You don't think that this has anything to do with China chilling the hell out on the espionage? It's getting a little ridiculous. I randomly have a short conversation about smurfs while my phone is in my pocket, and next time I open tiktok, it's an absolute smurf-fest.
I'm totally reading this is a joke, but the sad thing is that given the paranoia some people have about China in North America now it's honestly hard to even be really sure.
__________________
"If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?"
America's most recent moves against the tech industry in China are extremely aggressive, and for the first time threaten to actually be really damaging. They could impact all sorts of industries in China, ultimately damaging areas like medical imaging tech, transportation, pharmaceutical innovation, and many other areas that have nothing to do with the US at all other than them being part of China achieving more competitive economic and technological development. If the US policies achieve their goals, it will also be bad for a lot of the emerging and developing markets of the world that buy Chinese tech infrastructure to advance their own societies. It's pretty disgusting, and threatens to set much of the world's population most in need of advancement further back on that path just for the sake of US hegemony as the unipolar power.
Well I agree it's possibly not in the best interest in humanity - it's the obvious move for the US. No super power country is going to help build a country to become its equal or a stronger power if that country isn't going to align itself with them.
I'm totally reading this is a joke, but the sad thing is that given the paranoia some people have about China in North America now it's honestly hard to even be really sure.
If you don’t think that industrial espionage and IP stealing is real, then you have your head in the sand.
If you don’t think that industrial espionage and IP stealing is real, then you have your head in the sand.
He's siding with a fascist government that brutalizes its own people, destroyed democracy in Hong Kong, threatens daily to do the same to Taiwan, and allies itself with amazing countries like Russia and North Korea. I don't think head in the sand quite covers it
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hemi-Cuda For This Useful Post:
Well I agree it's possibly not in the best interest in humanity - it's the obvious move for the US. No super power country is going to help build a country to become its equal or a stronger power if that country isn't going to align itself with them.
From the point of US interest in continuing as the unipolar hegemon, sure it makes sense. Not debating that. I'm just part of the 96% of global population that's not American. I don't value American hegemony over a higher standard of common global prosperity, so I see the US acting in a way that puts self interest over the interests of most of the world, and I think that sucks. Even for most of the 4% of global population that is American or the 1% that voted for Biden, I don't think its in their best interests or that it's going to make their lives better, and I also count them among the people whose lives I would prefer to see improved.
__________________
"If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?"
The Following User Says Thank You to JohnnyB For This Useful Post:
If you don’t think that industrial espionage and IP stealing is real, then you have your head in the sand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda
He's siding with a fascist government that brutalizes its own people, destroyed democracy in Hong Kong, threatens daily to do the same to Taiwan, and allies itself with amazing countries like Russia and North Korea. I don't think head in the sand quite covers it
Yeah... point proven.
Someone makes a post about a social media app serving up targeted content about smurfs and equates that with espionage, and the response to me taking their post as being made in jest is others jumping in to say I have my head in the sand and am aligned with fascists.
Well done guys. 👏
__________________
"If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?"
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JohnnyB For This Useful Post:
So I've been lamenting the citizens in Georgia who continue to have Walker within 2-3 points of Warnock in polling, though of late, Warnock has been coming out ahead at least.
Warnock destroyed Walker in their latest debate but I still wouldn't be shocked if Murica sent Walker to the Senate anyways. In the debate, Walker pulled out a toy police badge...
From the point of US interest in continuing as the unipolar hegemon, sure it makes sense. Not debating that. I'm just part of the 96% of global population that's not American. I don't value American hegemony over a higher standard of common global prosperity, so I see the US acting in a way that puts self interest over the interests of most of the world, and I think that sucks. Even for most of the 4% of global population that is American or the 1% that voted for Biden, I don't think its in their best interests or that it's going to make their lives better, and I also count them among the people whose lives I would prefer to see improved.
Isn't that, like, most countries? I think you just described China as well.
Isn't that, like, most countries? I think you just described China as well.
