3 ms·

China doesn't spread "Chinese values" any more than America spreads "American values." America is an imperialist capitalist hegemon that exploits and oppresses

by krapp 2y ago

China doesn't spread "Chinese values" any more than America spreads "American values." America is an imperialist capitalist hegemon that exploits and oppresses other nations through debt, subterfuge or violence, and as China (which is very capitalistic, despite it's "communist" veneer) expands into the power vacuum created by America vacating its superpower status, it will inevitably do the same, probably in competition with a newly revived and militarized EU. So in the end, it doesn't matter whether America fucks you or China fucks you, or Europe fucks you, either way you're fucked.

kulahan 2y ago
If you think I meant to imply that America doesn’t spread their values, despite numerous attempts throughout my comment to show that I didn’t in ANY way mean to imply that, you may want to reread my comment. I don’t mean this to be mean - I believe that you’re saying pretty much the same thing as me in your first comment re: filling the power vacuum. I also completely disagree. I’d rather be fucked by Europe or USA than China any day of the week. At least at the end of the day, we share vaguely similar values.
- krapp 2y ago
  I am implying that America doesn't spread its values, because that isn't a thing that any country does. Nations don't have values, they have interests, and any premise to the contrary is just propaganda meant to manufacture consent for military adventurism and imperialism. People will support the premise of going to war in the Middle East to "spread democracy" far more than to "defend the petrodollar and distract the public from Saudi Arabia's complicity in 9/11," for instance.
  - kulahan 2y ago
    Nations are comprised of people who have values and elect representatives based on said values, was my point. Their own personal convictions don’t matter a WHOLE lot.
quanto 2y ago
> oppresses other nations through debt, subterfuge or violence Could you provide a recent example (since 2000 if possible; if not, since WW2) where the US oppresses other nations through debt? I am genuinely curious.
- Maxatar 2y ago
  There's no shortage of examples: Iraq, Egypt, Argentina, Pakistan, Philippines to name a few recent examples.
  - is_true 2y ago
    Argentina is being oppressed by corruption, not the US or any other nation.
- lazyasciiart 2y ago
  The US has veto power over the IMF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_International_Monetary_Fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_Internat...
  - dash2 2y ago
    It's a bit of a stretch to say "refusing to give a country loans" is exploiting someone through debt. Though "refusing to roll over a loan" might count, if you have first made a country dependent.
    - lazyasciiart 2y ago
      The conditions imposed on countries in order to receive a loan are usually the problem.
vladms 2y ago
America fucks itself as much as others. Some countries do resist against all odds, examples: Afghanistan fought both Russia and USA and won; Vietnam had wars with both USA and China (1979) and also won. Some countries prefer a side because of inherent affinities. I find the idea of "superpowers" (or very specific values) more of a Hollywood invention to make people afraid and docile. Yes, some countries do have resources and influence, but lots of times things don't go the way they plan it (values or otherwise).
- netsharc 2y ago
  I wonder what the situation in Iraq is like now... reading the book "Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Baghdad's Green Zone" 1), I got the impression Rumsfeld and Cheney metaphorically drove the car of US power into a concrete wall at full speed in Iraq, by bungling about what happens after they take over the country. They expected a welcome with flowers (like Putin expected in Ukraine) and didn't have a plan for nation building. In the early stages there was even bickering about if the State Departmen or Pentagon was in charge. Needless to say, Afghanistan was a mess too. This article (2) sort of summarizes the entire US occupation. People now think George W. Bush was an OK president (thanks Donnie), but he really did fuck things up big time. I suppose Bin Laden is grinning in his grave, someone's said that 9/11 cost Al Qaida about 500K to stage, if the goal is the destruction of America, what an ROI that's still returning. 1) https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/book_review/imperial-life-emerald-city-inside-baghdad%E2%80%99s-green-zone https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/book_review/imperial-life-eme... 2) https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/13/the-other-afghan-women https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/13/the-other-afgh... / https://archive.is/VfRmL https://archive.is/VfRmL
  - wat10000 2y ago
    It’s amazing to think about how much hinged on 537 votes in Florida. W could have been merely mediocre, but he was presented with a crisis and proceeded to mismanage it horribly.
dash2 2y ago
This idea of moral equivalence is popular and extremely dangerous. It is what Trump expressed as "you think we're so innocent?" No countries are purely altruistic, but there is a big space between pure altruism and simply being exploitative. This ignores the role of norms in foreign policy. For example, think of how the US attitude to the Taliban was (and still is) conditioned by the differences in their beliefs about women in society. If you think it doesn't matter whether America or China is in charge, you will be in for a shock. These countries have deeply different values, and their foreign policy will express that. I note also that you didn't mention Russia. I think it is obvious that Ukraine is not indifferent between being "exploited" by Russia and by the US.

