You're viewing a single thread.
America is everthing Americans claim China and Russia to be.
I've always thought that if you switch America and Russia/China in most events, it would better fit the narratives.
For example:
America brokered peace between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
America opened up factories in Afghanistan to provide jobs for the locals who are recovering from a war with China.
America is supporting their ally in Syria and combating terrorists supported by Russia.
Russia went to war with Iraq and killed a million people and destroyed all their infrastructure.
The incarceration rate in China is the highest in the world.
China accused America of spying on them with a weather balloon.
Russia overthrew the Libyan government, spiraling the wealthiest African country into a civil war.
Like seriously, switch the stories around and it better fits the narrative we're constantly being fed. With the view that libs have of Russia, China and America, events would literally have to play out like this if their view was correct.
Russia is killing people and destroying infrastructure, though. Do you not mind it happening if it's in Ukraine?
America is an endless expansionist that has illegally invaded multiple neighbours by force while calling it a "military exercise".
America has a semi dictator that gave themselves full unlimited power after being elected once and has since then meddled in every election in order to win
Hmm, not really
America is an endless expansionist that has illegally invaded multiple neighbours by force while calling it a “military exercise”.
Yes?
America has a semi dictator that gave themselves full unlimited power after being elected once and has since then meddled in every election in order to win
The US literally overthrew their democracy, and then when elections took place within a bourgeois 'democracy' interfered in those too. Russia post-overthrow of USSR could never have become a democracy, the US wouldn't have allowed it.
Also Texas and California. If we change the point of view of what constitutes power in USA this days from precidency to wealth, both questions are easily answered, specially considering all the elections USA or money coming from USA has meddled with (Chile for starters, Mexico, Honduras, Argentina, Guatemala, Cuba, Libya, Iran, ...).
This post expresses it better https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/9082580
Russia post-overthrow of USSR could never have become a democracy, the US wouldn't have allowed it.
America is when Russia
What
Yes?
Which do you think applies? The US hasn't added any territory lately that I'm aware of.
The "territory" you're looking for is called NATO. Its members totally join on their own free will, please ignore the regime changes that happen almost always before a country joins.
The only things forcing countries to join NATO are the aggressive invasions of countries like Russia.
They either get invaded (see Crimea, Chechnya, Georgia, ...) or join the defensive alliance of NATO so they get to keep at least a semblance of individualism.
NATO wouldn't be needed if Russia kept to itself.
If you want forced regime changes, just look at all the territories before they were invaded by Russia.
Ah yes, famous invasions during the 90s. Where NATO expanded a shitload after promising not to.
Also your knowledge of these events is lackluster. Gerogia attacked Russia, not the other way around (one couldsay Russia over reacted, but that does not change the fact who initiated hostilities). Chechnya was a civil war (a country can't invade itself). Crimea seceeded. So all of your examples are wrong.
Oh and Russia asked to join NATO in the eaely 2000s. Got denied.
IF you want to go further back it gets even better. NATO was founded before the Warsaw Treaty Org, the latter was founded after the USSR asked to join NATO and was denied.
You are correct that NATO is a anti soviet/anti russian alliance, but not for the reasons you think.
Do you believe history is driven by people and ideas, or material conditions and the interests that arise from them?
Marx reeling rn
But to a much lesser extent on some things in the modern day.
For example, China suppressing Uyghurs is on a level the US hasn't done since Japanese concentration camps in WWII. And it's been since maybe the US annexing Texas or manefest destiny since they've done covert or overt invasion like Ukraine, Georgia, Hong Kong, or planning with Taiwan.
Is there a country in the Middle East that America hasn't bombed or invaded?
Is there one that is part of the US now?
There are still American soldiers in most of them.
Occupied territories yes.
And there's a US colony committing a genocide in Palestine right now.
@JohnDClay @turkishdelight Zenz repurposes the pro-life argument that reduced birth rates are genocide to make it look like Xinjiang getting free healthcare & women who had 3 kids already receiving tubal ligations/ etc. is genocide the same way KKK guys think modernity is white genocide. China literally trained these people to be bilingual realtors and stuff like that, it wasn't even a mega trade program or something. They got people to white collar shit Xinjiang is rich
Were the tubal ligations voluntary?
@conditional_soup Yes. When BBC did a documentary on the training programs they literally showed people going to dancing classes and freely returning home. There was heavy surveillance but there are some really freaky Wahabbists out there not sure if you heard about the riot in Urumbi that killed like 200 people. They literally had to stop random knife attacks in the subway coming from ISIS linked groups, goes back to US and Saudi funding as far back as Operation Cyclone. Damn charlimit!
