3 ms·
Neo colonialism? It's just leveraging an imbalance between markets at the expense of the imbalance itself. If more wealthy people go to a place to leverage thei
by ralusek 7y ago
Neo colonialism? It's just leveraging an imbalance between markets at the expense of the imbalance itself. If more wealthy people go to a place to leverage their market advantage in a location, that market advantage pretty rapidly begins to disappear. It's beneficial to all parties involved, and consented to by all parties involved. Colonialism is not by consent.
- vwcx 7y agoBy no means am I implying that you offer negative intentions by your comment, but the “beneficial to all parties involved, and consented to by all parties involved” line was once how some described the system of chattel slavery in the United States. Let all actors speak for themselves.
- rixed 7y agoColonialism, past the initial brutal conquest, has little to do with consent. Empires could not stand very long on brutality alone; they stand also on the consent of the victims. I do not doubt that all involved parties do consent (although some more than others). I am more skeptical about market advantages disappearing, as I've rarely seen any exemple of this that was due solely to market equilibrium, and I therefore consider this a fantasy -- indeed, I doubt market laws but I do not doubt the laws of psychology that make popular the ideas that are needed to justify domination (oftentimes by both ends), however remote from reality. But maybe am I myself the victim of some lesser known psychological laws that makes me too suspicious? I'd gladly accept this possibility if we agreed not to start a thread that's been too political already.