by krapp 2y ago

kulahan 2y ago

If you think I meant to imply that America doesn’t spread their values, despite numerous attempts throughout my comment to show that I didn’t in ANY way mean to imply that, you may want to reread my comment. I don’t mean this to be mean - I believe that you’re saying pretty much the same thing as me in your first comment re: filling the power vacuum. I also completely disagree. I’d rather be fucked by Europe or USA than China any day of the week. At least at the end of the day, we share vaguely similar values.

krapp 2y ago
I am implying that America doesn't spread its values, because that isn't a thing that any country does. Nations don't have values, they have interests, and any premise to the contrary is just propaganda meant to manufacture consent for military adventurism and imperialism. People will support the premise of going to war in the Middle East to "spread democracy" far more than to "defend the petrodollar and distract the public from Saudi Arabia's complicity in 9/11," for instance.
- kulahan 2y ago
  Nations are comprised of people who have values and elect representatives based on said values, was my point. Their own personal convictions don’t matter a WHOLE lot.

quanto 2y ago

> oppresses other nations through debt, subterfuge or violence Could you provide a recent example (since 2000 if possible; if not, since WW2) where the US oppresses other nations through debt? I am genuinely curious.

Maxatar 2y ago
There's no shortage of examples: Iraq, Egypt, Argentina, Pakistan, Philippines to name a few recent examples.
- is_true 2y ago
  Argentina is being oppressed by corruption, not the US or any other nation.
lazyasciiart 2y ago
The US has veto power over the IMF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_International_Monetary_Fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_Internat...
- dash2 2y ago
  It's a bit of a stretch to say "refusing to give a country loans" is exploiting someone through debt. Though "refusing to roll over a loan" might count, if you have first made a country dependent.
  - lazyasciiart 2y ago
    The conditions imposed on countries in order to receive a loan are usually the problem.

vladms 2y ago

America fucks itself as much as others. Some countries do resist against all odds, examples: Afghanistan fought both Russia and USA and won; Vietnam had wars with both USA and China (1979) and also won. Some countries prefer a side because of inherent affinities. I find the idea of "superpowers" (or very specific values) more of a Hollywood invention to make people afraid and docile. Yes, some countries do have resources and influence, but lots of times things don't go the way they plan it (values or otherwise).

netsharc 2y ago
I wonder what the situation in Iraq is like now... reading the book "Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Baghdad's Green Zone" 1), I got the impression Rumsfeld and Cheney metaphorically drove the car of US power into a concrete wall at full speed in Iraq, by bungling about what happens after they take over the country. They expected a welcome with flowers (like Putin expected in Ukraine) and didn't have a plan for nation building. In the early stages there was even bickering about if the State Departmen or Pentagon was in charge. Needless to say, Afghanistan was a mess too. This article (2) sort of summarizes the entire US occupation. People now think George W. Bush was an OK president (thanks Donnie), but he really did fuck things up big time. I suppose Bin Laden is grinning in his grave, someone's said that 9/11 cost Al Qaida about 500K to stage, if the goal is the destruction of America, what an ROI that's still returning. 1) https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/book_review/imperial-life-emerald-city-inside-baghdad%E2%80%99s-green-zone https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/book_review/imperial-life-eme... 2) https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/13/the-other-afghan-women https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/13/the-other-afgh... / https://archive.is/VfRmL https://archive.is/VfRmL
- wat10000 2y ago
  It’s amazing to think about how much hinged on 537 votes in Florida. W could have been merely mediocre, but he was presented with a crisis and proceeded to mismanage it horribly.

dash2 2y ago

This idea of moral equivalence is popular and extremely dangerous. It is what Trump expressed as "you think we're so innocent?" No countries are purely altruistic, but there is a big space between pure altruism and simply being exploitative. This ignores the role of norms in foreign policy. For example, think of how the US attitude to the Taliban was (and still is) conditioned by the differences in their beliefs about women in society. If you think it doesn't matter whether America or China is in charge, you will be in for a shock. These countries have deeply different values, and their foreign policy will express that. I note also that you didn't mention Russia. I think it is obvious that Ukraine is not indifferent between being "exploited" by Russia and by the US.