"We don't want to live in a world where the Chinese are the dominant country," says US Ambassador to China Nicholas Burns : worldnews

[–] [email protected] 51 points 6 months ago (4 children)

"the Chinese"

Not China (the country), not the PRC (the country), but "the Chinese."

Because that's what the US ambassador thinks of Chinese people.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 6 months ago

"Hate the government not the people" proceeds to bomb/sanction/sabotage the people

[–] [email protected] 20 points 6 months ago

They only want a world controlled by white men. They'll bomb and kill anyone that threatens their fascist utopia.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago

What do you expect when their last and next president calls them chinamen?

[–] [email protected] 49 points 6 months ago (2 children)

If that is the case, you probably should have thought about that 50 years ago when "you" allowed and encouraged industries to out-source. But it's too late now.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 6 months ago

China: we're going to become a manufacturing machine for the world, but we're going to use your investment, technology, and infrastructure to build up our country and eventually overtake you.

US capitalists: hah, yeah, sure. Would you look at these profit margins!?

[–] [email protected] 28 points 6 months ago (1 children)

well, the US could do a revolution, nationalize what's left of the country and then start rebuilding. that would prevent this ghastly future...

but nah, they're gonna ride neoliberalism to the grave.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Well your grave and mine. But the ultra-wealthy will live their best life, until there is no one to bury them.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago

In that case, adventure-time

[–] [email protected] 47 points 6 months ago (1 children)

"We don't want to live in a world where the USians are the dominant country," reply billions.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 6 months ago

I’m American and would LOVE to see this piece of shit country taken down a peg or 40.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 6 months ago

Okay, get in.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 6 months ago

Me sowing (parasitizing third world countries for extracting capital): hahaha yes!

Me reaping (decomposing my productive state into a bloated financial institution): owiee nooo

[+] [email protected] 22 points 6 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Uh, too late? By like 300+ years?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

Well, we can work towards changing that, and judging by this article we're well on the way it seems.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (4 children)

But assuming that one has to be dominant, which would you choose of the ones that are realistic possibilities?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

China, unequivocally.

https://lib.icimod.org/record/35793/files/HimalDoc2022_WB_Poverty-Synthesis-Report-China.pdf

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Whoever promises more support to anti-imperialist efforts, so that the world may build itself up together.

[+] [email protected] -3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

All 3 have, what are you smoking? The US is one of the most imperialistic nations on Earth. That's not to say Russia and China aren't either, but to pretend the US didn't forcibly annex territories is to wash away the centuries of genocide and Conquest as "okay" because it was done successfully and more than a few years ago.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Do you consider things which happened hundreds of years ago to be of the same weight as things that are happening as we speak?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Do you consider things which happened merely decades ago, even up to hundreds of years ago, have lasting impact on generations that follow?

If you successfully do Imperialism, such that the colonized can no longer resist, does that erase the sin?

[+] [email protected] -2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

They all are.

[+] [email protected] -4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Is that the only expression of Imperialism you personally accept? Literal annexation? Hawaii. Vassal states? Cuba. The notion that Imperialism is just Conquest is laughable.

Edit: crickets...

[–] [email protected] -4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Definition of imperialism: The extension of a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political dominance over other nations.

Definition of hegemony: The dominance or leadership of one social group or nation over others.

I would be a little more nuanced with my definitions personally. I think Russia is textbook imperialist. I think China is borderline imperialist, and I think the USA is more hegemonic.

I think all 3 play all the same games except that the USA doesn't play in territorial expansion, which for me is a big improvement over those that do.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The US is built on territorial expansion, lmao. Indigenous Americans who had their land stolen from them have been generationally impacted! The consequences of slavery have set Black Americans back centuries economically! Hawaii was forcibly annexed very recently in a historical frame of viewing!

The US is perhaps one of the most Imperialist countries on the planet, just because it now fights proxy wars rather than direct Conquest doesn't make it any less evil. Here's a hint: the US stopped using Conquest for land acquisition because it already succeeded, not because it's a morally superior Imperialist power.

[+] [email protected] -5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Buddy, do indigenous people no longer exist? Are Hawaiians extinct? Do black Americans no longer exist? These events have lasting impacts! Despite the entire UN council except the US and Israel voting to open the Cuban blockade, the US is continuing it!

Secondly, if our conversation is about choosing which Imperialist power to live under, you must see why each country is doing what it's doing. The US already conquered the surrounding areas, and now expresses Imperialism through puppet states like Israel.

Your concern is nothing, you just refuse to believe that America is one of the most brutal empires the world has ever known.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

So basically ongoing imperialist conquest and subjugation in modern times is justified because anyone did it in the past? Bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Fucking no the hell it isn't justified, what are you talking about? You're the one justifying ongoing genocide in Gaza because the US already finished most of its domestic Conquest and genocide.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 months ago

Rules for thee, not for me

astronaut-1

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Why? Are you afraid they're going to treat you as poorly as you treated them? They won't, but they absolutely should.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago

Don't live. Problem solved.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The white man's burden (is his inflated ego).

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago

Cry more burger dipshit

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

ok cool. commit sudoku

World News

Rules: