This isn’t true though, as I elaborate on over here. China doesn’t seek to own everything, nor does it debt trap. In fact, it frequently forgives billions in debt. China’s goal in Africa is mutual, win-win development, as long term cooperation benefits everyone more greatly than western imperialism does.
The US, Canada, Europe, etc, in being dominated by finance capital and the profit motive, are ecomomically compelled into the strategy of keeping the global south underdeveloped so as to super-exploit them for cheap labor and resources. The PRC is socialist, though, and the finance industry is dominated by the state, meaning long-term planning and mutual development is not only possible, but economically compelled.
There’s lots of other links that discount your denial of their plans and how they leverage.
USA is like 5 year plan, 10 year plan. China has 100 year plan and 1000 year plan.
China does have long-term planning, I’m not disputing that, I’m disputing the idea that China is predatory towards the global south. These narratives are largely pushed by the west in order to scare the global south away from pivoting to China, whose mutual cooperation programs are proven to result in dramatic and rapid development.
I just don’t want to confuse capitalism vs socialism, with Global Domination strategy of USA or China.
They are “socialist” but they aren’t doing it out of the idea of greater good of all humankind, they are a dictatorship (currently) and this is self interest so they can be a global logistic player and their port building also includes military access.
This is a longterm goal to be the only superpower.
We can’t understand why the US Empire’s international interactions result in underdevelopment, super-exploitation, and occasionally bombings, coups, and genocide, while China’s international interactions result in mutual development, cooperation, and advancement in the global south, without comparing their modes of production. I don’t bring up capitalism and socialism because “capitalism bad, therefore international interactions with capitalist countries bad” or “socialism good, therefore socialist interaction internationally good,” but because the mode of production is what drives these fundamentally different results.
In capitalism, once the limits of domestic markets are reached, contradictions sharpen unless this exploitation is extended and exported internationally. This is primarily characterized by the presense of monopolies and the dictatorship of finance capital, and the export of capital to the global south. Essentially, as capitalism reaches its natural limits, it’s artificially extended by pushing it outward.
In socialism, as in China, humanity is in control, not capital. China’s state has control of the finance sector, not capitalists, and the profit motive isn’t dominant over production and distribution. This means China takes a long-term strategy of mutual development, not out of the good of their hearts, but because socialism as a mode of production simply works better with mutual cooperation and international stability. Where capitalist countries prey on lesser developed ones, resulting in slowed development in the global south, socialist countries seek cooperation and this results in rapid development.
They are “socialist” but they aren’t doing it out of the idea of greater good of all humankind, they are a dictatorship (currently)
China is a dictatotship of the proletariat. The working classes control the state, and this results in huge rates of satisfaction with democracy in China:
and this is self interest so they can be a global logistic player and their port building also includes military access. This is a longterm goal to be the only superpower.
This is projection. China’s self-interest is in mutual development and stability, China has no interest in being a super-power, because the utility in being a super-power is only to super-exploit the global south. It’s incredibly expensive and resource intensive to maintain an empire, and while imperialists make this back in super-profits, this is a temporary measure, as the current death of the US Empire is proving. China wants to continue to prosper, and it needs a developed global south and international stability to do so.
People leaving countries tend to not like them as much as those who choose to stay. Lots of people left China after the communists first took power. I work with a few Chinese ex-pats, and they don’t seem to dislike China at all, and visit often. Moreover, people within China approve their government at rates exceeding 90%. This is consistent and regularly found. You’re trying to paint a negative picture on the web, but the vast majority of Chinese citizens seem to like China, despite your fearmongering.
I implore you to actually listen to Chinese citizens, and hard data showing consistent and strong satisfaction within China. You seem to be working backwards from the conclusion “China bad,” and jump to any evidence backing that, no matter how flimsy.
Chinese citizens have to tow the line. The company I worked for had operations there, when our guys meet with counterparts then and ask probing questions everyone clams up, and one off to the side says we can’t talk about bad things.
If you go against it you have reprogramming training classes.
We even have Chinese police stations here in Canada and they go knocking on doors because a Chinese citizen has said something negative about the homeland. And coerce them into going back to the mainland.
This is not me reading it on the web, this is coworkers at the house when it happens to their room mates.
Stop trying to make China a utopia it is not. I agree with Socialism, but not a dictatorship.
It woukd seem you are being paid to promote China propaganda, or you are severely deluded to what goes on there.
A survey of citizens that know they cannot speak ll without retribution to them or their family, will always look positive.
Please use some critical thinking here.
While it does have benefits, the overarching Chinese plan is to own everything, and have countries on the debt hook.
USA is the world bully by might, China does it by strategy
I love unsourced conspiracy theories
“My source is that I’m incredibly racist.”
