Any independent thinker should indeed seek to critically understand multiple perspectives, yes. Although even just being able to formulate perspectives of other countries, or being willing to challenge blatant misinformation will get you accused of being an imperialist by left-posturing Western chauvanists.
You can make the argument for Russia but I really don’t understand how China, a country that has been at peace for over 40 years and which is developing an alternative economic sphere such that countries are not forced to accept whatever conditions the West imposes, could possibly be considered “imperialist.” I’m guessing people will just be like, “Well what if they invaded Taiwan? The things happening purely in my imagination prove China bad.”
Territorial disputes without violence. China hasn’t fired on a ship since 1988. They have engaged in territorial disputes over the SCS without engaging in violence. If you want to understand what the alternative would look like, I direct you to the events in the Caribbean.
The UN recognizes Taiwan as a province of China and has done so without interruption for many decades.
Ask literally any average Southeast Asian citizen about China’s influence on their country, and you’ll get a sense of Chinese imperialist ambitions.
And yet, China is not actually doing anything resembling imperialism. You project psychology (ambitions) onto a nation-state (China) because that’s all you understand. You don’t understand what the possible alternatives are.
I’m brushing over the long history of Han ethnic expansionism and the literal war with communist Vietnam over their supposed vassal-state of Cambodia.
Chinese imperialism during the dynastic era is not only well understood and recognized, it’s openly discussed in China as the wrong solution to statecraft. Chinese violent and wrong-headed foreign policy during Mao’s leadership are also openly discussed in China as the wrong solution to statecraft. The government has openly declared that those decisions were incorrect and have openly established that they are taking a new direction based on more accurate understandings of the principles of statecraft and the consequences of those actions.
They have engaged in territorial disputes over the SCS without engaging in violence.
This isn’t exactly true. The level of violence they have engaged in thus far has been limited but they have absolutely engaged in violence. The same is true for the disputed territory with India. There is regular violence, but it is limited with lines that they have not crossed (i.e. they aren’t out there firing missiles and dropping bombs, they doing things like ramming fishing boats or beating people with clubs). I think you are going to be very disappointed by China if you genuinely believe the current government is pacifist or lacks an imperial agenda.
The border dispute with between India and China over that specific border is both millennia old and exacerbated by European colonialism in the region defining boundaries by dictatorial decree. The fact that the border is policed by armed guards wielding clubs is by mutual agreement between India and China and the fact that there was a skirmish is not the same as “China is out there beating innocent people with clubs for their own territorial gains”.
As for ramming fishing boats, look at Operation 34A. The US has a history in the region of using fishing boats to lay mines covertly to avoid triggering a response or causing an international incident. The US soldiers were unmarked, wearing civilian clothing and the boats were design deliberately to look like civilian fishing boats.
When you don’t know history, it’s difficult to understand the present.
If you think China engaged in top-to-bottom self criticism and established the official opinion that previous foreign policy under Mao was incorrect and not beneficial to the Chinese state means that after 40 years of non-violent growth they maintain imperial ambitions because they are still managing ancient border disputes and are defending against real threats from the most violent psychopaths on the planet, I don’t know what to tell you.
I’m sorry but this does not come across like a serious argument. China is not ramming fishing vessels because the US once clandestinely deployed mines in the 1960’s. If you genuinely believe that I don’t know what to say except I hope you develop a more nuanced and realistic understanding of the world.
Re: China beating innocent people with clubs, I didn’t quite say that. I am sure some random innocent people have been caught up in it and beaten but on balance I think it has primarily been mutual combat involving provocations from both sides in the India/China border dispute.
I don’t think “40 years of non-violent growth” is an accurate statement at all. I can agree that contemporary Chinese imperialism doesn’t look like US imperialism and has utilized less violence overall. I think your framing of China vs. violent psychopaths is inherently flawed. China may or may not have fewer of those kinds of people in power compared to other governments, but it has plenty. It’s an inescapable fact of humanity that those people exist and have a tendency to seek power, and that power has a tendency to bring out those characteristics in people. There is nothing special about the people of China that make them better than the rest of humanity, the same problems of humanity manifest in China as everywhere else on the planet.
China is not ramming fishing vessels because the US once clandestinely deployed mines in the 1960’s.
So what you’re saying is that China has no valid security concerns behind their actions?
I don’t think “40 years of non-violent growth” is an accurate statement at all.
Let’s see why.
I can agree that contemporary Chinese imperialism doesn’t look like US imperialism and has utilized less
Well, since 1992 the US has conduct major kinetic military operations against over 14 countries, completely destroying at least 3 of them. Since 1992, China hasn’t fired a shot against anyone. So, yeah, doesn’t look like it at all. Less as in zero.
I think your framing of China vs. violent psychopaths is inherently flawed.
Fair. White supremacist Christian Eurocentric empire has only dominated every continent for 600 years, with most national borders across the whole world defined by genocidaires and child rapists, and military bases all over the world that are immune to local laws where young women are kidnapped, raped, and murdered by soldiers weekly and everyone knows it but no one can do anything about because of the violent psychopaths (sorry, I meant USians, who are just like everyone else). Not to mention the US criminal justice system monitoring and managing at least over 3x the number of prisoners and parolees as the next highest country in the world with some of the worst outcomes, worst recidivism rates, and economic extraction practices compared to literally anyone.
But fair, maybe my framing is uncharitable.
China may or may not have fewer of those kinds of people in power compared to other governments, but it has plenty.
Granted. Is it driving the same outcomes? No. It’s not. The outcomes are substantially and consistently better and have been for decades without interruption.
It’s an inescapable fact of humanity that those people exist and have a tendency to seek power, and that power has a tendency to bring out those characteristics in people.
And it is the job of a society to develop the social technologies necessary to manage those characteristics effectively. Eurocentric society is the world-crowning pinnacle of what happens when you fail - patriarchal white supremacist ChristoFascist genocidal child raping oligarchs committing mass murder on every inhabited continent to prove how civilized they are.
There is nothing special about the people of China that make them better than the rest of humanity, the same problems of humanity manifest in China as everywhere else on the planet.
And yet, the outcomes are different. Is that because Chinese people are racially superior? No. It’s because Chinese society has developed superior social technology for managing these problems.
I don’t see how you don’t see the connection. China is asserting that control over the SCS is part of its national security requirements. One of the reasons for this is that the US has been hard at work for over a century projecting power in the region and one of the pillars of that power projection is through its navy. Control over the SCS means asserting territorial boundaries that match Chinese security assessment. It can easily be said that fishing boats are not a threat, and yet, historically, the US has taken advantage of the fact that civilian fishing is not considered a threat to violate the Geneva conventions at in fact use fishing boats to project force and create national security threats for nations in the region. China, therefore, is not willing to accept anything less than total territorial control over the SCS for national security reasons and that means even fishing boats must be expelled from the area.
Do you think there’s some other reason for them to expel fishing boats from the SCS? Do you think it’s totally unconnected to national security and history? Do you think it’s some sort of problem with the personal psychology of Chinese leaders?
