• m_f@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    18 hours 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/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 hours 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.

    • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      18 hours 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
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        15 hours 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.