If you reduce imperialism to “bad vibes” like you’re doing, then you fail to explain the concrete reality of the situation. No, the USSR and PRC aren’t imperialist, they don’t expropriate vast sums of wealth from the global south, and instead trade with both countries results in the global south breaking the chains of imperialism and escaping the underdevelopment trap.
You’re illustrating exactly why refusing to analyze imperialism is a mistake, it isn’t because China is “benevolent,” but because they don’t have the same forces that drive imperialism, namely dominance of finance capital in the economy and the formation of colonies or neocolonies.
It’s not that I don’t “understand” so-called soviet or Chinese imperialism, it’s that I understand that these do not exist. I personally don’t need your approval, especially when you call social science and analysis “religion” and are arguing against study.
No, imperialism isn’t bad vibes. It’s when you build a factory in Africa, but the owners of the company are a Chinese investment group. It’s where the value doesn’t flow around the community, it’s where it gets sucked up and extracted
And it’s good for a while - the workers are making bank… Until their economy starts to catch up
Then you have an industrialized country, but half of the profits go to China, or pays the interest on debts to China
Belts and roads is China first. It’s Chinese economic imperialism. It’s the same forces, they want to offshore manufacturing and create beneficial trading partners. And they’re not trying to lose money doing it, they’re trying to hand out loans and make investments
It’s the same forces. It’s just a kinder approach to the process, but then everyone does it that way now
Your glasses are broken. Your analytical lens is making you fail to see the world clearly
See, you would be correct if that was actually what’s happening, but it isn’t. Your glasses are broken, and your refusal to analyze and understand is why you insert fan-theories in place of analysis.
BRI is not imperialism, and value does circulate in countries that trade with China. It is absolutely not the ssme forces, China isn’t under the control of a financial oligarchy and doesn’t expropriate wealth. Trade is not imperialism.
How many billionaires does China have? The answer would be zero if what you say is true
But it’s not.
I see China clearly. I don’t like their authoritarianism, but at least they’re nation building. They’re a very big county, with lots of problems, but they are at least attempting to address them
I can see both what they do well and what they do poorly. My number one take away from them is how important and achievable it is to reign in corporations
How is social science religion? You never explain this, you just equate any attempt to study a given phenomenon to religion. As for China having billionaires, that’s true, but doesn’t at all contradict what I said. I suggest reading China Has Billionaires. China does have areas for improvement, but it isn’t imperialist.
I’m saying it’s religion because how in the world can there be billionaires in the system you’re describing??? To hold those concepts together requires nothing short of belief
I don’t need to read your book list. Smart people can trick themselves into the most wild of mental gymnastics, there is no possible justification for billionaires. At best your book is an explanation of how China has failed to live up to their stated beliefs
Wise people recognize the truth when they see it. Billionaires come from mass exploitation, and only from mass exploitation. There’s simply no other way.
Now, we could talk about the explotation, what China does better than the West and such, but only if you can set down your beliefs about China
I could very easily have that conversation, because I haven’t put China, the US, or any country on a pedestal
They are real places with real people and real problems to me. I can look at them clearly and with minimal bias, because I know I will find humans there if I zoom in, with all the same human problems, but maybe better or worse solutions that I could learn from
Billionaires exist in China because China participates in markets and has some degree of private property. Public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and China isn’t imperialist. These are all true, and requires simply looking at the facts at hand to recognize. China has not failed to live up to their stated beliefs, you simply don’t actually know what their stated beliefs are because you’re arguing against learning.
China is indeed a real place with real problems. These problems are not the ones you think they are, because you focus on your own imagination to fill in the gaps in your knowledge rather than studying the real systems. This is why leftists advocate study, investigation, and learning over simply relying on instinct and vulgar empiricism alone.
If not imperialist, why imperialism shaped? I don’t care if their ideology is different, they’re doing exactly the same thing! Belts and roads are literally loans and investments, there is nothing you can say that changes that fact
Private ownership? That doesn’t explain away anything!
There are no billionaires without mass explotation. Period.
You’re just describing a flavor of capitalism. China has a system of controlled capitalism. It’s a different flavor, it seems like it’s a better flavor that I’d like to try, but it’s still capitalism
You’re jumping through some crazy hoops there when it’s just not that complicated.
It isn’t imperialism shaped. There’s no unequal exchange going on, no underdevelopment, no forced hegemony. The ideology being different helps, but the reason it isn’t imperialism is because there’s no imperialism. Loans and investments are not inherently imperialism.
Yes, there are no billionaires without mass exploitation, correct. This doesn’t mean China isn’t socialist or that it’s imperialist. China isn’t capitalist because public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy, and the working classes are in charge of the state, over what capitalists there are in China.
I’m not jumping through hoops, you just don’t know what China’s system is, what imperialism is, nor what socialism is, because you’re arguing that studying any of these is a waste of time.
