3 ms·

Exploitation is to make the exploitor rich, not to make the exploitee rich. But from what I understand Mexico could be a bit better off then it was decades ago

by jmclnx 9mo ago

Exploitation is to make the exploitor rich, not to make the exploitee rich. But from what I understand Mexico could be a bit better off then it was decades ago. But looking at history, the US took big chunks of land from Mexico in the 1800s. The resources from that land made the US what it is now. So in another time, Mexico and the US could have been completely different if that did not happen.

roenxi 9mo ago
So just circling back to the Korea example, does this imply that in the Cold & Korean wars, South Korea was exploiting the US to become rich? What exactly does the word "exploit" mean to you here if the US had to cross an ocean and to get themselves exploited by some minor power? > The US kind of exploits Korea, Taiwan for cheap labor.and goods. So we had a period where Korea was exploiting the US, then the US somehow broke their chokehold and started exploiting them? And if the Koreans improve their standard of living that mean they've regained exploitation dominance over the US? Or is Korea exploiting someone like the Chinese (a nation that I, naively, feel is a bit stronger than Korea)? Or who are they exploiting? I'm not sure how this plays out to be internally consistent. It seems like being wealthy has more to do with internal policy than external exploitation or even resource availability.
- jmclnx 9mo ago
  I do not say anywhere Korea Exploiting the US. I am saying the US and a few other nations used many countries to gain power and use that as chess games against each other. Without US support, S. Korea and Taiwan would not exist. The US is/has used these countries against China and the USSR. Yes, they got better off due to it, but the US gets a bit more benefit from the arrangement. Fun fact, until about the 1980s, N. Korea had a much stronger economy that S. Korea due to support from the USSR.

by jmclnx 9mo ago

roenxi 9mo ago

So just circling back to the Korea example, does this imply that in the Cold & Korean wars, South Korea was exploiting the US to become rich? What exactly does the word "exploit" mean to you here if the US had to cross an ocean and to get themselves exploited by some minor power? > The US kind of exploits Korea, Taiwan for cheap labor.and goods. So we had a period where Korea was exploiting the US, then the US somehow broke their chokehold and started exploiting them? And if the Koreans improve their standard of living that mean they've regained exploitation dominance over the US? Or is Korea exploiting someone like the Chinese (a nation that I, naively, feel is a bit stronger than Korea)? Or who are they exploiting? I'm not sure how this plays out to be internally consistent. It seems like being wealthy has more to do with internal policy than external exploitation or even resource availability.

jmclnx 9mo ago
I do not say anywhere Korea Exploiting the US. I am saying the US and a few other nations used many countries to gain power and use that as chess games against each other. Without US support, S. Korea and Taiwan would not exist. The US is/has used these countries against China and the USSR. Yes, they got better off due to it, but the US gets a bit more benefit from the arrangement. Fun fact, until about the 1980s, N. Korea had a much stronger economy that S. Korea due to support from the USSR.