More complicated than what most people think considering the history of Taiwan. Imagine if fascist in your country seized a region via ethnic cleansing and then created a break away state. Would your country be happy to recognize it as an independent nation? The only thing that complicates this is they eventually established a somewhat democratic government, after +40 years of violent authoritarianism.
Ask literally any average Southeast Asian citizen about China’s influence on their country, and you’ll get a sense of Chinese imperialist ambitions.
Eh… Comparatively I think you would hear worse if you asked them about western ambitions.
China is a superpower, you don’t get to that status without flexing that power. The reality is that every superpower in history regardless of what social economic system they utilize has to compete with an established hegemony to upset the status quo. You can label that as imperialism if you want However that opens the debate on how we quantify imperialism, and the only real way to do that is by comparison.
Compared to the leading superpower I’d hardly say their activity in their own backyard really can’t be compared to what the US is currently doing to control a waterway right now.
I’m brushing over the long history of Han ethnic expansionism
I think Han chauvinism has long been an issue within China, even Mao spoke about it during his time in power. Do I think it’s as dire as it’s depicted in western media? No, but I do hope that the CCP takes more steps to integrate ethnic minorities into positions in higher government like the politburo. That being said, is the treatment of ethnic minorities on the same level or worse than in western nations…? Not really, which leads me to believe that ethnic chauvinism isn’t really a problem specific to any government or economic system.
war with communist Vietnam over their supposed vassal-state of Cambodia.
Which the CCP openly admits was a misguided mistake, and apparently unlike other superpowers was something they actually learned from.
Would your country be happy to recognize it as an independent nation
Self-determination is a virtue. Holding onto the claims of your forefathers is problematic to say the least. History of Israel and all that.
Comparatively I think you would hear worse if you asked them about western ambitions.
Anecdotally, I have experienced the opposite. I oppose US imperialism too. It’s all bad
You can label that as imperialism if you want However that opens the debate on how we quantify imperialism, and the only real way to do that is by comparison.
This is a non-answer. You want to discuss the nature of power and dynamics. Doing an imperialism because your neighbor did an imperialism does not make it morally correct, in fact it’s likely to lead to a cascade into conflict. This is not US or Russia apologia, everyone should rail them for doing that. Making excuses for China doing the same is the weakest take you can have in a conversation on the topic of morality.
On the topic of Han ethnicity, we should always be wary of the concept of ethnicity in political policy, rather than people as people.
Great to hear that the CCP is willing to admit a few mistakes. Really puts into perspective how bad Trump is.
The non-western world’s current stance on LGBTQ+ will always make the US and Europe better places to exist for personal choice and freedoms. Until that changes, Chinese / Russian apologists will always be treated with derision and Fox News level credibility. FYI
Self-determination is a virtue. Holding onto the claims of your forefathers is problematic to say the least. History of Israel and all that.
Is it always a virtue? For example, was the Arrow Cross party taking over Hungary and helping exterminate 500k Hungarian Jews a virtuous act of self determination?
I oppose US imperialism too. It’s all bad
I think we can agree that any foreign nation flexing their power their smaller neighboring countries is bad, but we are making a comparison here. You can disagree with the actions of both countries and still compare their actions against each other.
This is a non-answer. You want to discuss the nature of power and dynamics.
My point wasn’t supposed to be interpreted as a definitive answer. It was a way to open the discussion to further evaluation.
Doing an imperialism because your neighbor did an imperialism does not make it morally correct, in fact it’s likely to lead to a cascade into conflict.
To have an actual discussion about this we would have to first define what you think imperialism actually is. That way we can separate acts of imperialism, and actions taken to bulwark against encroaching imperialism.
Imo morality rarely comes into play when super powers enact geopolitical strategy. As observers we can analyze the resulting fallout of those strategies, but I think it’s a mistake to assume morality in their intent.
excuses for China doing the same is the weakest take you can have in a conversation on the topic of morality.
I don’t think I really brought up morality, I was focused more on outcomes of their actions.
The non-western world’s current stance on LGBTQ+ will always make the US and Europe better places to exist for personal choice and freedoms.
Ehh… It kinda depends on what country you are talking about in Europe and honestly the US is back sliding on that front as well.
Many East Asian countries including China have actually made a lot of progress for the LGBT populations there. The Chinese government tends to take a hands off approach, going so far as to adopt the “Three Nos” position as in “no approval, no disapproval, and no promotion”.
Most LGBT people in East Asia are a lot more affected by their own family’s perception rather than the government. The wide influence of Confucianism makes any changes to family structure a slow and difficult process. Though the general acceptance among young urban people has been pretty rapid.
Until that changes, Chinese / Russian apologists will always be treated with derision and Fox News level credibility. FYI
I think that’s making a hasty generalization… I can in fact believe that China has a better track record on foreign policy than most western countries, and still be critical about some of their domestic policy. Does that make me an apologist, or were you just creating a false dichotomy?
I also don’t really know what Russia has to do with anything I’ve said? We were talking about eastern and/or socialist countries…Russia isn’t either of those. FYI
Article 4 In advancing the building of the community for the Chinese nation, economic, political, cultural, social and ecological-civilization development shall be coordinated; common prosperity and development for all ethnic groups shall be fully realized; the people of all ethnic groups shall be ensured the ability to jointly act as masters of the country; a shared spiritual home for the Chinese nation shall be built; all-round mutual embeddedness and extensive interaction, exchange and integration among all ethnic groups shall be promoted; an ecological home in which humanity and nature coexist in harmony shall be jointly protected; and the Chinese nation shall be developed into a community with a stronger sense of identity and greater cohesion.
Article 5 Citizens of the People’s Republic of China are equal before the law. All ethnic groups in the People’s Republic of China are equal. Discrimination against or oppression of any ethnic group is prohibited.
Article 6 A sense of community for the Chinese nation is the foundation of ethnic unity. The state shall increase commonality while respecting and accommodating differences, promote mutual support and harmonious coexistence among all ethnic groups, and safeguard the great unity of the Chinese nation. Acts that undermine ethnic unity or create ethnic separatism are prohibited.
Article 8 The state shall uphold and improve the system of regional ethnic autonomy and safeguard national unity and ethnic unity.
Article 9 The state shall govern ethnic affairs in accordance with law, protect the lawful rights and interests of the people of all ethnic groups in accordance with law, strengthen publicity and education concerning the Constitution and laws, enhance the awareness of the state, citizenship and the rule of law among the people of all ethnic groups, safeguard the unity, dignity and authority of the socialist rule of law, and modernize the system and capacity for governance of ethnic affairs within the framework of the rule of law.
