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 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.