If you reduce imperialism to “bad vibes” like you’re doing, then you fail to explain the concrete reality of the situation. No, the USSR and PRC aren’t imperialist, they don’t expropriate vast sums of wealth from the global south, and instead trade with both countries results in the global south breaking the chains of imperialism and escaping the underdevelopment trap.
You’re illustrating exactly why refusing to analyze imperialism is a mistake, it isn’t because China is “benevolent,” but because they don’t have the same forces that drive imperialism, namely dominance of finance capital in the economy and the formation of colonies or neocolonies.
It’s not that I don’t “understand” so-called soviet or Chinese imperialism, it’s that I understand that these do not exist. I personally don’t need your approval, especially when you call social science and analysis “religion” and are arguing against study.
No, imperialism isn’t bad vibes. It’s when you build a factory in Africa, but the owners of the company are a Chinese investment group. It’s where the value doesn’t flow around the community, it’s where it gets sucked up and extracted
And it’s good for a while - the workers are making bank… Until their economy starts to catch up
Then you have an industrialized country, but half of the profits go to China, or pays the interest on debts to China
Belts and roads is China first. It’s Chinese economic imperialism. It’s the same forces, they want to offshore manufacturing and create beneficial trading partners. And they’re not trying to lose money doing it, they’re trying to hand out loans and make investments
It’s the same forces. It’s just a kinder approach to the process, but then everyone does it that way now
Your glasses are broken. Your analytical lens is making you fail to see the world clearly
See, you would be correct if that was actually what’s happening, but it isn’t. Your glasses are broken, and your refusal to analyze and understand is why you insert fan-theories in place of analysis.
BRI is not imperialism, and value does circulate in countries that trade with China. It is absolutely not the ssme forces, China isn’t under the control of a financial oligarchy and doesn’t expropriate wealth. Trade is not imperialism.
And that sounds like religion to me
How many billionaires does China have? The answer would be zero if what you say is true
But it’s not.
I see China clearly. I don’t like their authoritarianism, but at least they’re nation building. They’re a very big county, with lots of problems, but they are at least attempting to address them
I can see both what they do well and what they do poorly. My number one take away from them is how important and achievable it is to reign in corporations
How is social science religion? You never explain this, you just equate any attempt to study a given phenomenon to religion. As for China having billionaires, that’s true, but doesn’t at all contradict what I said. I suggest reading China Has Billionaires. China does have areas for improvement, but it isn’t imperialist.
I’m saying it’s religion because how in the world can there be billionaires in the system you’re describing??? To hold those concepts together requires nothing short of belief
I don’t need to read your book list. Smart people can trick themselves into the most wild of mental gymnastics, there is no possible justification for billionaires. At best your book is an explanation of how China has failed to live up to their stated beliefs
Wise people recognize the truth when they see it. Billionaires come from mass exploitation, and only from mass exploitation. There’s simply no other way.
Now, we could talk about the explotation, what China does better than the West and such, but only if you can set down your beliefs about China
I could very easily have that conversation, because I haven’t put China, the US, or any country on a pedestal
They are real places with real people and real problems to me. I can look at them clearly and with minimal bias, because I know I will find humans there if I zoom in, with all the same human problems, but maybe better or worse solutions that I could learn from
Billionaires exist in China because China participates in markets and has some degree of private property. Public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and China isn’t imperialist. These are all true, and requires simply looking at the facts at hand to recognize. China has not failed to live up to their stated beliefs, you simply don’t actually know what their stated beliefs are because you’re arguing against learning.
China is indeed a real place with real problems. These problems are not the ones you think they are, because you focus on your own imagination to fill in the gaps in your knowledge rather than studying the real systems. This is why leftists advocate study, investigation, and learning over simply relying on instinct and vulgar empiricism alone.
If not imperialist, why imperialism shaped? I don’t care if their ideology is different, they’re doing exactly the same thing! Belts and roads are literally loans and investments, there is nothing you can say that changes that fact
Private ownership? That doesn’t explain away anything!
There are no billionaires without mass explotation. Period.
You’re just describing a flavor of capitalism. China has a system of controlled capitalism. It’s a different flavor, it seems like it’s a better flavor that I’d like to try, but it’s still capitalism
You’re jumping through some crazy hoops there when it’s just not that complicated.
It isn’t imperialism shaped. There’s no unequal exchange going on, no underdevelopment, no forced hegemony. The ideology being different helps, but the reason it isn’t imperialism is because there’s no imperialism. Loans and investments are not inherently imperialism.
Yes, there are no billionaires without mass exploitation, correct. This doesn’t mean China isn’t socialist or that it’s imperialist. China isn’t capitalist because public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy, and the working classes are in charge of the state, over what capitalists there are in China.
I’m not jumping through hoops, you just don’t know what China’s system is, what imperialism is, nor what socialism is, because you’re arguing that studying any of these is a waste of time.