Senate Asian Geopolitics

Actual functioning states. With governments and historic divisions. So PR, Catalonia, Scotland.

 

This. Russia took months to gather near 200k troops and support. To invade Taiwan you would need a bombing campaign not seen since World War II. And you would need an invasion force bigger than D-Day. If China does invade Taiwan in the future we’ll know its coming.

 

Just as a note, more bombs were dropped by the United States on Laos alone during the Vietnam War than were dropped on Japan, Germany, and Italy combined during World War II. Unexploded ordinance kills Laotians today. Several countries have already experienced bombing campaigns that exceeded those of WW2.

 

Every instance of "democracy" (as accepted by Euros and US) leads to corporate interests winning at the expense of people. Every instance. When a country in the global south has free and fair elections, American and European money flows into it to back candidates and parties that will sell out their own people for a tiny bit of personal wealth. This happens all the time. So those who want to stand up to these interests have to curb some political liberties. This isn't licence to become Saudi Arabia (who is backed by the West, mind you). But it's necessary if these countries need to survive. But because those countries stand up to us, the US begins propaganda against those countries. And you swallow that propaganda whole.

What values are you even talking about here? Have you ever been to the global south? I come from Pakistan. I was born there and I lived my childhood there. There's no "everyone is equal" unless the wealth that was taken from that part of the world is returned by the global north. You're not helping when you jump on board every time US media runs a story about how some country America doesn't like is authoritarian. Focus on your own country. There's plenty of authoritarian to fight here.

 

Who said recently that capitalism is more important than democracy? That's the West's philosophy.

 

Lol I'm suddenly reminded of when Ender was like "you're an idiot you can only have an opinion on a conflict if you've been there" and then I pointed out I've been to Syria and he hasn't. Good times.

 

Ender's Law: The longer a JCC thread grows, the probably of Ender being mentioned gets closer to 1.

 

Still my point stands. You would need a huge bombing campaign before the invasion could even begin. If you invaded at the same time the casualty rate would be horrendous.

 

The solution to that should be to have stronger campaign finance laws, not to throw out democracy and fundamental rights wholesale.

Yeah, there's lots of countries we don't like...and maybe because the reason is because they're authoritarian? I don't see the corporate media saying we need to overthrow the governments of Denmark or Sweden. Or the EU...they've got a lot of policies that run counter to American corporate interests, but we're not trying to destroy them.

You're right in that we've got plenty of authoritarianism to fight here at home, and our hands will be full for the foreseeable future. But authoritarianism is bad here for the same reason it's bad everywhere else.

Also , I'm pretty sure I'm not swallowing the U.S. media propaganda whole. I take a small bite and chew it for a little bit, then depending on how it tastes maybe I'll swallow some of it.

 

No clearly you were saying that bombings the level of Vietnam are good....

 

I am assuming this is humor? Cause I am atrocious at telling when something is serious or not

 

I don't even know where to begin with this much ignorance about US foreign policy.

1) "campaign finance laws" aren't going to help here at all. We are very good at manipulating elections, creating unrest, and performing all kinds of coups. They have to insulate their political processes from the interests of both Capital and the West.

2) we don't dislike countries because they're authoritarian. We are perfectly fine with authoritarian countries that further our geopolitical goals. See: Saudi Arabia, Israel, Azerbaijan, etc. There's a whole host of authoritarian governments we support.

3) the fact that you believe that the US has enemies because we're democratic and they're authoritarian is the biggest proof that you swallow propaganda whole.

I don't mean to be insulting, but as someone from the global south, having to read such ignorance actively caused me pain. You are acting like the literal caricature of the ignorant westerner who has no idea why things are bad for those of us from elsewhere.

 

My perennial question when you trot all this out is what is not allowable? What is one time you’ve ever said that something is not justified on the name of limiting Western/corporate influence? Is this just a never-ending license for anything imaginable? Where does one draw the line?

This is the same as my earlier question. What’s the point of an “alternative” if it is also bad? Why should people care about resisting Westeen influence if doing so creates a restrictive society they don’t end up enjoying? What is the actual end point on all the stuff you suggest? What is the positive case for the society you want instead of the big list of excuses for why it is not this or that other thing?

