• davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    24 days ago

    that’s basic human behavior.

    It’s has nothing to do with the material conditions, iT’s JUsT hUmAN NAtUre.

    The problem is not human nature, it is imperialism, otherwise known as monopoly capitalism, otherwise known as the highest stage of capitalism. In the time of British hegemony it took the form of colonialism, and in the current time of American hegemony it has taken the form of neocolonialism.

    • m_f@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      24 days ago

      I have depicted you in mixed case text. Your argument is over :sneer:

      Do better.

      Imperialism is human nature, yes. Imperialism is not otherwise known as monopoly capitalism, which is where your whole chain of thought breaks down. Are you really trying to argue that Communists can’t be imperialist?

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        23 days ago

        You’re entirely ignoring davel’s point. The reason the US bombs is because of what davel calls “Imperialism,” and linked to examples of it. What you call “human nature Imperialism” and what davel calls “Imperialism as a stage in Capitalism” are fundamentally different concepts, you’re talking past davel, and davel is 100% correct here.

        The reason the US bombs countries is not because humans are mean. The US bombs to protect its interests. This you both agree on. However, davel has successfully identified why the US’ interests depend on bombing others, and China’s interests do not.

        To simplifiy davel’s point, Capitalism centralizes and spreads, until it spreads along international lines. This results in the country with more Capital leveraging this to gain favorable trade deals, so it can super-exploit foreign countries for super-profits. The bombing the US does is to keep their power projected and punish those turning against it.

        China does not have a Capitalist system, it has a Socialist Market Economy. China manufactures the vast majority of its own goods, rather than manufacturing overseas, so its interactions with the Global South have a fundamentally different character. China wants to uplift the Global South so that the Global South buys from China and makes them even more money.

        Both countries are acting in their own interests, but because of the structures in place, this results in the US bombing and plundering, and China building up infrastructure and hospitals. Even when China wants resources housed in the Global South, this difference in internal structure makes trade more mutually beneficial, rather than plunderous.

        • m_f@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          23 days ago

          The world we live in now is not one where it’s advantageous to China to be overtly aggressive. We can theorize all day, but looking at Chinese history, they’re just like every other empire in history, and have been quite aggressive in the past. Even the idea of “China” is born out of bloody wars of conquest. I don’t see any reason that they’d be different if given the opportunity.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            23 days ago

            So essentially your reply is to ignore analyzing why the US acts in the way it does materially, and why the PRC acts the way it does materially, and instead analyze based on vibes and some deterministic idea that Chinese people will turn to conquest even if it benefits them more to continue down their current path?

            This is absurd. Analyze why things happen like we have, otherwise you have nothing.

            • m_f@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              23 days ago

              I am analyzing why things happen, you just don’t like it. The analysis is rooted in looking at the entirety of their history. Materially, they have been just as imperialist as anyone else. My point is that looking at their imperialist history and saying things will be different this time based on vibes is foolish.

                • m_f@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  23 days ago

                  They’re still imperialist, they just don’t have the power to effect it as well as they have historically:

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_salami_slicing_strategy

                  They lost out to bigger imperialists in the 19th century. Now, they’re recovering and behaving exactly as you’d expect if they’re still imperialist, just with less power (but growing).

                  EDIT: Fixed link above to be direct

                  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    23 days ago

                    That’s a link to a wikipedia segment saying a Western Imperialist think tank has accused China of slowly going bit by bit to get larger gains than had they gone all at once. That isn’t proof of the PRC hyper-exploiting the Global South for Super Profits via the export of Capital, nor proof of anything. It’s an accusation from a biased source.

                    You are clearly rejecting the definition of Imperialisn davel, I, and other Marxists use. Whether it’s intentional or not I don’t know, but if it is, why have a conversation with us? You haven’t proven that the PRC is Imperialist, just that it acts in its own interests, which we all agree about. Davel and I have just pointed out that the structure of the economic system of the PRC means it is moving to uplift the Global South so they can buy more from the PRC, rather than bomb them to death and hyper-exploit their workers like the West does.

      • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        24 days ago

        Imperialism is human nature, yes.

        It is human nature in the sense that humans have been known to do it. It is not human nature in the sense that humans will always do it when the opportunity presents itself.

        Are you really trying to argue that Communists can’t be imperialist?

        That would be a strange form of communism. Imperialism is, however, baked into capitalism, because once the capitalist class has absorbed the domestic, it tries to exfiltrate new resources abroad and subjugate new labor abroad and access new markets abroad. That is what the UK did, and that is what the US, as the global imperialist hegemon, has been doing for decades, along with its imperial core junior partners.

        • m_f@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          24 days ago

          It is not human nature in the sense that humans will always do it when the opportunity presents itself.

          What would be the best historical example that you can think of? To be specific, what is a historical example of when a country would have benefited from expanding an empire, had the resources and ability to do so, and chose not to for an extended period of time?

          That would be a strange form of communism.

          Human greed is a base desire that has been a constant throughout our entire history. At some point, you’re arguing for a fantasy. Either Communism is a realistic political system that can be implemented with humans as we are, including all of our base animal impulses, or it’s a fantasy that requires humans to achieve a higher level of consciousness first or something.

          • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            23 days ago

            Either Communism is a realistic political system that can be implemented with humans as we are, including all of our base animal impulses

            That is precisely what it is.

            or it’s a fantasy that requires humans to achieve a higher level of consciousness first or something.

            That is precisely what it is not.

            I think there’s ~0% chance you’re interested in understanding dialectical materialism or historical materialism, but I’ll link to this anyway: Elementary principles of philosophy

            • m_f@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              23 days ago

              I agree on what it is and isn’t, but that’s the counterpoint to your statement that communism and imperialism don’t mix. My assertion is that imperialism is a part of human nature, and so either you acknowledge that communism and imperialism do mix, or that communism isn’t realistic for humanity.

              I think there’s ~0% chance you’re interested in understanding […]

              It’s hard to convey over text on the internet, but I am actually interested in better understanding the world. As much as I think places like Hexbear are silly, it’s useful to encounter worldviews so alien. I really hate low-effort “dunking” even if it’s something I agree with, because you can’t learn anything from that and it loses all nuance.