You say that the global south is accelerating in its development because of China, can you give me data/graphs for this claim?
Land-grabbing and seizing other resources unethically also constitutes imperialism, though. China keeps trying to bully the countries that have broken off from China (i.e. Taiwan and Hong Kong). I hope you can recognize that without blind support for China and asserting the secession of some of its parts was/is “invalid” (or “never happened”).
There’s also the sea-grabbing china has been doing in the sea below it where it’s got conflicts w the phillipines, Malaysia/Indonesia and other countries in the area where from what I last remember china was conducting unauthorized operations in the area despite nobody in the region recognizing the area as China’s— though this may be off.
you say china isn’t imperialist by “socialist consensus” but that’s not really relevant here; of course supporters of XYZ party/ideology aren’t going to criticize a member. I am not a socialist, outside of socialism it seems pretty clearly to be imperialist.
Secondly, however, “land-grabbing” isn’t inherently imperialism. For example, Hong Kong was a British colony stolen from China and recently given back, ans the majority of Hong Kongers are happy with that (something fans of the western-backed rioters neglect to say). The majority of people in Taiwan want neither independence nor to be folded more fully into the PRC, they want the status quo, and the CPC is willing to wait it out even though the Kuomintang fled there and massacred local resistance in the White Terror after they lost the Chinese Civil War.
Border disputes are not inherently imperialism either. Some nations recognized the ROC as the legitimate government of China for a time, and it claimed different areas, which caused the modern border nonsense.
All in all, I gave a short synopsis of imperialism and a link to a good article explaining it so that we could hopefully be on the same page. If you mean to say that any and all acquisition of land that was not immediately your territory prior to doing so is “imperialism,” then I’m sorry but I don’t agree that this is bad in all cases. Imperialism is an epoch of international monopoly finance capitalism, it’s a specific stage in capitalist development at a world scale, and the imperialist countries are generally western countries and their vassals.
If China can respect Taiwan’s desire to maintain the status quo I have no issue with that. Its been on the news that China has been using the Iran war as cover, partly to prepare for an attack on Taiwan with the ships being equipped with military missiles and the sort. I haven’t looked into that claim, however.
If you’re saying all western countries play into imperialism by means of capitalism, then there’s two things to say here:
1- China hasn’t fully transitioned to complete communism yet, even if it is transitioning over time. Meaning China also engages in capitalism. This makes china involved in the same process of imperialism, even if to a smaller extent. Do you recognize that?
2- In the socialist framework, Communism is seen as the natural end consequence, and countries will naturally transition from capitalism to communism. By that reasoning, according to socialists, isn’t it “only a matter of time” before the west also communizes? So why demonize the west? Are the west simply imperialistic because they are inherently “evil” like that, or does historical analysis on the etiology of current conditions / diamat not apply when analyzing the west?
If China can respect Taiwan’s desire to maintain the status quo I have no issue with that. Its been on the news that China has been using the Iran war as cover, partly to prepare for an attack on Taiwan with the ships being equipped with military missiles and the sort. I haven’t looked into that claim, however.
If you’re saying all western countries play into imperialism by means of capitalism, then there’s two things to say here: 1- China hasn’t fully transitioned to complete communism yet, even if it is transitioning over time. Meaning China also engages in capitalism. This makes china involved in the same process of imperialism, even if to a smaller extent. Do you recognize that?
China has elements of capitalism, but has a socialist economy and a socialist state. Western countries have capitalist states and capitalist economies. Capitalism itself is not imperialism, imperialism is a stage in capitalist development. Global south countries are largely capitalist, and yet are on the plundered end of imperialism as a global system. China is a developing, socialist country that is not under the control of a financial oligarchy nor driven by the profit motive as the primary aspect driving development.
2- In the socialist framework, Communism is seen as the natural end consequence, and countries will naturally transition from capitalism to communism. By that reasoning, according to socialists, isn’t it “only a matter of time” before the west also communizes? So why demonize the west? Are the west simply imperialistic because they are inherently “evil” like that, or does historical analysis on the etiology of current conditions / diamat not apply when analyzing the west?