Countries will always need something beneficial for them in any dealings with other countries, but if we listen to what the leaders of African countries are saying, the difference is that deals with Americans and the west to be completely frank, are heavily weighted to the west, often with nothing tangible for them in the end. This is why they have continued to do business with China after many years - they agree to build for them infrastructure such as roads, bridges, ports and trains to give them the basics for their economy to develop. They see benefits. The west historically just takes and takes for their own interests.
The Following User Says Thank You to activeStick For This Useful Post:
From the point of US interest in continuing as the unipolar hegemon, sure it makes sense. Not debating that. I'm just part of the 96% of global population that's not American. I don't value American hegemony over a higher standard of common global prosperity, so I see the US acting in a way that puts self interest over the interests of most of the world, and I think that sucks. Even for most of the 4% of global population that is American or the 1% that voted for Biden, I don't think its in their best interests or that it's going to make their lives better, and I also count them among the people whose lives I would prefer to see improved.
China could align themselves more closely with the US and not act out against US interests and the US wouldn't be doing this to them right now. China also regularly blocks US businesses from their market. So let's not act like China is blameless in this scenario.
Countries will always need something beneficial for them in any dealings with other countries, but if we listen to what the leaders of African countries are saying, the difference is that deals with Americans and the west to be completely frank, are heavily weighted to the west, often with nothing tangible for them in the end. This is why they have continued to do business with China after many years - they agree to build for them infrastructure such as roads, bridges, ports and trains to give them the basics for their economy to develop. They see benefits. The west historically just takes and takes for their own interests.
Are you saying the deals with China in Africa aren't wildly in China's favour? China is basically trying to find their China (in terms of what China meant to the US in the 70-80s) - cheap labour, their Saudi Arabia - access to oil, etc.
The Following User Says Thank You to PeteMoss For This Useful Post:
Are you saying the deals with China in Africa aren't wildly in China's favour? China is basically trying to find their China (in terms of what China meant to the US in the 70-80s) - cheap labour, their Saudi Arabia - access to oil, etc.
Like I said, the benefits for both are there. China gets paid to help them create the infrastructure needed to help move their countries towards growth, and China also gets access through other business ventures such as a large consumer base there for Chinese goods and services. But again, compared to what the west does historically with the raping and pillaging of African lands and resources, it shouldn't be a surprise at all why they are going to move forward with China into their future.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to activeStick For This Useful Post:
Isn't that, like, most countries? I think you just described China as well.
It's fair to say that countries all want to advance their own interests, but there is also no country in the world that can exert the influence that the US can. It's like having a marketplace with one massively dominant player in it that can shape the market according to its own interests in many ways. So, when the US takes the kind of aggressive action that they are uniquely capable of taking to prevent another competitor from rising up and creating more balanced competition, I think it's fair to see their actions as being qualitatively different. Also, even if they weren't the globally dominant player, it would still be fair to call them out on the kind of actions that are potentially bad for a lot of the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteMoss
Are you saying the deals with China in Africa aren't wildly in China's favour? China is basically trying to find their China (in terms of what China meant to the US in the 70-80s) - cheap labour, their Saudi Arabia - access to oil, etc.
Generally, the press in the West only focuses on very recent Chinese investment activities in Africa, and tends to look at it pretty shallowly and negatively, but China has a history of aid and investment in Africa going back to the '70s. It's not very well covered outside of academic literature, but China has decades of working with countries there coming at it with their own understanding of the challenges of being a developing nation and the problems of Western aid. So, China is not just taking the same approach as the US or the Bretton Woods institutions. They bring a different understanding, and different value propositions. That's not to say there are no problems, but China approaches these relationships differently in ways that are attractive to a lot of countries. And don't forget that these countries are not all just naïve suckers. There are plenty of Africans in government positions who are very smart and have been educated at top schools of the world, and who understand the history of aid and investment relationships in their region. Give them some credit for being able to evaluate the options on the table and make decisions according to advancing their own interests too.
Of course it's fine to call out China on harmful things it does too, but this is the American politics thread after all, and I just find it really saddening that Biden seems to have adopted a foreign policy approach pretty reminiscent of the Project for a New American Century. I didn't like that approach under Bush and Cheney, and I don't like it under Biden. His domestic policies may be a huge improvement, but he behaves a lot like a hawkish neocon on the international stage, which I don't think is good for the world.
