I want to hear you reasons, why do you think that.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
8 points

“and now class I would like to draw your attention to a footnote that existed between the ancient empires of Britain and the Glorious Peoples Empire of China… for a time there was a thing called ‘America’…”

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

I don’t think the PRC will be taking on the mantle of “Empire.” Hegemon, sure, but their strategy thus far has been starkly different from the British and US Empires with respect to the Global South. The current US Empire dominates the Global South largely through massive Financial Capital and control of the World Reserve Currency, and is largely de-industrialized, while the PRC focuses more on selling to other countries as a heavily industrialized country. For example, in the US, “Made in USA” is a rarity, and usually just assembled in the USA, while in China “Made in China” goods are by far the norm.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

UK went through industrialization leading to its empire, and the US was the industrial power during its ascent. Same thing with Japan before WWII.

Many imoeralistic powers seem to go through big industrial growth before expansion.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Sure, but that evidently doesn’t seem to be the course the PRC is taking. Rather, as Marxist-Leninists, they appear to be more interested in building up the Global South through favorable trade deals as an investment in future customers for their exports. This is fundamentally a different strategy from focusing on exporting financial and industrial Capital to the Global South. Further, China is too populous to offload their productive forces to the Global South, even if we doubt them as dedicated Communists it doesn’t appear to be an economically viable strategy to adopt an Imperialist stance to begin with.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Belt and roads is China’s attempt to do exactly what we’ve been doing with the global south, invest for influence and put them on a debt treadmill. Build infrastructure, pressure them to take on more debt with new projects, say it’s time for austerity, open up more foreign investments, use pressure to buy up raw resources, etc

It’s worth mentioning Coca-Cola… You can get American products everywhere, opening them up as a new market isn’t a different strategy, it’s part of the process

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

Is there actual evidence of these debt traps, or is that just an assumed motivation? Again, China’s financial Capital is largely held by the State, not private entities. Big difference in motivation compared to, say, US finance Capital, which is largely Private. Furthermore, Coke largely produces in the Global South, China produces in its own country.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Asklemmy

!asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Create post

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it’s welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Icon by @Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de

Community stats

  • 8.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.9K

    Posts

  • 322K

    Comments