Socialism does not develop from capitalism, capitalism prepares the conditions for transition to socialism. Capitalism still has to be overthrown, and the biggest obstacle to revolution both in the imperial core and in the imperialized countries is imperialism. Imperialism is what bribes the working classes in the core into siding with capitalism over the global south, and imperialism is what keeps global south countries underdeveloped and at risk of coups, sanctions, and genocide by the west if they fight back.
The west is not imperialist because they are evil. The west is imperialist because they developed that way. Capitalism was first developed in Britain, which then progressed to the underdevelopment of African countries via trading more advanced British goods for slaves. This kickstarted colonization of the Americas and Africa, where Europe leveraged its developmental head start to completely suck Africa dry of labor and resources to continue widening the development gap.
This transitioned from full colonialism to imperialism, as bank and industrial capital ballooned in size and merged to form financial capital, and markets became over saturated domestically and needed to expand. This became the basis of exporting capital, the era of imperialism, and after colonialism was “ended” came the more subtle neocolonialism. The US Empire rose and overtook Europe as the world hegemony following World War II, as Europe was forced to rebuild while the US profited immensely.
China is not a part of that in any capacity. It is facilitating trade along more equal lines, and this is why China is the country of choice for the global south to turn to as a partner. The super profits from imperialism and neocolonialism are drying up in the west, which is why there has been a wave of fascism. China is dominated by state capital, in the hands of a working class state, not finance capital by a capitalist state. See State Capital vs. Finance Capital: Why China is not – and Cannot Become – an Imperial Hegemon.
You have continuously either ignored resources I have provided or seemingly deliberately ignored key points to try to form a strawman of my views. It’s a repeated behavior of yours.
Which countries, specifically, has Scandinavia conducted an imperialistic campaign over? Please specify the countries. So far you have kept it nebulous.
or is it exclusively through this indirect mechanism of end-stage-capitalism imperialism that it occurs just generally/globally?
Imperialism is a stage in capitalism, not an individual action, just like there’s no such thing as a single company in a vacuum, as the existence of companies implies capital markets, labor markets, and commodity markets all in general the company is operating within. Imperialism is a material process where the imperial core exports capital to the global south, taking advantage of development gaps and hard/soft power to super-exploit them for super-profits.
In 2008, Norwegian communications multinational, Telenor — partly owned by the state — was exposed for partnering with a Bangladeshi supplier that employed child labour in horrendous conditions.
A report revealed that the children were made to handle chemical substances without protection and one worker died after falling into a pool of acid. The plant also ruined the crops of farmers in the surrounding area with the waste it produced.
Like other Western multinationals that deliberately go to the developing world looking to save money on labour and operating costs, the company washed its hands of the accusations — denying knowledge about its partner’s inhumane practices.
Similarly, Norwegian oil and gas company Statoil, also partly owned by the state, has been involved in multiple corruption cases around the world — especially in underdeveloped countries — where they have bribed state companies and government officials to obtain licenses for extraction.
Their involvement is not only limited to these aggressive economic practices, Scandinavian nations are also deeply involved in the West’s military exploits. Norway dropped 588 bombs on Libya, but is scarcely mentioned as being part of these imperialist operations. Statoil has since started joint extractions operations worth millions in the ruined country.
Sweden’s foreign policy record is no better. Technology firms like Saab, BAE Systems and Bofors compete with the US and Israel in their development of a large variety of weapons that are sold to 55 countries around the world in deals worth billions. It seems that Sweden, like its Norwegian neighbour, actively participates in denying human rights to millions across the globe, especially in underdeveloped nations.
The Swedish clothing giant H&M can sell affordable products in rich nations and make huge profits only because it exploits and underpays workers in impoverished nations such as Bangladesh.
As John Smith points out in his book Imperialism in the Twenty-First Century, only €0.95 of the final sale price of an H&M T-shirt remains in Bangladesh to cover the cost of the factory, the workers, the suppliers and the government. The remaining €3.54 goes for taxes and transportation in the market country, with the bulk going to the retailer.