@conditional_soup If you've heard of the one child policy here's a fun fact none of you "China watchers" know. Most regions and/or minority groups did not get affected. If you were Han or anything in Tibet, or a minority any placd, you could be fruitful and multiply. Just an example of how China deliberately gives minority groups boosted democratic representation, healthcare access, training, and cultural representation. Which is what responsible nations should do (glaring at indian res)
@conditional_soup *Urumqi god this charlimit is so awful I can do 5000 but 500 is grueling. Sorry for triple tapping ya
@JohnDClay @turkishdelight That's really interesting that the evidence-free allegations pushed by far-right evangelical Adrian Zenz at the Jamestown Foundation (who believes some nations represent beasts of the biblical Apocalypse & nuclear war will bring the Rapture, but I digress (IN REALITY HE WORSHIPS MAMMON WHAT A RUBE LOL)) in coordination with the State Dept. specifically recalls our past atrocities. Internment, Islamaphobia, and chattel slavery. All lies
Huh? Pretty sure Guantanamo Bay is still open to this day. Not on the same scale nowadays, sure; but the CCP never claimed freedom as part of its core values either.
Reading comprehension really is a struggle sometimes. They specifically mentioned scale in their comment. Also, I kinda feel like being open about genocide doesn't make it better.
They also compared Japanese U.S. internment camps during WWII to the current suppression of Uyghurs in China so maybe take what they say with a grain of salt.
You think reeducation camps to kill a culture are different?
You think Japanese camps were to kill a culture?
I think the camps for the Uyghurs are.
Do you think the current treatment of Uyghurs by China is comparable to treatment of Japanese people in US internment camps during WWII?
Sorry it seems you may have forgotten one of the cardinal rules around here, you can only say bad things about America, everything else is bigotry
It's an international poker game and everyone is cheating. To see politics through a campist lens helps no one.
Acknowledging that the US has been the leader of the imperial core — the countries that have been colonizing the rest of the world for 500 years now — since WW2 is the realistic, materialist view.
Only difference now is that it's changed form to mainly the economic subjugation (neocolonialism) of "former" colonies through unequal exchange under capitalism rather than direct military subjugation — though the US still has a major actual settler colony committing a genocide in Palestine right now.
Any country that tries to escape this system (by nationalizing its resources to prevent extraction by unequal exchange, usually by establishing a socialist state) is sanctioned (DPRK, Vietnam in the past, Zimbabwe etc), embargoed (Cuba), overthrown (Chile, Burkina Faso etc), or invaded (Vietnam, Libya, Korea, etc).
"Imperial Core" is from Star Wars and sounds like a cringe LARP.
It is literally from anti-colonial theory lmao
Was this theory developed after Star Wars was already released?
Star Wars was loosely based on it so no wonder you'll see parallels.
Decades prior.
Fun fact : The rebells in Star Wars were modelled after the Viet Minh, the Empire after the USA.
Even if it was, using media to explain ideas of politics isn't new nor is it bad. Like how is using Star Trek or Star Wars or any other piece of media that the public is familiar with on a cultural level inherently a "Gotcha!" to an argument/debate?
"Hey this book that was taught in classrooms has some parallels to current events." "Wow, you're using your understandings of the world around you to make commentary? Weirdo."
Everything you said can be true, and it can also still sound like a cringe LARP.
That just sounds like you think people who can critically analyze media and the world suck. You must be a very boring person to have a conversation with, I can tell from this brief interaction.
Well, the empire from Star Wars was based on the US empire after all, and the rebels were based on the Viet Cong.
That's partially true, the Empire was based on inspiration from the US, Nazi Germany, and USSR. The rebels are of course the Viet Cong.
USSR
Thank god the "empire" funded and supported the rebels against the empire lmao
The Viet Cong are not the only rebels to have ever existed, the USSR is well known to use excessive military force against its own rebels.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_the_Soviet_Union
excessive
How much force would have been appropriate then, do you think?
Also, NATOpedia article lmao
Citation needed on that USSR claim, Lucas has only, to my knowledge, spoken of the USSR with respect to the inspiration he took from their film industry. He's outright stated that the Empire is the US and the Rebels the Viet Cong, plus there are the obvious allusions to the Nazis with Stormtroopers and the color of the Empire's unirorms, but to my knowledge nothing connecting to the USSR.
Return of the Jedi special edition commentary.
Believe it or not, Lucas is capable of finding both positives and negatives about both the US and the USSR.
Most of the aesthetic of Empire architecture is inspired by brutalist Soviet architecture, and ceremony for the Emperor's arrival was inspired by October Revolution Day military parades.
Thanks for the answer, any links or quotes? Can't find anything online.
If I have the time and motivation when I'm home I'll rip the relevant portion of the commentary and upload.
Thanks, I'd appreciate it! Don't stress out over it though, I'm just a curious rando.
The USSR was also a fascist dictatorship, the actual bureaucratic structure of the Galactic Empire much more closely resembles the USSR.
Edit: good points were made, it's overly reductive to call the USSR a facist dictatorship
This, I disagree with. The USSR was Marxist-Leninist and run by Soviets, not a fascist millitary dictatorship. Whether or not you or I believe the USSR was truly democratic or a betrayal of Socialist values is of little consequence when compared to the vastly different structure of Nazi Germany, which was a blend of corporations and an ethno-state.