Article 15 The state shall comprehensively promote and popularize the standard spoken and written Chinese language. No organization or individual may obstruct citizens from learning or using the standard spoken and written Chinese language. Schools and other educational institutions shall use the standard spoken and written Chinese language as the basic language of education and instruction. The state shall promote the learning of Putonghua by preschool children and the basic mastery of the standard spoken and written Chinese language by young people who complete compulsory education. State organs shall use the standard spoken and written Chinese language for official purposes. Where documents are required by relevant laws to be issued in the spoken and written language of an ethnic minority, versions in both the standard spoken and written Chinese language and the minority language shall be provided. Where state organs, social organizations, enterprises, public institutions or other social organizations need to use both the standard spoken and written Chinese language and the spoken and written language of an ethnic minority in a public setting, prominence shall be given to the standard spoken and written Chinese language in terms of placement, order and other respects. The state shall respect and protect the learning and use of the spoken and written languages of ethnic minorities, promote their standardization, normalization and digital development, and support the preservation, collation, study and use of ancient books and records in minority languages.
Article 16 Schools and other educational institutions of all types and at all levels shall carry the requirements for fostering a strong sense of community for the Chinese nation through the entire education process and incorporate them into an education system combining classroom instruction, social practice, themed education and online education. Schools and other educational institutions of all types and at all levels shall use state-compiled textbooks in accordance with relevant state provisions. Education administrative departments shall implement the requirements for fostering a strong sense of community for the Chinese nation in the preparation and review of teaching materials. The departments of the State Council responsible for education administration, ethnic affairs and related work shall organize the preparation of series of textbooks or readers concerning the community for the Chinese nation.
Article 29 The state shall enhance mutual learning and integration among the cultures of all ethnic groups and encourage all ethnic groups to appreciate one another’s fine traditional cultures and learn one another’s spoken and written languages. People’s governments at all levels shall support cultural workers and relevant entities in creating and presenting literary and artistic works that are grounded in Chinese culture and reflect interaction, exchange and integration among all ethnic groups. People’s governments at all levels shall support libraries, museums, cultural centers and stations, memorial halls, art museums, science and technology museums, workers’ cultural palaces, children’s and youth palaces and other public cultural-service entities in conducting exhibitions and exchange activities concerning the history of the Chinese nation, national prosperity and development, and related subjects. People’s governments at all levels shall draw on the Chinese nation’s rich cultural, sporting and other resources to encourage and support exchange activities, including traditional festivals of the Chinese nation, folk culture events and sporting competitions, that are welcomed and jointly participated in by the people of all ethnic groups.
So scary for our government with mandated representation of minorities to wish to encourage cultural exchange while instituting a common tongue to allow for our social and physical mobility while continuing to encourage the teaching of minority languages and writing systems. 😱
You do realise that documents like that are used to stop discussion, and are pointed to by people saying “look, we HAVE equality so stop making a fuss”.
China has a lot of that, and things like bonus 高考 points for ethnic minorities are an often used rallying cry by the Han suoremists as an example of how things have gone too far (and unlike the coming one, this one is allowed to be broadcast on B站 and other sites and doesn’t get pulled down).
Then you’ve got huge amounts of prejudice against ethnic groups, with negative stereotypes of them as thieves, or violent.
And a two tier policing system, where ethnic minority folks in Yunnan and Guizhou, for example, feel that they can’t hunt or forage in traditional styles because it’s in violation of the law, but Han people in the same towns do it (and you can see/find them flogging poached wildlife in the town market) without a care.
Meanwhile the “economic development” of ethnic tourism primarily leads to people from 东北 moving in and buying up land and making the profits, while local Han get middle management positions, and the ethnic minority folks get to be the side show, singers, or worst I’ve seen - dancing girls who are chastised for trying to get the Han 叔叔 to leave them alone.
No irony here. The way people in general on reddit and adjacent platforms (not you necessarily, just the way Chinese politics is spoken about) you’d think that the CPC can do whatever it pleases without care for anything. So which is it? And why are you so cynical about the genuineness of laws stating that all Chinese are equal, regardless of ethnicity?
Oh, a lot of people know nothing about the PRC or China in general. It’s infuriating.
Often either a utopia or the most evil and terrible distopia, blergh. It’s a place, full of myriad people, ideas, ways of being, and their own contradictions.
I’m used to people assuming I’m at the other extreme pole, when really I’m just trying to complicate the picture and share a bit of what I learnt and saw while living in the PRC for several years - where I found something much more interesting than either idealised extreme.
Edit: and in answer to your question: of course the CCP can’t do whatever it pleases without a care for anything. It’s too faction ridden, broad, and worried about 3rd roads, dissent, and popular unrest for that. It values stability, peaceful day to day living, and being able to return its side of the social contract. But that also means that small factions that could upset or displace the sense of harmony, such as traditional ethnic minority ways of life, habits, etc. are not given much time. They need to Modernise and Develop, like the rest regardless of what those people actually think, do, or want.
Having spent a lot of time in Yunnan and Guizhou, I’ve seen enough of it myself, sadly.
imperialism, state policy, practice, or advocacy of extending power and dominion, especially by direct territorial acquisition or by gaining political and economic control of other areas
Bruh can’t even read a dictionary, lmao.
Projection
Lmao, who do you even think I am?
The US is bad too. If you’re going to be anti-imperialist then you need to be against all imperialism and not just the one you were told to hate.
The vitriol toward defending China in this second response, at any cost, gives you away.
Using the Britannica definition of Imperialism is like using the IDF definition of antisemitism. It isn’t actually very persuasive, bcs it gives you away as either a shill for the existing world order or a useful idiot for the same.
Imperialism is the stage of capitalism where finance capital overtakes commodity production. That’s a gross oversimplification, but it’ll do for the level of debate in this thread.
Neither China nor Russia is an Imperialist power because in neither state has capitalist control over markets led to the rise of finance capital overtaking commodity production as the main basis of the economy.
Using what’s widely respected as one of the most accurate sources available isn’t acceptable so you bust out quotes from Lenin as the reliable source? Lol
imperialism, state policy, practice, or advocacy of extending power and dominion, especially by direct territorial acquisition or by gaining political and economic control of other areas
That’s still not the same as minor border disputes.
The US is bad too. If you’re going to be anti-imperialist then you need to be against all imperialism and not just the one you were told to hate.
Yes, decades long occupations, minor border clashes, both equally bad and equally requiring staunch opposition. You gonna go full “white lives matter” next? Or can we agree that focusing on the much, much bigger problem should be the priority?
The vitriol toward defending China in this second response, at any cost, gives you away.
“Gives me away” as what? If you’re going to accuse me of something, say it to my face.
I find it incredible funny that I have seen many other people (me included) criticizing their country, all of the countries really… but I have never seen Objection saying a negative word about China. Not even once. On any matter.
Edit: I stand corrected. I though Objection to be either a hypocrite, a shill or a bot, or otherwise unable to criticize China. They changed my opinion by showing they are capable of criticising China on issues they find fault with.
I generally don’t go around shit-talking other countries that I don’t live in and have never been to. The only real exceptions being ones that are receiving military aid from my own country, such as Israel, because that makes it relevant to me.
For the record, I have and do criticize China on certain things, such as LGBT rights. But again, that’s pretty irrelevant to any political questions that are actually relevant to me and my life. What am I going to do about problems in China? What levers of power can I or should I assert to address their problems? It kinda seems like I should probably be a little bit more concerned about all the horrible things my own country is doing. Don’t talk shit about a splinter in their eye when there’s a wooden board in your own or something.