In other words, Western nations capture most of the profit, although it is the poor workers and nations that have put in most of the labour and resources.
The Danish-British firm G4S is the world’s largest security company and is known for its long list of controversies. It has supplied services to Israeli prisons and checkpoints, and been accused of mistreatment of immigrants in detention centres. It has also played a huge role in protecting Western imperialist interests, such as oil refineries and the territory around the Dakota Access pipeline on Native American land in the US.
However, since Britain is known as the most aggressive of the two nations, the Danish component is frequently swept under the rug, despite the fact they were the founders and developers of the company.
It was for these reasons that I linked resources on what imperialism actually is, and why capitalism necessarily evolves into it. Imperialism is also why socialist revolution has largely happened in exploited countries, rather than more developed ones as initially predicted by Marx. Capitalism may pave the way for socialism, but not in an even manner like social democrats would have you believe.
China sells weapons, selling weapons is not imperialism inherently. It matters to whom weapons are sold, for what purposes and ends. Scandinavian countries largely sell weapons the same way the rest of the west does, in service of retaining imperialism (such as selling to Israel).
Regarding colonialism, it’s in many ways similar to imperialism as a stage of capitalism. They are often linked.
You say that the global south is accelerating in its development because of China, can you give me data/graphs for this claim?
Land-grabbing and seizing other resources unethically also constitutes imperialism, though. China keeps trying to bully the countries that have broken off from China (i.e. Taiwan and Hong Kong). I hope you can recognize that without blind support for China and asserting the secession of some of its parts was/is “invalid” (or “never happened”).
There’s also the sea-grabbing china has been doing in the sea below it where it’s got conflicts w the phillipines, Malaysia/Indonesia and other countries in the area where from what I last remember china was conducting unauthorized operations in the area despite nobody in the region recognizing the area as China’s— though this may be off.
you say china isn’t imperialist by “socialist consensus” but that’s not really relevant here; of course supporters of XYZ party/ideology aren’t going to criticize a member. I am not a socialist, outside of socialism it seems pretty clearly to be imperialist.
For starters, BRI has lifted 40 million people out of poverty, has built thousands of infrastructure projects, and increased billions in bilateral trade. Further, I didn’t say the global south developing was soley because of China, but also due to anti-colonial movements and anti-imperialist movements, as well as partnerships among the global south that do not necessarily include China, I just said that China is playing a positive role in undermining imperialism.
Secondly, however, “land-grabbing” isn’t inherently imperialism. For example, Hong Kong was a British colony stolen from China and recently given back, ans the majority of Hong Kongers are happy with that (something fans of the western-backed rioters neglect to say). The majority of people in Taiwan want neither independence nor to be folded more fully into the PRC, they want the status quo, and the CPC is willing to wait it out even though the Kuomintang fled there and massacred local resistance in the White Terror after they lost the Chinese Civil War.
Border disputes are not inherently imperialism either. Some nations recognized the ROC as the legitimate government of China for a time, and it claimed different areas, which caused the modern border nonsense.
All in all, I gave a short synopsis of imperialism and a link to a good article explaining it so that we could hopefully be on the same page. If you mean to say that any and all acquisition of land that was not immediately your territory prior to doing so is “imperialism,” then I’m sorry but I don’t agree that this is bad in all cases. Imperialism is an epoch of international monopoly finance capitalism, it’s a specific stage in capitalist development at a world scale, and the imperialist countries are generally western countries and their vassals.
If China can respect Taiwan’s desire to maintain the status quo I have no issue with that. Its been on the news that China has been using the Iran war as cover, partly to prepare for an attack on Taiwan with the ships being equipped with military missiles and the sort. I haven’t looked into that claim, however.
If you’re saying all western countries play into imperialism by means of capitalism, then there’s two things to say here: 1- China hasn’t fully transitioned to complete communism yet, even if it is transitioning over time. Meaning China also engages in capitalism. This makes china involved in the same process of imperialism, even if to a smaller extent. Do you recognize that?
