5 ms·
Maybe this is better as well, once citizens have more welfare they have more power to acquire human rights.
by whazor 9y ago
Maybe this is better as well, once citizens have more welfare they have more power to acquire human rights.
- grecy 9y agoWho said anything about citizens getting more welfare? China is stripping these countries bare, and the money goes straight into the pockets of the corrupt ruling class. It is staggering to see the countries with the multi-hundreds-of-billions in resources have the poorest citizens.
- pm90 9y agoI think a distinction must be made between a completely extractive economy and one that is based on manufacturing. So if its simply raw materials being mined and shipped abroad, then yes I agree with the stripping the countries part. If they are actually manufacturing stuff.... Oh actually, if they're employing only Chinese citizens for manufacturing, then I agree with your assessment.
- grecy 9y agoOne of the major "problems" with African economies is they manufacture essentially nothing, and everything they export is completely unprocessed raw materials.
- westiseast 9y agoI think that's highly debatable; it's obvious human rights aren't a massive priority to China, and neither is transfer of wealth to those countries. Even if Chinese money does end up in a rush of trade and business, without strong political systems, its debatable whether wealth will make it into the hands of people who will subsequently push for human rights. Remember also that China is simultaneously creating a blueprint with its own country showing developing nations how to create economic transformations and a level of freedom and opportunity in society without political reform. It's quite likely that even if the push creates wealth and prosperity in a host nation that doesn't have strong democratic institutions, they might start adopting Chinese political norms and techniques. * as a side note, the western aid model has huge drawbacks too and carries similar if/but criticisms. I think it's just too simplistic for the Chinese side to say "well, everything will be fine once we create wealth!"
- mcguire 9y agoIt's a very long game, though. The end results of the British Empire seem to be a net positive, although in most cases it took several hundred years and numerous wars. On the other hand, the Spanish empire doesn't seem to have been so beneficial.
- rohit2412 9y agoFor Britain? Yes. India doesn't agree with your thesis.
- mcguire 9y agoIndia is one of the successes. (After, of course, the United States, Canada, and Australia). It's the largest democracy in the world, and set up to be one of the wealthiest and most powerful after the current crop of powers.
- rohit2412 9y agoHow much of the positive is the result of British empire? And does it offset poverty caused by centuries of colonialism?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- volgo 9y agoReally? I wouldnt call India a democratic success. I worked in India for a few months doing recruiting and have seen more poverty than I’m comfortable with, and I’ve been to some really poor countries. Old women selling vegetables for pennies on the side of a slum can have all the vote she wants, but it won’t change a thing I had a long discussion with a few Indian coworkers. And the main problem they mention is politicians will promise irresponsible amount of free stuff to the poorest untouchable that end up being terrible policies Nothing against the country, but take a look at the GDP of India vs China. They started out both at the bottom of world development, and 2 decades later... https://imgur.com/gallery/itzav https://imgur.com/gallery/itzav