▲ 137 ▼ Libs on surveillance cameras and ChInA BaD (lemmy.ml) submitted 1 year ago by bubblybubbles@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml 32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] zeezee@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 year ago (1 child) So you're saying that China didn't extend or take advantage of western debt traps for their own economic and geopolitical goals? So Sri Lanka desperately needs $1.12 billion to avoid defaulting to Western bondholders China provides that cash immediately In exchange they get 99-year control of a $1.4 billion strategic asset Sri Lanka still owes them the original construction debt China now controls 70% of future port profits for a century (or two) And look I'm not claiming that this crisis wasn't caused by western imperialism - but calling it a "trade" or "multilateral exchange" when China very obviously took advantage of a country in crisis for almost exclusively their own benefit is disingenuous. Do you really see no issues with such predatory lending (irrespective of it being done by the IMF or BRI)? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zeezee@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 year ago The article you've linked says they've forgiven less than 5% of the total amount lended so not sure I'd classify that as "frequent" Further, the PRC does not require austerity politics or otherwise giving up sovereignty over the recipients economy, they pay for infrastructural development. I agree this is definitely a good thing but I want to acknowledge they do also directly profit from all this development - they're not doing it to help others for the socialist ideal but for strategic geopolitical goals they just fundamentally don't have the same mechanics that force imperialism in the west, like huge private monopoly and falling rates of profit. But they still operate in the same system which is why even their renegotiated loans never fall below the 2% inflation rate. Idk I can understand critical support of China when it comes to challenging western imperialism I just don't agree with their approach of rejecting egalitarianism and enforcing material inequality as a means to supposedly reach communism permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] zeezee@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 year ago (1 child) So you're saying that China didn't extend or take advantage of western debt traps for their own economic and geopolitical goals? So Sri Lanka desperately needs $1.12 billion to avoid defaulting to Western bondholders China provides that cash immediately In exchange they get 99-year control of a $1.4 billion strategic asset Sri Lanka still owes them the original construction debt China now controls 70% of future port profits for a century (or two) And look I'm not claiming that this crisis wasn't caused by western imperialism - but calling it a "trade" or "multilateral exchange" when China very obviously took advantage of a country in crisis for almost exclusively their own benefit is disingenuous. Do you really see no issues with such predatory lending (irrespective of it being done by the IMF or BRI)? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zeezee@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 year ago The article you've linked says they've forgiven less than 5% of the total amount lended so not sure I'd classify that as "frequent" Further, the PRC does not require austerity politics or otherwise giving up sovereignty over the recipients economy, they pay for infrastructural development. I agree this is definitely a good thing but I want to acknowledge they do also directly profit from all this development - they're not doing it to help others for the socialist ideal but for strategic geopolitical goals they just fundamentally don't have the same mechanics that force imperialism in the west, like huge private monopoly and falling rates of profit. But they still operate in the same system which is why even their renegotiated loans never fall below the 2% inflation rate. Idk I can understand critical support of China when it comes to challenging western imperialism I just don't agree with their approach of rejecting egalitarianism and enforcing material inequality as a means to supposedly reach communism permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] zeezee@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 year ago The article you've linked says they've forgiven less than 5% of the total amount lended so not sure I'd classify that as "frequent" Further, the PRC does not require austerity politics or otherwise giving up sovereignty over the recipients economy, they pay for infrastructural development. I agree this is definitely a good thing but I want to acknowledge they do also directly profit from all this development - they're not doing it to help others for the socialist ideal but for strategic geopolitical goals they just fundamentally don't have the same mechanics that force imperialism in the west, like huge private monopoly and falling rates of profit. But they still operate in the same system which is why even their renegotiated loans never fall below the 2% inflation rate. Idk I can understand critical support of China when it comes to challenging western imperialism I just don't agree with their approach of rejecting egalitarianism and enforcing material inequality as a means to supposedly reach communism permalink fedilink source parent
[–] zeezee@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 year ago The article you've linked says they've forgiven less than 5% of the total amount lended so not sure I'd classify that as "frequent" Further, the PRC does not require austerity politics or otherwise giving up sovereignty over the recipients economy, they pay for infrastructural development. I agree this is definitely a good thing but I want to acknowledge they do also directly profit from all this development - they're not doing it to help others for the socialist ideal but for strategic geopolitical goals they just fundamentally don't have the same mechanics that force imperialism in the west, like huge private monopoly and falling rates of profit. But they still operate in the same system which is why even their renegotiated loans never fall below the 2% inflation rate. Idk I can understand critical support of China when it comes to challenging western imperialism I just don't agree with their approach of rejecting egalitarianism and enforcing material inequality as a means to supposedly reach communism permalink fedilink source parent