2- In the socialist framework, Communism is seen as the natural end consequence, and countries will naturally transition from capitalism to communism. By that reasoning, according to socialists, isn’t it “only a matter of time” before the west also communizes? So why demonize the west? Are the west simply imperialistic because they are inherently “evil” like that, or does historical analysis on the etiology of current conditions / diamat not apply when analyzing the west?
Correct, it has been on the news because this is what western media does. In reality, Kuomintang leaders are meeting with Xi Jinping to avoid the US turning Taiwan into Ukraine 2.
China has elements of capitalism, but has a socialist economy and a socialist state. Western countries have capitalist states and capitalist economies. Capitalism itself is not imperialism, imperialism is a stage in capitalist development. Global south countries are largely capitalist, and yet are on the plundered end of imperialism as a global system. China is a developing, socialist country that is not under the control of a financial oligarchy nor driven by the profit motive as the primary aspect driving development.
Socialism does not develop from capitalism, capitalism prepares the conditions for transition to socialism. Capitalism still has to be overthrown, and the biggest obstacle to revolution both in the imperial core and in the imperialized countries is imperialism. Imperialism is what bribes the working classes in the core into siding with capitalism over the global south, and imperialism is what keeps global south countries underdeveloped and at risk of coups, sanctions, and genocide by the west if they fight back.
The west is not imperialist because they are evil. The west is imperialist because they developed that way. Capitalism was first developed in Britain, which then progressed to the underdevelopment of African countries via trading more advanced British goods for slaves. This kickstarted colonization of the Americas and Africa, where Europe leveraged its developmental head start to completely suck Africa dry of labor and resources to continue widening the development gap.
This transitioned from full colonialism to imperialism, as bank and industrial capital ballooned in size and merged to form financial capital, and markets became over saturated domestically and needed to expand. This became the basis of exporting capital, the era of imperialism, and after colonialism was “ended” came the more subtle neocolonialism. The US Empire rose and overtook Europe as the world hegemony following World War II, as Europe was forced to rebuild while the US profited immensely.
China is not a part of that in any capacity. It is facilitating trade along more equal lines, and this is why China is the country of choice for the global south to turn to as a partner. The super profits from imperialism and neocolonialism are drying up in the west, which is why there has been a wave of fascism. China is dominated by state capital, in the hands of a working class state, not finance capital by a capitalist state. See State Capital vs. Finance Capital: Why China is not – and Cannot Become – an Imperial Hegemon.
You have continuously either ignored resources I have provided or seemingly deliberately ignored key points to try to form a strawman of my views. It’s a repeated behavior of yours.
Which countries, specifically, has Scandinavia conducted an imperialistic campaign over? Please specify the countries. So far you have kept it nebulous.
or is it exclusively through this indirect mechanism of end-stage-capitalism imperialism that it occurs just generally/globally?
Imperialism is a stage in capitalism, not an individual action, just like there’s no such thing as a single company in a vacuum, as the existence of companies implies capital markets, labor markets, and commodity markets all in general the company is operating within. Imperialism is a material process where the imperial core exports capital to the global south, taking advantage of development gaps and hard/soft power to super-exploit them for super-profits.
Scandinavia plays a bloody role in imperialism:
It was for these reasons that I linked resources on what imperialism actually is, and why capitalism necessarily evolves into it. Imperialism is also why socialist revolution has largely happened in exploited countries, rather than more developed ones as initially predicted by Marx. Capitalism may pave the way for socialism, but not in an even manner like social democrats would have you believe.
Hmm, that reads the same as British East India Company-era colonialism tbh.
On the sale of weapons: doesn’t china sell weapons, too, though? A brief answer will do.
China sells weapons, selling weapons is not imperialism inherently. It matters to whom weapons are sold, for what purposes and ends. Scandinavian countries largely sell weapons the same way the rest of the west does, in service of retaining imperialism (such as selling to Israel).
Regarding colonialism, it’s in many ways similar to imperialism as a stage of capitalism. They are often linked.
China doesn’t sell weapons to the US and Israel?