 

The current bad is y'all exploiting the global south. The other "bad" isn't. Your argument is literally "your alternative to me not exploiting the global south and causing untold suffering there is also bad." That's not an argument.

 

There's nothing to argue here since "debate and discussions are for those who don't have anything at stake. Debate and discussions are for those who are privileged, for those who have free time, for those who, after arguments, debate and discussion are over, can go back to living their life."

Therefore, nothing to argue or discuss here. Westerners shouldn't debate about this since they are privileged.

 

I'm at the point where I don't know the difference between capitalism, neoliberalism and authoritarianism... I wonder if saying capitalism/neoliberalism isn't authoritarianism is like saying H2O ice or steam isn't H2O because it's not liquid water in those phases. It seems like the US creates authoritarianism. It is ruled by capitalism and capitalism is to operate without borders, restrictions, rules, stops, so on. The US is also an imperialist military nation. Once the US has disrupted another nation the unrest this creates opens the door for authoritarian regimes to take over (if the US didn't already support one), which means less freedom and less chance of democracy for the people in that country. If the US was a true promoter of freedom and democracy it wouldn't behave this way. The world is like a snake eating its own tail under capitalism, because capitalism must always expand, and the planet is a finite space. So ofc capitalists like Musk have Mars and solar system mining dreams because it's like perhaps they realize that after capitalism has consumed everything here there will be nothing left.

It makes sense that the US is like the head of the snake and the nations it exploits are like the tail. I don't understand how capitalism isn't economic authoritarianism. It's not a miracle system that will raise up the world, it can only raise up some people at the expense of others. It can only create zero sum games which make lies of attempts to create equality. US authoritarianism even arises arguably out of capitalism. The argument is that capitalism wrecked a lot of the country when jobs moved out of the country for more profit. This created instability, and what do you know, out of that instability was born what is currently MAGA. So then the Republicans offer their solution: free up the markets, create an enemy to other!

It's all one big death spiral, a giant churning economic black hole that won't stop consuming, a system with no sentience mindlessly running the world, always hungry to exploit more people and resources. And it feels like it very much runs US politics. It runs the campaigns of our elected officials and they return the favor to their corporate backers.

Although I guess I do see the Republicans as actually being for real authoritarian capitalism if they really aspire to make the US more like Hungary or Poland. Living in this kind of system would be a nightmare to me. This article calls it "global Trumpism."

 

To be clear, your position is that China in no way exploits or takes advantage of developing nations (as you've termed, "the global south")?

 

What China does or doesn't do to developing nations like in Africa doesn't matter because.... Reasons! The USA is also bad therefore China can't also be bad. Don't look at their second wave of imperialism via copper mines!

 

Also, Vivec, it's worth being explicit that there is something larger at stake here. It is true that China being bad would not make the US good. You are correct in that. But I'm not excusing the US's actions. I am agreeing that the things they do are exploitative and bad. I am saying vocally that they should stop. You, on the other hand, are tying to use China's comparative "goodness" to excuse at repressive internal policies, and potentially (still waiting for clarification from you) some of their foreign policies as well. I think it matters a lot whether the excuse you are offering on their behalf is actually valid or not. If it isn't, what exactly are you doing?

 

Exactly. "the US is bad so Americans can't say anything about China being bad" is the ultimate fallacious argument.

 

In short: two wrongs doesn't make one right. I think a lot of people forget this.

For example: just because the US invades Irak in 2003, doesn't excuse the fact that Russia is invading Ukraine, or China will invade Taiwan by force. Otherwise it's selective outrage...

 

It's not just that. It's also an ad hominem attack on westerners saying they can't have good thoughts on China just because their country is also bad.

 

So it's the use of "guilt by association" tactic?

We've seen that a lot during the past few years in public discourse...

 

Ad hominem means attack on the person. In other words, attacking the source of an argument (e.g. all Westerners) and ignoring potentially valid opinions just because of the source is a fallacy. A classic one, which is why its name is Latin.

 

It's racism, plain and simple.