__________________
"If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?"
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JohnnyB For This Useful Post:
So I've been lamenting the citizens in Georgia who continue to have Walker within 2-3 points of Warnock in polling, though of late, Warnock has been coming out ahead at least.
Warnock destroyed Walker in their latest debate but I still wouldn't be shocked if Murica sent Walker to the Senate anyways. In the debate, Walker pulled out a toy police badge...
Warnock's finances are pretty greasy, he's not exactly a great candidate either. I'm not saying Walker is but it's pathetic that these are the two "best" options for a top 10 (population) state.
It's fair to say that countries all want to advance their own interests, but there is also no country in the world that can exert the influence that the US can. It's like having a marketplace with one massively dominant player in it that can shape the market according to its own interests in many ways. So, when the US takes the kind of aggressive action that they are uniquely capable of taking to prevent another competitor from rising up and creating more balanced competition, I think it's fair to see their actions as being qualitatively different. Also, even if they weren't the globally dominant player, it would still be fair to call them out on the kind of actions that are potentially bad for a lot of the world.
Generally, the press in the West only focuses on very recent Chinese investment activities in Africa, and tends to look at it pretty shallowly and negatively, but China has a history of aid and investment in Africa going back to the '70s. It's not very well covered outside of academic literature, but China has decades of working with countries there coming at it with their own understanding of the challenges of being a developing nation and the problems of Western aid. So, China is not just taking the same approach as the US or the Bretton Woods institutions. They bring a different understanding, and different value propositions. That's not to say there are no problems, but China approaches these relationships differently in ways that are attractive to a lot of countries. And don't forget that these countries are not all just naïve suckers. There are plenty of Africans in government positions who are very smart and have been educated at top schools of the world, and who understand the history of aid and investment relationships in their region. Give them some credit for being able to evaluate the options on the table and make decisions according to advancing their own interests too.
Of course it's fine to call out China on harmful things it does too, but this is the American politics thread after all, and I just find it really saddening that Biden seems to have adopted a foreign policy approach pretty reminiscent of the Project for a New American Century. I didn't like that approach under Bush and Cheney, and I don't like it under Biden. His domestic policies may be a huge improvement, but he behaves a lot like a hawkish neocon on the international stage, which I don't think is good for the world.
I wish the China you think exists actually existed...they'd be a great investment right now.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Rutuu For This Useful Post:
It's fair to say that countries all want to advance their own interests, but there is also no country in the world that can exert the influence that the US can. It's like having a marketplace with one massively dominant player in it that can shape the market according to its own interests in many ways. So, when the US takes the kind of aggressive action that they are uniquely capable of taking to prevent another competitor from rising up and creating more balanced competition, I think it's fair to see their actions as being qualitatively different. Also, even if they weren't the globally dominant player, it would still be fair to call them out on the kind of actions that are potentially bad for a lot of the world.
I think you’re mistaking the failings of a capitalist market and society with the direction of a government.
The fact that companies will pillage and plunder a location (doesn’t matter if that location is in Africa or Canada or California) and are only restricted by government regulations tells me that it isn’t the “US” that is at fault.
Are you of the opinion that the US government chooses and pays companies to go into other countries and “develop” them?
So I've been lamenting the citizens in Georgia who continue to have Walker within 2-3 points of Warnock in polling, though of late, Warnock has been coming out ahead at least.
Warnock destroyed Walker in their latest debate but I still wouldn't be shocked if Murica sent Walker to the Senate anyways. In the debate, Walker pulled out a toy police badge...
Candidates only matter but so much in Senate races. I can't imagine a scenario where I would vote for a better Republican candidate for Senate in today's environment. Governor, maybe I'd listen to, but 99% of what a Senator does that will affect me in any way is vote along party lines, and even the worst of democrats would be better than giving the Republican an extra vote.
Early voting is also underway now in Georgia. This race in Georgia is particularly interesting to me given how unqualified Walker is. Blows my mind that he has a very real shot at winning.
