91
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024
91 points (93.3% liked)
World News
32075 readers
864 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
But assuming that one has to be dominant, which would you choose of the ones that are realistic possibilities?
Interesting for you to fold under even the first question to explain your position, but so be it.
China, unequivocally.
https://lib.icimod.org/record/35793/files/HimalDoc2022_WB_Poverty-Synthesis-Report-China.pdf
Whoever promises more support to anti-imperialist efforts, so that the world may build itself up together.
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.
Do you consider things which happened hundreds of years ago to be of the same weight as things that are happening as we speak?
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?
They all are.
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...
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.
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.
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.
So basically ongoing imperialist conquest and subjugation in modern times is justified because anyone did it in the past? Bullshit.
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.