This isn’t true though, as I elaborate on over here. China doesn’t seek to own everything, nor does it debt trap. In fact, it frequently forgives billions in debt. China’s goal in Africa is mutual, win-win development, as long term cooperation benefits everyone more greatly than western imperialism does.
The US, Canada, Europe, etc, in being dominated by finance capital and the profit motive, are ecomomically compelled into the strategy of keeping the global south underdeveloped so as to super-exploit them for cheap labor and resources. The PRC is socialist, though, and the finance industry is dominated by the state, meaning long-term planning and mutual development is not only possible, but economically compelled.
There’s lots of other links that discount your denial of their plans and how they leverage. USA is like 5 year plan, 10 year plan. China has 100 year plan and 1000 year plan.
More evidence free assertions
I’m honestly most baffled by the idea that the USA has 5 or 10 year plans.
China does have long-term planning, I’m not disputing that, I’m disputing the idea that China is predatory towards the global south. These narratives are largely pushed by the west in order to scare the global south away from pivoting to China, whose mutual cooperation programs are proven to result in dramatic and rapid development.
I just don’t want to confuse capitalism vs socialism, with Global Domination strategy of USA or China.
They are “socialist” but they aren’t doing it out of the idea of greater good of all humankind, they are a dictatorship (currently) and this is self interest so they can be a global logistic player and their port building also includes military access. This is a longterm goal to be the only superpower.
We can’t understand why the US Empire’s international interactions result in underdevelopment, super-exploitation, and occasionally bombings, coups, and genocide, while China’s international interactions result in mutual development, cooperation, and advancement in the global south, without comparing their modes of production. I don’t bring up capitalism and socialism because “capitalism bad, therefore international interactions with capitalist countries bad” or “socialism good, therefore socialist interaction internationally good,” but because the mode of production is what drives these fundamentally different results.
In capitalism, once the limits of domestic markets are reached, contradictions sharpen unless this exploitation is extended and exported internationally. This is primarily characterized by the presense of monopolies and the dictatorship of finance capital, and the export of capital to the global south. Essentially, as capitalism reaches its natural limits, it’s artificially extended by pushing it outward.
In socialism, as in China, humanity is in control, not capital. China’s state has control of the finance sector, not capitalists, and the profit motive isn’t dominant over production and distribution. This means China takes a long-term strategy of mutual development, not out of the good of their hearts, but because socialism as a mode of production simply works better with mutual cooperation and international stability. Where capitalist countries prey on lesser developed ones, resulting in slowed development in the global south, socialist countries seek cooperation and this results in rapid development.
China is a dictatotship of the proletariat. The working classes control the state, and this results in huge rates of satisfaction with democracy in China:
This is projection. China’s self-interest is in mutual development and stability, China has no interest in being a super-power, because the utility in being a super-power is only to super-exploit the global south. It’s incredibly expensive and resource intensive to maintain an empire, and while imperialists make this back in super-profits, this is a temporary measure, as the current death of the US Empire is proving. China wants to continue to prosper, and it needs a developed global south and international stability to do so.
That is why they are fundamentally different.
From ex pats of China, they disagree with you that there is huge rates of satisfaction or “democracy”.
You are trying to paint a pleasant picture on the web, but people who have left it disagree with you.
You really trying to counter polling and evidence with “well I talked to a guy who said otherwise”?
People leaving countries tend to not like them as much as those who choose to stay. Lots of people left China after the communists first took power. I work with a few Chinese ex-pats, and they don’t seem to dislike China at all, and visit often. Moreover, people within China approve their government at rates exceeding 90%. This is consistent and regularly found. You’re trying to paint a negative picture on the web, but the vast majority of Chinese citizens seem to like China, despite your fearmongering.
I implore you to actually listen to Chinese citizens, and hard data showing consistent and strong satisfaction within China. You seem to be working backwards from the conclusion “China bad,” and jump to any evidence backing that, no matter how flimsy.
Chinese citizens have to tow the line. The company I worked for had operations there, when our guys meet with counterparts then and ask probing questions everyone clams up, and one off to the side says we can’t talk about bad things.
If you go against it you have reprogramming training classes.
We even have Chinese police stations here in Canada and they go knocking on doors because a Chinese citizen has said something negative about the homeland. And coerce them into going back to the mainland. This is not me reading it on the web, this is coworkers at the house when it happens to their room mates.
Stop trying to make China a utopia it is not. I agree with Socialism, but not a dictatorship.
It woukd seem you are being paid to promote China propaganda, or you are severely deluded to what goes on there.
A survey of citizens that know they cannot speak ll without retribution to them or their family, will always look positive. Please use some critical thinking here.