If there was a way for me to assert some lever of power against China, it would be through my own government. But that would only be a valid thing to do if my government wasn’t doing worse things, which is why it’s relevant to point out that the US is worse, in spite of the inevitable response of “whataboutism.”
If the discourse around here was upholding China as some utopia that we should all try to emulate in every regard, you would see me criticize it more. But because the discourse is more about how evil every single thing it does is, how every accusation should be believed completely uncritically, how we should support Western governments acting against it, etc, it’s only natural that that’s what you see me pushing back against the most.
China’s modern day homophobia does not come from a place of “The Buddha said this was bad,” rather, it comes from seeing homosexuality as a Western invention, and a symptom of “bourgeois decadence.” Sadly, such brainworms are common in many socialist countries. There is a stereotype many people have that gay people all live in cities and spend all our time partying at nightclubs, because that makes for better TV than the reality does.
I think we have different definitions what criticism is, because all you do there is explain why, whitewash.
Wait, no, unless you think this is the part when you criticize China
Sadly, such brainworms are common in many socialist countries
Because you don’t. You explicitly don’t criticize China in this sentence.
Edit: I checked, definition of the words are clear. To criticize is to pass judgment, or find fault. To explain is to provide context or inform or clarify. You did the latter.
And proud of it. Because anyone who thinks critically, acknowledges basic, objective facts about reality, anyone who questions their own government and confronts their own presumptions and prejudices, is a “tankie” to you liberal, imperialist, chauvinists.
At least I don’t have the blood of a million Middle Easterners on my hands like you do.
You can make the argument for Russia but I really don’t understand how China, a country that has been at peace for over 40 years and which is developing an alternative economic sphere such that countries are not forced to accept whatever conditions the West imposes, could possibly be considered “imperialist.”
Any conflict between the US and China in the Pacific Rim is described as “US Imperialism” from the Chinese perspective and “Chinese Imperialism” from the US perspective.
Any claim China makes along its border regions is Imperialism. Any naval actions made by the Chinese military is Imperialism. Any police action inside the recognized territory of China is imperialism. The entire 1.4B person population is routinely described as a Han monoculture.
The national economic plan is at once a failed project, doomed to collapse within the year, and a sinister plot to steal global market share for the most villainous purposes imaginable. China is, at once, the world’s biggest polluter and the perpetuator of a string of environmentalist “hoaxes”. It’s producing commodities, like consumer electronics and cars and steel girders and plastic widgets, too cheaply and quickly. But it’s also dogged by inefficient bureaucracy and COVID restrictions and an inherent cultural disinterest in entrepreneurship, so the country is constantly lacking essentials.
So they need to go out and steal other people’s stuff, whether its Taiwanese semiconductors or Middle Eastern fossil fuels or East African mineral wealth. And the government accomplishes this by tricking idiot liberals into doing business with them, while secretly infiltrating their societies with the most black-handed saboteurs and spies and assassins.
China is ontologically evil. Its politics is so authoritarian that the people don’t even realize they are being oppressed. But also the people DO realize they are oppressed and yearn for freedom. And if you don’t understand all of this to be true, you’re either an idiot or a LLM programmed to ignore the obvious and trick other people just like an Evil Chinese would.
Any conflict between the US and China in the Pacific Rim is described as “US Imperialism” from the Chinese perspective and “Chinese Imperialism” from the US perspective.
Which is hilarious because there’s absolutely no equivalency here. China is not running warships through the Florida Keys or in the Long Island Sound. The US is running warships off the coast of China and has Marines stationed 4 miles off the coast inside a territory that the UN recognizes as a province of the state of China. The US are clearly in the wrong here. This both-sides position is ridiculous
Any claim China makes along its border regions is Imperialism.
For those who don’t know, this statement is completely untrue, with ZERO historical basis, and ZERO consistency. This is intellectual dishonesty when spoken by people with knowledge. It’s just parroting propaganda when ignorant people say it.
China is ontologically evil
And people question why we say that the USA is the most propagandized people on the planet.
Which is hilarious because there’s absolutely no equivalency here. China is not running warships through the Florida Keys or in the Long Island Sound. The US is running warships off the coast of China and has Marines stationed 4 miles off the coast inside a territory that the UN recognizes as a province of the state of China. The US are clearly in the wrong here. This both-sides position is ridiculous
I can’t help map the history of Taiwan against the history of Cuba, when it comes to the topic of “imperialism”.
On the one hand, you have an island that was actually and repeatedly invaded by Western governments, conquered and liberated and conquered again. Bombed, embargoed, sabotaged, sanctioned, its leaders subjected to hundreds of assassination attempts. The explicit stated goal of the imperial neighbor is “regime change”. The implicit unstated goal is subjugation leading to a full-on ethnic cleansing, to clear the way for a new generation of colonial settlers to occupy vacant real estate.
On the other, you have an island that is heavily incorporated into its neighbor’s economic ecosystem. People freely travel to and from the mainland. Citizenship is muddy by design, because the Eastern government wants to encourage islanders to recognize themselves as full citizens of the neighboring state. And Taiwanese businesses are happy to take advantage of this arrangement, exploiting their special status to function as a bridge between mainland businesses (under sanction by Western governments) and Western customers (hungry for cheap, high quality Chinese goods).
Cuba is impoverished as a matter of US foreign policy.
Taiwan is enriched as a matter of Chinese foreign and domestic policies.
One of these countries has been in the headlines for decades, with hysterical predictions of an imminent military occupation. And it isn’t Cuba.
And people question why we say that the USA is the most propagandized people on the planet.
The ways chauvanism can manifest and reassert itself, even when people rational recognize it as a bad thing in the abstract, are so crazy. The internalized indoctrination works like some kind of demon constantly whispering in people’s heads, trying to get them to come back around to “America #1!”
Criticism will either be overly specific, “This is just because of Trump, I miss when we had respectable Republicans like Bush,” or it will be overly general, “Yes, the US is bad, but only in the sense that all governments are bad.” Anything to avoid the conclusion that the US just fucking sucks.
If the American government fails it must either be an exception, or an inherent flaw in all governments, because we’re the smartest, best, most moral and freedom-loving people in the world. Impossible that foreigners could succeed where we failed, if we failed, it could only be because the task is impossible. That’s how the chauvanists think, and so the conclusion is already determined before a single actual fact is considered.
Anything to avoid the conclusion that the US just fucking sucks.
Even that is overly broad and kinda skitters over what it is that makes US empire a global horror.
Like, “ah bummer man the US sucks” doesn’t do justice to the pile of bloody backpacks at the Minab school attack. It feels almost trite to say “The child murder needs to stop”, but so much US policy - foreign and domestic - is about slaughtering children by the millions. It’s not just a “aw shucks things are bad”. It’s a global campaign of eugenics, driven by a handful of plutocrats who have pegged their collective future on the advent of Computer God.
