Saturday, May 30, 2020

China Is Not the Enemy — Neoliberalism Is — Isabella Weber, Hao Qi, and Zhongjin Li


Another side of the story.

Isabella Weber, Hao Qi, and Zhongjin Li

See also

The Diplomat is usually pretty US and Western-centric in its viewpoint. However, the unique American and geographically delimited Western liberal views are foundationally different from other views, such as the Chinese and other Asian, Islamic, etc. Viewing one predominantly of exclusively through the lens of another skews the analysis away from objectivity.

This article is more balanced and nuanced, and is worth a read. The author seems to be personally familiar with the Chinese and Western viewpoints.

The Diplomat
How Chinese Nationalism Is Changing
Brian Wong

11 comments:

Peter Pan said...

If you are opposed to the world economic order, then China is your #1 enemy. No one is doing more to support globalism than China. Our option is to opt out.

Without national sovereignty, neoliberalism cannot be fought. Jacobin is another "left" publication that has bought the rope that will be used to hang them.

Matt Franko said...

"another "left" publication that has bought the rope that will be used to hang them."

Yes! they are all D-U-M-B dumb uneducated unqualified finger painting morons...

Peter Pan said...

I'd say they've "lost their edge". Do you get the historical reference?

Calgacus said...

PP: If you are opposed to the world economic order, then China is your #1 enemy. No one is doing more to support globalism than China. Our option is to opt out.

No, the US, by far is the #1 enemy, does far more to support malignant globalism. China isn't supporting globalism in a maleficent way.

Without national sovereignty, neoliberalism cannot be fought.

Sure, but what does China have to do with it? China has national sovereignty and exercises it to successfully fight neoliberalism. The US has national sovereignty and uses it to impose neoliberalism on the people of the USA and the rest of the world.. The main weapon is mind control by endless repetition of nonsense. All the rest of the advanced world has to do is Just Say No.

Coronavirus just showed the difference between the USA & China. China has a functioning government and the USA doesn't. The Chinese actually look at the real world occasionally while the USA is ruled by swamp creatures who believe their own gaseous lies.

Basically, the Chinese are very much like Americans used to be. As late as 20 years ago, the USA would probably have weathered coronavirus far better. Maybe even 10 years ago, before Obama's austerity mania led to further public health cuts - and while at least as evil, he isn't as dopy as Trump - he probably would have acted much quicker and more rationally.

Not a great fan of that Jacobin article, though it has some good points. But it isn't about selling rope in any way. That criticism has very little to do with China or coronavirus or anything under consideration here.

Matt Franko said...

“China isn't supporting globalism in a maleficent way. “

LOL if we let them they would parachute their military in to cut out grass for $15 per yard lol!!!

It’s a piece of shit nation...

Peter Pan said...

The aims of US imperialism are incompatible with the aims of globalism. This wasn't the case prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union. China has since taken over the role of promoting globalism. China's efforts are constructive, US efforts are largely disruptive.

For the pro-globalist left, China is the good guy.
For anti-globalists, China and their supporters are the problem.
The European Union is a problem.

The US has gone astray because of its imperialist delusions, yet there is strong support for globalism among the business community. It's unclear if Bannon's "economic nationalism" model will prevail against the status quo. The status quo is to badmouth China while signing whatever deal will grant US business access to China's markets. The status quo is what devastated segments of the US economy.

It's unclear if Trump is serious about divesting from China. It may be just be a show for his base.

A win by Biden would be a victory for globalism. It's just that the war hawks would continue to push for policies that would be disruptive from a globalist point of view. War is good for business, yet it ruins trade and access to markets. Neither of these camps are our friends. Their only concerns are geopolitical power and profit.

Unfortunately the anti-globalist movement consists of right-wingers, xenophobes, and war-mongering maniacs like Bannon. The left, appalled by the rhetoric of the right and having drunk the global kool-aid, are politically irrelevant.

If globalism isn't stopped, the outcome may be worse than the effects of neoliberalism. Unsustainable economic systems eventually lead to collapse. The worst case scenario is for every country to be plugged into the same system. We're on our way there, if not already there.

Matt Franko said...

Bannon is not a warmonger...

Matt Franko said...

Just because somebody talks about the possibility of war doesn’t mean they are warmongers...

You biased anti war people can’t even tolerate even the discussion of warfare...

Peter Pan said...

Why should discussion of war with China be tolerated?
It's madness.

Bannon can be dismissed as a madman, but not globalism. Too many people believe the latter is a good idea.

Calgacus said...

The aims of US imperialism are incompatible with the aims of globalism

Not sure what you meant by globalism here. According to most meanings, they're not incompatible, they're identical. The worst forms of globalism are dying of coronavirus. Outsourcing essentials - not trying for food self-sufficiency, not being able to produce basic medical equipment - is usually lunacy from any perspective, for any sort of -ism.

The status quo is what devastated segments of the US economy.

Nope, the US decision to devastate segments of its own economy - most areas of the country - was what devastated segments of its own economy. In Marxist terms this idea that the Chimerica status quo was the devastation is just apologetics for the US ruling class. I don't think that is your intent, but that is what such half-explanations are - the bad sort of nationalism. The main current of lefty especially Trotskyite thought in particular is to oppose the good sort of nationalism - attempts to build socialism (in one, or any country).

A Marxist, Christian, socialist MMT job guarantee would deal very easily with / prevent economic devastation / unemployment wrought by excess globalism. Unfortunately critics of the JG or fearmongerers about the perils of trade don't think things through and abandon common sense besides. The only real way for a country to devastate another is militarily. Sure, mind control has done a lot worse. But that requires cooperation from the victim and these days, people don't blame such victims enough.

Peter Pan said...

Destabilizing countries or destroying them militarily is incompatible with globalism. The last time this wasn't true was during to the Cold War. We're all on the same side now... triumph of history and all that.

A Marxist, Christian, socialist MMT job guarantee would deal very easily with / prevent economic devastation / unemployment wrought by excess globalism.

You just denied that the status quo devastated segments of America, and now you advocate something which isn't business as usual.

Outsourcing of jobs and capital, beggar-thy-neighbour approaches to labour and environmental standards, are part of the problem. A JG won't resolve the unsustainability of "excess" globalism, nor the illogical outcomes (i.e. lunacy) you mentioned earlier. Trade based on material necessity would be a fraction of what it is today. Instead, we are faced with a narrative that insists upon more, more, and more. More trade, more consumption, on a finite world.