The Empire appears to be more similar to Nazi Germany, where there exists a blend of corporations with a totalitarian state, rather than a command economy centered around worker councils.
I think it's hard to argue that the USSR wasn't a military dictatorship under Stalin. The USSR was hyper-nationalist and relied heavily on extensive police and military forces that used excessive violence to keep dissenters in line.
The USSR wasn't pursuing an ethno-state like Germany, but neither is the Galactic Empire. You might argue that despite the Galactic Empire being diverse in species, notably only white human men served as officers and leaders and dominated the military, but I'm not sure that's an intentional world-building decision rather than that's just how films in 1977 were made. I'm not yet aware if the USSR was known for being gender and race inclusive in its government or military structure either.
The USSR was a one-party state, and the state did own and control everything. However, this is fundamentally entirely different from Nazi Germany, which was a combination of corporations and a party owning and controlling everything in a totalitarian Capitalist manner.
It's reductive to call the USSR fascist, in my opinion. The USSR wasn't a shining beacon of tolerance and democracy, of course, but at the same time it absolutely was not fascist. The Russian Federation, that rose from the ruins of the USSR, is fascist, and run by extremely wealthy Capitalists.
As for equality in the USSR, gender economic equality was generally high overall, especially when compared to other nations, and especially in the military, but not within government. As for racism, it was apparently much, much better than modern Russia, so make of that what you will, but the state was seemingly mostly composed of white men. Homosexuality was made illegal by Stalin, I do know that.
I acknowledge the US has been the "imperial core". The thing I take issue with is the finger pointing.
As if the United States is unique in seeking out and pursuing its interests. China and Russia may not be the "imperial core" but, all nations will do what's in their best interest.
That's the flaw with nations, the campist lens of "America bad, Russia and China good" isn't productive. Das all I'm saying.
No other country controls the global financial system like the US, and imperial core countries in general, does through its dollar hegemony and global monopolies.
Which is natural, since the entire modern world, its institutions and trade systems, are built on the past few centuries of brutal colonization of the rest of the world by western europe and japan.
finger pointing
Acknowledging reality isn't "finger pointing".
Given the same opportunity would Russia and China not do the same things?
But they don't, so talking about those "what if"s are pointless. China's current interests — and, broadly speaking, those of capitalist Russia even after the USSR has been overthrown — are mostly in line with the Global South's against imperial core countries. There's a reason sentiment like this is common across the developing world.
Many of western countries' victims, like Cuba, DPRK, Burkina Faso, Palestine, etc., would not be able to function right now, or perhaps even exist, if they did not have China and Russia's support. Of course, alot of them like Libya aren't able to function anymore.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I wouldn't consider alot of those countries "functioning". They don't engage in the same actions because they aren't able to. Not for any moral reasons. China and Russia support those countries for extractive and political reasons.
Countries don't have allies because they like each other. Countries ally when it's beneficial to their interests.
Yes, the United States government has done/continues to do, many terrible things in the name of protecting economic interests. But to sit here and say russia and China some how have the moral high ground is unacceptable to me.
Some information might change your point of view:
At the core of all of this is the US attempt to remain the world's hegemonic power, by augmenting military alliances around the world to contain or defeat China and Russia. It's a dangerous, delusional, and outmoded idea. The US has a mere 4.2% of the world population, and now a mere 16% of world GDP (measured at international prices). In fact, the combined GDP of the G7 is now less than that of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), while the G7 population is just 6 percent of the world compared with 41 percent in the BRICS. Source
I once thought that the US had made mistakes but generally was trying to do the right thing. But the more I read and learned history, the more damning it was towards America.
I once thought that the US had made mistakes but generally was trying to do the right thing
Thing is, there is no "trying" to do something on a national scale. What nations do — what they can do — and how they react entirely depends on their mode of production and material conditions. And that mode of production for the US is imperialist capitalism.
It really does explain so much history. Why were you and I able to see through the charade, and why do others have trouble? I was watching Jonas Ceika’s newest video essay on Urban Guerrillas and left wing terrorism, and it made me think about how left wing groups have trouble translating into mass movements. Something about the conditions being right; and how the conditions will never be right in America.
What a shit take
How so?
Because Americans don't really believe that white picket fence bullshit these days anymore. We're not running around waving flags at things we're in the trenches criticizing our government too.
I don't think America is communist.
Neither is China.
Well, not "communist" capital C, but certainly socialist, or at least with socialist leanings.
For example private land ownership isn't really a thing in China, making essentially all natural resources defacto state-owned. It's actually a really interesting idea IMO.
Are you illiterate? That is the whole fucking point of my reply. x2
neither is China
Are you illiterate? That is the whole fucking point of my reply.
🤣 What a deranged take.