Impossible that foreigners could succeed where we failed
Unless they’re Norwegian, for some reason. Only the Scandinavians - the whitest of the white Europeans - are allowed to claim anything approaching “Functional Socialism”. And only when they build their society on the back of a petro-state.
It feels almost trite to say “The child murder needs to stop”, but so much US policy - foreign and domestic - is about slaughtering children by the millions.
Classic “no way to prevent this” says only nation where this regularly happens. A part of me just wishes that the horrors could be contained to within our borders, but we have to make all of our shit everyone’s problem.
Only the Scandinavians - the whitest of the white Europeans - are allowed to claim anything approaching “Functional Socialism”.
The funniest part about this is how many people will be like, “The best approach is a mixture of socialism and capitalism” which is exactly what China is doing. I’ve tried so many times to get a coherent answer from the “China bad because billionaires” types as to whether the reforms in the 80’s were good or bad. The only response you’ll ever get from most of them is to call you a fascist for asking.
Any independent thinker should indeed seek to critically understand multiple perspectives, yes. Although even just being able to formulate perspectives of other countries, or being willing to challenge blatant misinformation will get you accused of being an imperialist by left-posturing Western chauvanists.
You can make the argument for Russia but I really don’t understand how China, a country that has been at peace for over 40 years and which is developing an alternative economic sphere such that countries are not forced to accept whatever conditions the West imposes, could possibly be considered “imperialist.” I’m guessing people will just be like, “Well what if they invaded Taiwan? The things happening purely in my imagination prove China bad.”
Had me in the first half, ngl.
https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/territorial-disputes-south-china-sea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_status_of_Taiwan
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/south-korea-expressed-concern-over-chinese-structure-disputed-area-sea-2025-04-24/
Ask literally any average Southeast Asian citizen about China’s influence on their country, and you’ll get a sense of Chinese imperialist ambitions.
I’m brushing over the long history of Han ethnic expansionism and the literal war with communist Vietnam over their supposed vassal-state of Cambodia.
Edit: Read up on the Chinese Ethnic Unity Law: https://www.chinalawtranslate.com/en/ethnic-unity-and-progress-law/
Whom will likely benefit the most: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_China
Territorial disputes without violence. China hasn’t fired on a ship since 1988. They have engaged in territorial disputes over the SCS without engaging in violence. If you want to understand what the alternative would look like, I direct you to the events in the Caribbean.
The UN recognizes Taiwan as a province of China and has done so without interruption for many decades.
And yet, China is not actually doing anything resembling imperialism. You project psychology (ambitions) onto a nation-state (China) because that’s all you understand. You don’t understand what the possible alternatives are.
Chinese imperialism during the dynastic era is not only well understood and recognized, it’s openly discussed in China as the wrong solution to statecraft. Chinese violent and wrong-headed foreign policy during Mao’s leadership are also openly discussed in China as the wrong solution to statecraft. The government has openly declared that those decisions were incorrect and have openly established that they are taking a new direction based on more accurate understandings of the principles of statecraft and the consequences of those actions.
This isn’t exactly true. The level of violence they have engaged in thus far has been limited but they have absolutely engaged in violence. The same is true for the disputed territory with India. There is regular violence, but it is limited with lines that they have not crossed (i.e. they aren’t out there firing missiles and dropping bombs, they doing things like ramming fishing boats or beating people with clubs). I think you are going to be very disappointed by China if you genuinely believe the current government is pacifist or lacks an imperial agenda.
The border dispute with between India and China over that specific border is both millennia old and exacerbated by European colonialism in the region defining boundaries by dictatorial decree. The fact that the border is policed by armed guards wielding clubs is by mutual agreement between India and China and the fact that there was a skirmish is not the same as “China is out there beating innocent people with clubs for their own territorial gains”.
As for ramming fishing boats, look at Operation 34A. The US has a history in the region of using fishing boats to lay mines covertly to avoid triggering a response or causing an international incident. The US soldiers were unmarked, wearing civilian clothing and the boats were design deliberately to look like civilian fishing boats.
When you don’t know history, it’s difficult to understand the present.
If you think China engaged in top-to-bottom self criticism and established the official opinion that previous foreign policy under Mao was incorrect and not beneficial to the Chinese state means that after 40 years of non-violent growth they maintain imperial ambitions because they are still managing ancient border disputes and are defending against real threats from the most violent psychopaths on the planet, I don’t know what to tell you.
I’m sorry but this does not come across like a serious argument. China is not ramming fishing vessels because the US once clandestinely deployed mines in the 1960’s. If you genuinely believe that I don’t know what to say except I hope you develop a more nuanced and realistic understanding of the world.
Re: China beating innocent people with clubs, I didn’t quite say that. I am sure some random innocent people have been caught up in it and beaten but on balance I think it has primarily been mutual combat involving provocations from both sides in the India/China border dispute.
I don’t think “40 years of non-violent growth” is an accurate statement at all. I can agree that contemporary Chinese imperialism doesn’t look like US imperialism and has utilized less violence overall. I think your framing of China vs. violent psychopaths is inherently flawed. China may or may not have fewer of those kinds of people in power compared to other governments, but it has plenty. It’s an inescapable fact of humanity that those people exist and have a tendency to seek power, and that power has a tendency to bring out those characteristics in people. There is nothing special about the people of China that make them better than the rest of humanity, the same problems of humanity manifest in China as everywhere else on the planet.
So what you’re saying is that China has no valid security concerns behind their actions?
Let’s see why.
Well, since 1992 the US has conduct major kinetic military operations against over 14 countries, completely destroying at least 3 of them. Since 1992, China hasn’t fired a shot against anyone. So, yeah, doesn’t look like it at all. Less as in zero.
Fair. White supremacist Christian Eurocentric empire has only dominated every continent for 600 years, with most national borders across the whole world defined by genocidaires and child rapists, and military bases all over the world that are immune to local laws where young women are kidnapped, raped, and murdered by soldiers weekly and everyone knows it but no one can do anything about because of the violent psychopaths (sorry, I meant USians, who are just like everyone else). Not to mention the US criminal justice system monitoring and managing at least over 3x the number of prisoners and parolees as the next highest country in the world with some of the worst outcomes, worst recidivism rates, and economic extraction practices compared to literally anyone.
But fair, maybe my framing is uncharitable.
Granted. Is it driving the same outcomes? No. It’s not. The outcomes are substantially and consistently better and have been for decades without interruption.
And it is the job of a society to develop the social technologies necessary to manage those characteristics effectively. Eurocentric society is the world-crowning pinnacle of what happens when you fail - patriarchal white supremacist ChristoFascist genocidal child raping oligarchs committing mass murder on every inhabited continent to prove how civilized they are.
And yet, the outcomes are different. Is that because Chinese people are racially superior? No. It’s because Chinese society has developed superior social technology for managing these problems.
WTF dude. No, that is not what I said. I quit right there because this is a complete non sequitur. Good luck with your ideas, I am out.
