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.
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.