Not gonna say you’re wrong about India, obviously there’s a ton of animosity there - the infighting over who should join BRICS+ really exemplifies it - but when you look at things like trade flows over the last decade then they have been constantly increasing. I think part of China’s charm, strategy even, is that even if the government of X country dislikes China for Y political reason, the economic logic of increasing ties in a capitalist system is hard to fight against. Capitalists want profit.
A little more confused about ASEAN, can you expand on that? Sure, not everybody in ASEAN is particularly glad about China’s increasing regional power, but most of them seem to be okay outside of naval disputes. This statement published just a couple weeks ago at the 26th ASEAN-China Summit sounds fairly positive about their relationship and boosting ties.
More economic ties with China does not necessarily mean these countries want to have friendlier cultural ties with China. ASEAN and India have territorial disputes, aside from ideological differences. The trade deals are just business, and therefore not reflective of what the countries really think of China whether they could be seen as ally, to be trusted, etc.
The only developing nations I see who are in more warmer and friendlier terms with China are in Africa. But even many local Africans complain of how many Chinese firms does business (debt trap, not hiring locals, etc).
economic ties matter because the US, the hegemon of the present economic order, is trying to cut China out of said economic ties. culture is a superstructure built on top of the material base. not to mention, worrying about how two countries on the other side of the world “feel” about each other is peak liberal cope.
You’re not wrong about US wanting to remain hegemon, but no one from democratic countries would want to align to countries with you know… authoritarian. Surveys still show that much of the world still prefer the US as a superpower, despite many countries wanting to trade with China. Having trade relations does not mean the parties are friends. More often than not, countries are just business partners. That’s called realpolitik-- and a cynical one at that. Countries that are even allied still want something in return. A lot of white Western champagne socialists never bother to research, ask or get to know the actual opinions of those from countries who are being bullied by China in South China Sea from their exclusive economic zones. Japan, China, South Korea and ASEAN signed a trade union, but it doesn’t mean they will all relinquish their own territorial claims. For many white Western champagne socialists, the conditions of black and brown people they purport to try to alleviate from Western imperialism are tools for exploitation for their own ideological self-masturbatory, pat-on-the-back congratulations.
Another factor why the US is still preferred than China as the global power is because US has better soft power, something that China could never amount to. The totalitarianism of China is something that many will not be impressed by. Not trying to make the US flawless, it’s clear they aren’t, it’s just that they’re lesser evil than China. Oh and before anyone says anything about US being worse than China and vice versa, I know they’re both bad; this isn’t evil Olympics. Many people surveyed thinks both countries are threat to world peace.
Cope all you want, keep engaging in the echo chamber of self-fellating champagne socialist circles who take for granted the freedom of speech and rule of law while sitting in front computer at the comfort of one’s own house in a Western country, but the link I gave showcasing many developing nations think China and US are both threats is not going to change. White Western socialists never really do think what other countries think. They’re just as condescending and guilty of white man’s burden mentality as imperialistic white capitalists that brown and black people in developing countries can’t think for themselves. Both believe either Western-made ideologies of socialism and capitalism will save people of colour from their misery.
ASEAN and India would disagree with that.
Not gonna say you’re wrong about India, obviously there’s a ton of animosity there - the infighting over who should join BRICS+ really exemplifies it - but when you look at things like trade flows over the last decade then they have been constantly increasing. I think part of China’s charm, strategy even, is that even if the government of X country dislikes China for Y political reason, the economic logic of increasing ties in a capitalist system is hard to fight against. Capitalists want profit.
A little more confused about ASEAN, can you expand on that? Sure, not everybody in ASEAN is particularly glad about China’s increasing regional power, but most of them seem to be okay outside of naval disputes. This statement published just a couple weeks ago at the 26th ASEAN-China Summit sounds fairly positive about their relationship and boosting ties.
“Hi, do we ever have an offer on rope for you!”
More economic ties with China does not necessarily mean these countries want to have friendlier cultural ties with China. ASEAN and India have territorial disputes, aside from ideological differences. The trade deals are just business, and therefore not reflective of what the countries really think of China whether they could be seen as ally, to be trusted, etc.
The only developing nations I see who are in more warmer and friendlier terms with China are in Africa. But even many local Africans complain of how many Chinese firms does business (debt trap, not hiring locals, etc).
economic ties matter because the US, the hegemon of the present economic order, is trying to cut China out of said economic ties. culture is a superstructure built on top of the material base. not to mention, worrying about how two countries on the other side of the world “feel” about each other is peak liberal cope.
You’re not wrong about US wanting to remain hegemon, but no one from democratic countries would want to align to countries with you know… authoritarian. Surveys still show that much of the world still prefer the US as a superpower, despite many countries wanting to trade with China. Having trade relations does not mean the parties are friends. More often than not, countries are just business partners. That’s called realpolitik-- and a cynical one at that. Countries that are even allied still want something in return. A lot of white Western champagne socialists never bother to research, ask or get to know the actual opinions of those from countries who are being bullied by China in South China Sea from their exclusive economic zones. Japan, China, South Korea and ASEAN signed a trade union, but it doesn’t mean they will all relinquish their own territorial claims. For many white Western champagne socialists, the conditions of black and brown people they purport to try to alleviate from Western imperialism are tools for exploitation for their own ideological self-masturbatory, pat-on-the-back congratulations.
Another factor why the US is still preferred than China as the global power is because US has better soft power, something that China could never amount to. The totalitarianism of China is something that many will not be impressed by. Not trying to make the US flawless, it’s clear they aren’t, it’s just that they’re lesser evil than China. Oh and before anyone says anything about US being worse than China and vice versa, I know they’re both bad; this isn’t evil Olympics. Many people surveyed thinks both countries are threat to world peace.
The US is way more authoritarian than China, probably the most authoritarian country in the world by any reasonable metric, so I don’t see your point.
A fundamentally ridiculous assertion, the US is many orders of magnitude more evil.
Cope all you want, keep engaging in the echo chamber of self-fellating champagne socialist circles who take for granted the freedom of speech and rule of law while sitting in front computer at the comfort of one’s own house in a Western country, but the link I gave showcasing many developing nations think China and US are both threats is not going to change. White Western socialists never really do think what other countries think. They’re just as condescending and guilty of white man’s burden mentality as imperialistic white capitalists that brown and black people in developing countries can’t think for themselves. Both believe either Western-made ideologies of socialism and capitalism will save people of colour from their misery.
You’re a clown, lick my nuts.
Spoken like a pampered, jobless, welfare queen living in his mother’s basement.
Sounds authoritarian 2 me
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2021/02/china-debt-trap-diplomacy/617953/