I don’t see how you don’t see the connection. China is asserting that control over the SCS is part of its national security requirements. One of the reasons for this is that the US has been hard at work for over a century projecting power in the region and one of the pillars of that power projection is through its navy. Control over the SCS means asserting territorial boundaries that match Chinese security assessment. It can easily be said that fishing boats are not a threat, and yet, historically, the US has taken advantage of the fact that civilian fishing is not considered a threat to violate the Geneva conventions at in fact use fishing boats to project force and create national security threats for nations in the region. China, therefore, is not willing to accept anything less than total territorial control over the SCS for national security reasons and that means even fishing boats must be expelled from the area.
Do you think there’s some other reason for them to expel fishing boats from the SCS? Do you think it’s totally unconnected to national security and history? Do you think it’s some sort of problem with the personal psychology of Chinese leaders?
More complicated than what most people think considering the history of Taiwan. Imagine if fascist in your country seized a region via ethnic cleansing and then created a break away state. Would your country be happy to recognize it as an independent nation? The only thing that complicates this is they eventually established a somewhat democratic government, after +40 years of violent authoritarianism.
Eh… Comparatively I think you would hear worse if you asked them about western ambitions.
China is a superpower, you don’t get to that status without flexing that power. The reality is that every superpower in history regardless of what social economic system they utilize has to compete with an established hegemony to upset the status quo. You can label that as imperialism if you want However that opens the debate on how we quantify imperialism, and the only real way to do that is by comparison.
Compared to the leading superpower I’d hardly say their activity in their own backyard really can’t be compared to what the US is currently doing to control a waterway right now.
I think Han chauvinism has long been an issue within China, even Mao spoke about it during his time in power. Do I think it’s as dire as it’s depicted in western media? No, but I do hope that the CCP takes more steps to integrate ethnic minorities into positions in higher government like the politburo. That being said, is the treatment of ethnic minorities on the same level or worse than in western nations…? Not really, which leads me to believe that ethnic chauvinism isn’t really a problem specific to any government or economic system.
Which the CCP openly admits was a misguided mistake, and apparently unlike other superpowers was something they actually learned from.
Self-determination is a virtue. Holding onto the claims of your forefathers is problematic to say the least. History of Israel and all that.
Anecdotally, I have experienced the opposite. I oppose US imperialism too. It’s all bad
This is a non-answer. You want to discuss the nature of power and dynamics. Doing an imperialism because your neighbor did an imperialism does not make it morally correct, in fact it’s likely to lead to a cascade into conflict. This is not US or Russia apologia, everyone should rail them for doing that. Making excuses for China doing the same is the weakest take you can have in a conversation on the topic of morality.
On the topic of Han ethnicity, we should always be wary of the concept of ethnicity in political policy, rather than people as people.
Great to hear that the CCP is willing to admit a few mistakes. Really puts into perspective how bad Trump is.
The non-western world’s current stance on LGBTQ+ will always make the US and Europe better places to exist for personal choice and freedoms. Until that changes, Chinese / Russian apologists will always be treated with derision and Fox News level credibility. FYI
Is it always a virtue? For example, was the Arrow Cross party taking over Hungary and helping exterminate 500k Hungarian Jews a virtuous act of self determination?
I think we can agree that any foreign nation flexing their power their smaller neighboring countries is bad, but we are making a comparison here. You can disagree with the actions of both countries and still compare their actions against each other.
My point wasn’t supposed to be interpreted as a definitive answer. It was a way to open the discussion to further evaluation.
To have an actual discussion about this we would have to first define what you think imperialism actually is. That way we can separate acts of imperialism, and actions taken to bulwark against encroaching imperialism.
Imo morality rarely comes into play when super powers enact geopolitical strategy. As observers we can analyze the resulting fallout of those strategies, but I think it’s a mistake to assume morality in their intent.
I don’t think I really brought up morality, I was focused more on outcomes of their actions.
Ehh… It kinda depends on what country you are talking about in Europe and honestly the US is back sliding on that front as well.
Many East Asian countries including China have actually made a lot of progress for the LGBT populations there. The Chinese government tends to take a hands off approach, going so far as to adopt the “Three Nos” position as in “no approval, no disapproval, and no promotion”.
Most LGBT people in East Asia are a lot more affected by their own family’s perception rather than the government. The wide influence of Confucianism makes any changes to family structure a slow and difficult process. Though the general acceptance among young urban people has been pretty rapid.
I think that’s making a hasty generalization… I can in fact believe that China has a better track record on foreign policy than most western countries, and still be critical about some of their domestic policy. Does that make me an apologist, or were you just creating a false dichotomy?
I also don’t really know what Russia has to do with anything I’ve said? We were talking about eastern and/or socialist countries…Russia isn’t either of those. FYI
Some exerpts:
Article 4 In advancing the building of the community for the Chinese nation, economic, political, cultural, social and ecological-civilization development shall be coordinated; common prosperity and development for all ethnic groups shall be fully realized; the people of all ethnic groups shall be ensured the ability to jointly act as masters of the country; a shared spiritual home for the Chinese nation shall be built; all-round mutual embeddedness and extensive interaction, exchange and integration among all ethnic groups shall be promoted; an ecological home in which humanity and nature coexist in harmony shall be jointly protected; and the Chinese nation shall be developed into a community with a stronger sense of identity and greater cohesion.
Article 5 Citizens of the People’s Republic of China are equal before the law. All ethnic groups in the People’s Republic of China are equal. Discrimination against or oppression of any ethnic group is prohibited.
Article 6 A sense of community for the Chinese nation is the foundation of ethnic unity. The state shall increase commonality while respecting and accommodating differences, promote mutual support and harmonious coexistence among all ethnic groups, and safeguard the great unity of the Chinese nation. Acts that undermine ethnic unity or create ethnic separatism are prohibited.
Article 8 The state shall uphold and improve the system of regional ethnic autonomy and safeguard national unity and ethnic unity.
Article 9 The state shall govern ethnic affairs in accordance with law, protect the lawful rights and interests of the people of all ethnic groups in accordance with law, strengthen publicity and education concerning the Constitution and laws, enhance the awareness of the state, citizenship and the rule of law among the people of all ethnic groups, safeguard the unity, dignity and authority of the socialist rule of law, and modernize the system and capacity for governance of ethnic affairs within the framework of the rule of law.
Article 15 The state shall comprehensively promote and popularize the standard spoken and written Chinese language. No organization or individual may obstruct citizens from learning or using the standard spoken and written Chinese language. Schools and other educational institutions shall use the standard spoken and written Chinese language as the basic language of education and instruction. The state shall promote the learning of Putonghua by preschool children and the basic mastery of the standard spoken and written Chinese language by young people who complete compulsory education. State organs shall use the standard spoken and written Chinese language for official purposes. Where documents are required by relevant laws to be issued in the spoken and written language of an ethnic minority, versions in both the standard spoken and written Chinese language and the minority language shall be provided. Where state organs, social organizations, enterprises, public institutions or other social organizations need to use both the standard spoken and written Chinese language and the spoken and written language of an ethnic minority in a public setting, prominence shall be given to the standard spoken and written Chinese language in terms of placement, order and other respects. The state shall respect and protect the learning and use of the spoken and written languages of ethnic minorities, promote their standardization, normalization and digital development, and support the preservation, collation, study and use of ancient books and records in minority languages.
