Remembering to look for and ignore folks with that telltale indicator has made the fediverse so much more enjoyable.

  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    19 hours ago

    There’s no religion in analyzing imperialism, nor is there any advantage to refusing to analyze it, its causes, and how we can stop it as I already explained. You keep comparing social science to religion, as though trying to reach a deeper understanding of anything is useless.

    • theneverfox@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      No, I’m saying your glasses are broken. They’re not helping you see more clearly, they’re blurring reality

      That’s why I called it a weird religion.

      Imperialism isn’t some shadowy force. It’s just a bad thing being done to others out in the open. On its face, it’s unfair. You don’t have to prepare people to understand why it’s unfair, they just have to believe you when you point at it

      Do you think China doesn’t do imperialism? Do you think the USSR was being benevolent when it did the same thing, just a little more fairly and a better message?

      If you can understand these examples of imperialism, I’m willing to take back my claim that your glasses are broken

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        19 hours ago

        If you reduce imperialism to “bad vibes” like you’re doing, then you fail to explain the concrete reality of the situation. No, the USSR and PRC aren’t imperialist, they don’t expropriate vast sums of wealth from the global south, and instead trade with both countries results in the global south breaking the chains of imperialism and escaping the underdevelopment trap.

        You’re illustrating exactly why refusing to analyze imperialism is a mistake, it isn’t because China is “benevolent,” but because they don’t have the same forces that drive imperialism, namely dominance of finance capital in the economy and the formation of colonies or neocolonies.

        It’s not that I don’t “understand” so-called soviet or Chinese imperialism, it’s that I understand that these do not exist. I personally don’t need your approval, especially when you call social science and analysis “religion” and are arguing against study.

        • theneverfox@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          18 hours ago

          No, imperialism isn’t bad vibes. It’s when you build a factory in Africa, but the owners of the company are a Chinese investment group. It’s where the value doesn’t flow around the community, it’s where it gets sucked up and extracted

          And it’s good for a while - the workers are making bank… Until their economy starts to catch up

          Then you have an industrialized country, but half of the profits go to China, or pays the interest on debts to China

          Belts and roads is China first. It’s Chinese economic imperialism. It’s the same forces, they want to offshore manufacturing and create beneficial trading partners. And they’re not trying to lose money doing it, they’re trying to hand out loans and make investments

          It’s the same forces. It’s just a kinder approach to the process, but then everyone does it that way now

          Your glasses are broken. Your analytical lens is making you fail to see the world clearly

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            18 hours ago

            See, you would be correct if that was actually what’s happening, but it isn’t. Your glasses are broken, and your refusal to analyze and understand is why you insert fan-theories in place of analysis.

            BRI is not imperialism, and value does circulate in countries that trade with China. It is absolutely not the ssme forces, China isn’t under the control of a financial oligarchy and doesn’t expropriate wealth. Trade is not imperialism.

            • theneverfox@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              17 hours ago

              And that sounds like religion to me

              How many billionaires does China have? The answer would be zero if what you say is true

              But it’s not.

              I see China clearly. I don’t like their authoritarianism, but at least they’re nation building. They’re a very big county, with lots of problems, but they are at least attempting to address them

              I can see both what they do well and what they do poorly. My number one take away from them is how important and achievable it is to reign in corporations

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                17 hours ago

                How is social science religion? You never explain this, you just equate any attempt to study a given phenomenon to religion. As for China having billionaires, that’s true, but doesn’t at all contradict what I said. I suggest reading China Has Billionaires. China does have areas for improvement, but it isn’t imperialist.

                • theneverfox@pawb.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  16 hours ago

                  I’m saying it’s religion because how in the world can there be billionaires in the system you’re describing??? To hold those concepts together requires nothing short of belief

                  I don’t need to read your book list. Smart people can trick themselves into the most wild of mental gymnastics, there is no possible justification for billionaires. At best your book is an explanation of how China has failed to live up to their stated beliefs

                  Wise people recognize the truth when they see it. Billionaires come from mass exploitation, and only from mass exploitation. There’s simply no other way.

                  Now, we could talk about the explotation, what China does better than the West and such, but only if you can set down your beliefs about China

                  I could very easily have that conversation, because I haven’t put China, the US, or any country on a pedestal

                  They are real places with real people and real problems to me. I can look at them clearly and with minimal bias, because I know I will find humans there if I zoom in, with all the same human problems, but maybe better or worse solutions that I could learn from

                  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    16 hours ago

                    Billionaires exist in China because China participates in markets and has some degree of private property. Public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and China isn’t imperialist. These are all true, and requires simply looking at the facts at hand to recognize. China has not failed to live up to their stated beliefs, you simply don’t actually know what their stated beliefs are because you’re arguing against learning.

                    China is indeed a real place with real problems. These problems are not the ones you think they are, because you focus on your own imagination to fill in the gaps in your knowledge rather than studying the real systems. This is why leftists advocate study, investigation, and learning over simply relying on instinct and vulgar empiricism alone.