Article 16 Schools and other educational institutions of all types and at all levels shall carry the requirements for fostering a strong sense of community for the Chinese nation through the entire education process and incorporate them into an education system combining classroom instruction, social practice, themed education and online education. Schools and other educational institutions of all types and at all levels shall use state-compiled textbooks in accordance with relevant state provisions. Education administrative departments shall implement the requirements for fostering a strong sense of community for the Chinese nation in the preparation and review of teaching materials. The departments of the State Council responsible for education administration, ethnic affairs and related work shall organize the preparation of series of textbooks or readers concerning the community for the Chinese nation.
Article 29 The state shall enhance mutual learning and integration among the cultures of all ethnic groups and encourage all ethnic groups to appreciate one another’s fine traditional cultures and learn one another’s spoken and written languages. People’s governments at all levels shall support cultural workers and relevant entities in creating and presenting literary and artistic works that are grounded in Chinese culture and reflect interaction, exchange and integration among all ethnic groups. People’s governments at all levels shall support libraries, museums, cultural centers and stations, memorial halls, art museums, science and technology museums, workers’ cultural palaces, children’s and youth palaces and other public cultural-service entities in conducting exhibitions and exchange activities concerning the history of the Chinese nation, national prosperity and development, and related subjects. People’s governments at all levels shall draw on the Chinese nation’s rich cultural, sporting and other resources to encourage and support exchange activities, including traditional festivals of the Chinese nation, folk culture events and sporting competitions, that are welcomed and jointly participated in by the people of all ethnic groups.
So scary for our government with mandated representation of minorities to wish to encourage cultural exchange while instituting a common tongue to allow for our social and physical mobility while continuing to encourage the teaching of minority languages and writing systems. 😱
You do realise that documents like that are used to stop discussion, and are pointed to by people saying “look, we HAVE equality so stop making a fuss”.
China has a lot of that, and things like bonus 高考 points for ethnic minorities are an often used rallying cry by the Han suoremists as an example of how things have gone too far (and unlike the coming one, this one is allowed to be broadcast on B站 and other sites and doesn’t get pulled down).
Then you’ve got huge amounts of prejudice against ethnic groups, with negative stereotypes of them as thieves, or violent.
And a two tier policing system, where ethnic minority folks in Yunnan and Guizhou, for example, feel that they can’t hunt or forage in traditional styles because it’s in violation of the law, but Han people in the same towns do it (and you can see/find them flogging poached wildlife in the town market) without a care.
Meanwhile the “economic development” of ethnic tourism primarily leads to people from 东北 moving in and buying up land and making the profits, while local Han get middle management positions, and the ethnic minority folks get to be the side show, singers, or worst I’ve seen - dancing girls who are chastised for trying to get the Han 叔叔 to leave them alone.
But they’re an oppressive evil dictatorship, why would they need to save face? Maybe just accept that you’ve drunk the Koolaid.
… Why would massively face conscious culture China care about face?
You’ve got so much irony I can’t even tell what point you’re trying to make.
No irony here. The way people in general on reddit and adjacent platforms (not you necessarily, just the way Chinese politics is spoken about) you’d think that the CPC can do whatever it pleases without care for anything. So which is it? And why are you so cynical about the genuineness of laws stating that all Chinese are equal, regardless of ethnicity?
Oh, a lot of people know nothing about the PRC or China in general. It’s infuriating.
Often either a utopia or the most evil and terrible distopia, blergh. It’s a place, full of myriad people, ideas, ways of being, and their own contradictions.
I’m used to people assuming I’m at the other extreme pole, when really I’m just trying to complicate the picture and share a bit of what I learnt and saw while living in the PRC for several years - where I found something much more interesting than either idealised extreme.
Edit: and in answer to your question: of course the CCP can’t do whatever it pleases without a care for anything. It’s too faction ridden, broad, and worried about 3rd roads, dissent, and popular unrest for that. It values stability, peaceful day to day living, and being able to return its side of the social contract. But that also means that small factions that could upset or displace the sense of harmony, such as traditional ethnic minority ways of life, habits, etc. are not given much time. They need to Modernise and Develop, like the rest regardless of what those people actually think, do, or want.
Having spent a lot of time in Yunnan and Guizhou, I’ve seen enough of it myself, sadly.
Thanks for the insight! That’s my idea of things, too. I’ve been here for a week now lol and it’s far from whichever evil reddit thinks it is.
I need to read more and learn more, but so far I find myself preferring China to western oligarchy.
Minor border disputes are not imperialism.
Projection.
Over 40 years ago lol. If the US had been at peace since Vietnam, I’d have very different opinions about it.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/imperialism
Bruh can’t even read a dictionary, lmao.
Lmao, who do you even think I am?
The US is bad too. If you’re going to be anti-imperialist then you need to be against all imperialism and not just the one you were told to hate.
The vitriol toward defending China in this second response, at any cost, gives you away.
Using the Britannica definition of Imperialism is like using the IDF definition of antisemitism. It isn’t actually very persuasive, bcs it gives you away as either a shill for the existing world order or a useful idiot for the same.
Imperialism is the stage of capitalism where finance capital overtakes commodity production. That’s a gross oversimplification, but it’ll do for the level of debate in this thread.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/imperialism.pdf
Neither China nor Russia is an Imperialist power because in neither state has capitalist control over markets led to the rise of finance capital overtaking commodity production as the main basis of the economy.
Using what’s widely respected as one of the most accurate sources available isn’t acceptable so you bust out quotes from Lenin as the reliable source? Lol
That’s still not the same as minor border disputes.
Yes, decades long occupations, minor border clashes, both equally bad and equally requiring staunch opposition. You gonna go full “white lives matter” next? Or can we agree that focusing on the much, much bigger problem should be the priority?
“Gives me away” as what? If you’re going to accuse me of something, say it to my face.
I find it incredible funny that I have seen many other people (me included) criticizing their country, all of the countries really… but I have never seen Objection saying a negative word about China. Not even once. On any matter.Edit: I stand corrected. I though Objection to be either a hypocrite, a shill or a bot, or otherwise unable to criticize China. They changed my opinion by showing they are capable of criticising China on issues they find fault with.
I generally don’t go around shit-talking other countries that I don’t live in and have never been to. The only real exceptions being ones that are receiving military aid from my own country, such as Israel, because that makes it relevant to me.
For the record, I have and do criticize China on certain things, such as LGBT rights. But again, that’s pretty irrelevant to any political questions that are actually relevant to me and my life. What am I going to do about problems in China? What levers of power can I or should I assert to address their problems? It kinda seems like I should probably be a little bit more concerned about all the horrible things my own country is doing. Don’t talk shit about a splinter in their eye when there’s a wooden board in your own or something.
If there was a way for me to assert some lever of power against China, it would be through my own government. But that would only be a valid thing to do if my government wasn’t doing worse things, which is why it’s relevant to point out that the US is worse, in spite of the inevitable response of “whataboutism.”
If the discourse around here was upholding China as some utopia that we should all try to emulate in every regard, you would see me criticize it more. But because the discourse is more about how evil every single thing it does is, how every accusation should be believed completely uncritically, how we should support Western governments acting against it, etc, it’s only natural that that’s what you see me pushing back against the most.
Your profile motto:
Sure.
I think we have different definitions what criticism is, because all you do there is explain why, whitewash.
Wait, no, unless you think this is the part when you criticize China
Because you don’t. You explicitly don’t criticize China in this sentence.
Edit: I checked, definition of the words are clear. To criticize is to pass judgment, or find fault. To explain is to provide context or inform or clarify. You did the latter.
Removed by mod
They brigaded you Dagnet. RIP.
Purged like their authoritarian heroes wished for dissidents, downvotes to the back of the head. :,(
Damn, my comment got removed, I wonder who did it, and admin perhaps?
And so they prove my point. Luckily those downvotes are as meaningless as their opinions
Being wildly unpopular does nothing to prove you right or wrong
I’m so glad nobody cares when the US does “minor border disputes” the way they care about when China does it.
Oh wait…
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
And proud of it. Because anyone who thinks critically, acknowledges basic, objective facts about reality, anyone who questions their own government and confronts their own presumptions and prejudices, is a “tankie” to you liberal, imperialist, chauvinists.
At least I don’t have the blood of a million Middle Easterners on my hands like you do.
Holy based
Removed by mod
Lazy
Ain’t done nothing if you ain’t been called a
RedTankie, so you might as well ignore it, or love the word instead!Any conflict between the US and China in the Pacific Rim is described as “US Imperialism” from the Chinese perspective and “Chinese Imperialism” from the US perspective.
Any claim China makes along its border regions is Imperialism. Any naval actions made by the Chinese military is Imperialism. Any police action inside the recognized territory of China is imperialism. The entire 1.4B person population is routinely described as a Han monoculture.
The national economic plan is at once a failed project, doomed to collapse within the year, and a sinister plot to steal global market share for the most villainous purposes imaginable. China is, at once, the world’s biggest polluter and the perpetuator of a string of environmentalist “hoaxes”. It’s producing commodities, like consumer electronics and cars and steel girders and plastic widgets, too cheaply and quickly. But it’s also dogged by inefficient bureaucracy and COVID restrictions and an inherent cultural disinterest in entrepreneurship, so the country is constantly lacking essentials.
So they need to go out and steal other people’s stuff, whether its Taiwanese semiconductors or Middle Eastern fossil fuels or East African mineral wealth. And the government accomplishes this by tricking idiot liberals into doing business with them, while secretly infiltrating their societies with the most black-handed saboteurs and spies and assassins.
China is ontologically evil. Its politics is so authoritarian that the people don’t even realize they are being oppressed. But also the people DO realize they are oppressed and yearn for freedom. And if you don’t understand all of this to be true, you’re either an idiot or a LLM programmed to ignore the obvious and trick other people just like an Evil Chinese would.
Good comment!
Which is hilarious because there’s absolutely no equivalency here. China is not running warships through the Florida Keys or in the Long Island Sound. The US is running warships off the coast of China and has Marines stationed 4 miles off the coast inside a territory that the UN recognizes as a province of the state of China. The US are clearly in the wrong here. This both-sides position is ridiculous
For those who don’t know, this statement is completely untrue, with ZERO historical basis, and ZERO consistency. This is intellectual dishonesty when spoken by people with knowledge. It’s just parroting propaganda when ignorant people say it.
And people question why we say that the USA is the most propagandized people on the planet.
I can’t help map the history of Taiwan against the history of Cuba, when it comes to the topic of “imperialism”.
On the one hand, you have an island that was actually and repeatedly invaded by Western governments, conquered and liberated and conquered again. Bombed, embargoed, sabotaged, sanctioned, its leaders subjected to hundreds of assassination attempts. The explicit stated goal of the imperial neighbor is “regime change”. The implicit unstated goal is subjugation leading to a full-on ethnic cleansing, to clear the way for a new generation of colonial settlers to occupy vacant real estate.
On the other, you have an island that is heavily incorporated into its neighbor’s economic ecosystem. People freely travel to and from the mainland. Citizenship is muddy by design, because the Eastern government wants to encourage islanders to recognize themselves as full citizens of the neighboring state. And Taiwanese businesses are happy to take advantage of this arrangement, exploiting their special status to function as a bridge between mainland businesses (under sanction by Western governments) and Western customers (hungry for cheap, high quality Chinese goods).
Cuba is impoverished as a matter of US foreign policy.
Taiwan is enriched as a matter of Chinese foreign and domestic policies.
One of these countries has been in the headlines for decades, with hysterical predictions of an imminent military occupation. And it isn’t Cuba.
The ways chauvanism can manifest and reassert itself, even when people rational recognize it as a bad thing in the abstract, are so crazy. The internalized indoctrination works like some kind of demon constantly whispering in people’s heads, trying to get them to come back around to “America #1!”
Criticism will either be overly specific, “This is just because of Trump, I miss when we had respectable Republicans like Bush,” or it will be overly general, “Yes, the US is bad, but only in the sense that all governments are bad.” Anything to avoid the conclusion that the US just fucking sucks.
If the American government fails it must either be an exception, or an inherent flaw in all governments, because we’re the smartest, best, most moral and freedom-loving people in the world. Impossible that foreigners could succeed where we failed, if we failed, it could only be because the task is impossible. That’s how the chauvanists think, and so the conclusion is already determined before a single actual fact is considered.
Even that is overly broad and kinda skitters over what it is that makes US empire a global horror.
Like, “ah bummer man the US sucks” doesn’t do justice to the pile of bloody backpacks at the Minab school attack. It feels almost trite to say “The child murder needs to stop”, but so much US policy - foreign and domestic - is about slaughtering children by the millions. It’s not just a “aw shucks things are bad”. It’s a global campaign of eugenics, driven by a handful of plutocrats who have pegged their collective future on the advent of Computer God.
Unless they’re Norwegian, for some reason. Only the Scandinavians - the whitest of the white Europeans - are allowed to claim anything approaching “Functional Socialism”. And only when they build their society on the back of a petro-state.
Classic “no way to prevent this” says only nation where this regularly happens. A part of me just wishes that the horrors could be contained to within our borders, but we have to make all of our shit everyone’s problem.
The funniest part about this is how many people will be like, “The best approach is a mixture of socialism and capitalism” which is exactly what China is doing. I’ve tried so many times to get a coherent answer from the “China bad because billionaires” types as to whether the reforms in the 80’s were good or bad. The only response you’ll ever get from most of them is to call you a fascist for asking.
I’m blessed with having long-time friends from various places in the world.