Myanmar Coup
- This topic has 119 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
“Are you defending the expansionist policy of China…”
What “expansionism”? Into the South China Sea? Where no one lives?
“…which has shown itself equally as willing as the USA to cooperate with despots and dictatorships?”
The difference, comrade, is that all those dictators were installed by the US in coups, invasions, color revolutions or electoral manipulations. Name one dictator on earth today installed by China. Just one. What would you have China do? Sanction such countries like the good ol’ U.S. of A.? Who is harmed by such sanctions? Why the common prole you rend your garments in support of. Do you see the glaring hypocrisy of such a position?
“Do the interests of the Chinese state over-ride solidarity with Myanmar’s working people?”
No, they go hand in hand. That’s the whole point of the BRI, mutual prosperity and development. Myanmanr’s NED funded opposition wants no part of it. They shun the very idea, condemning their country to backwardness and underdevelopment. Is that OK with you, comrade?
“Real Politik is already asserting itself. Regardless of the token sanctions being imposed upon certain individual Myanmar officials, every nation is eager to come to a working accommodation with the Tatmadaw. ASEAN has a pragmatic relationship with the Tatmadaw government.”
Again, I ask, what would you do? Sanction, invade, fund color revolutions?
“The way to understand the coup is simply to follow the money – Myanmar Economic Holdings Ltd (MEHL) and Myanmar Economic Corporation (MEC) – through which the military and their families possess monopolistic control over core sectors of the economy and the country’s most lucrative industries.”
Everything happening in SE Asia ties back to US containment of China, including the coup in Myanmar. If you don’t know that, I don’t blame you, few do. But now you do. Choose not to believe it, well, that’s your prerogative.
“I apologise if I gave the impression that there are no real conspiracies.
However, I was simply trying to infer that they can be a myriad of motivations in politics and cherry-picking supposed connections gives the impression that there is one grand plot in the great scheme of things.”
Well, I’d feel better about accepting your apology if you’d gone to the effort of watching the original video I’ve linked to. It’s about 14 minutes long. Watch it and give me your thoughts. I’m curious where you think the analysis is mistaken.
“Remember, it was the American oligarchs that chose China to partner. It is their rival protectionists,”America First” who are calling for a trade war.”
That is true, but no poor country since WW2 has thrived without such help. The CCP was smart enough to make sure that technology transfer was part of the deal. Without such a devil’s bargain China could not have achieved anything like what it has.
“The capitalist class has never been united except in the class war against the workers.”
No argument from me on that point.
I wonder who it was that installed Pol Pot?
Perhaps the following might help us decide:
“it is estimated that at least 90% of the foreign aid which was provided to the Khmer Rouge came from China.”
Or perhaps we should look at Kim Jong-Un
As Xi Jingping states:
“No matter how the international situation changes”, China would “firmly support Chairman Kim Jong-un to lead the North Korean party and people to implement the new strategic line”,
Yes, the Chinese “Communist Party” is clearly a great friend to the oppressed workers of North Korea, no self interested foriegn policy there.
(just a note of clarification I am being ironic, just that your use of the spelling color indicates that you are probably not a Scot and maybe even from the good old USA, so you may be unfamiliar with my use of irony)
Tibet by invasion would be an example of China’s expansionism.
The Chinese loans and business investment have propped up many African dictators.
China’s military presence in Africa, however, pales in comparison to that of the US or the French but it not negligible. It has been engaged in a number of missions across the continent, with troop contributions to peacekeeping operations in Sudan, South Sudan, Liberia, Mali and the Democratic Republic of Congo. It has also contributed millions of dollars of equipment to the African Union, And a military base was opened in Djibouti. It like many others make a healthy trade in armaments to the continent. It is not philanthropy. It is the same old scramble for Africa for geo-politics, only difference is China is the new boy on the block.
Where have I denied that there is a rivalry between the USA and its allies against China, to contain it. Australia has adopted a very bellicose strategy
Many smaller nations SE Asian countries seek the rights to the resources in the South China Sea. Unable to stand up to the potential power of China, they seek the aid of the USA who are only too happy to oblige for their own mercenary purposes.
One country, in particular, Vietnam, may well recall actual Chinese aggression and its invasion after it had expelled the Americans. Another example of China’s expansionist policy, you have ignored.
I have written of the inhumanity of sanctions as a form of siege warfare that kills civilians.
As for being against the development of Myanmar, I am reminded that when I criticise sweat-shop factories and exploitation by foreign corporations, I’m accused of resisting the industrialisation and future prosperity of the country. You use the same argument.
Don’t just take our word that the BRI is a form of imperialism:
“Tanzanian President John Magufuli said the loan agreements of BRI projects in his country were “exploitative and awkward.” He said Chinese financiers set “tough conditions that can only be accepted by mad people,” because his government was asked to give them a guarantee of 33 years and an extensive lease of 99 years on a port construction. Magufuli said Chinese contractors wanted to take the land as their own but his government had to compensate them for drilling the project construction.
Indian commentator S. K. Chatterji considers debt traps an economic dimension of China’s salami slice strategy. According to Chatterji, China’s sovereignty slicing tactic dilutes the sovereignty of the target nations mainly using the debt trap. An example provided is Beijing pressuring Tajikistan to handover 1,158 km2 territory, which still owes China US$1.2 billion out of a total $2.9bn of debt. Other nations with a similar risk of sovereignty slicing are Pakistan, Madagascar, Mongolia, Maldives, Kyrgyzstan, Montenegro, Sri Lanka, and Laos which have borrowed large sums from China.
The apologists of Chinese state capitalism (you included) look frighteningly similar to the apologists of Stalinism, dressed in the same disguise of Marx and Engels, with the same language of comradeship, but the same familiar policy of exploiting the workers and supporting the imperialist and expansionist interests of the ruling class.
China is an imperialist country like any other. Imperialism is economic expansion. Any country small or large is potentially expansionist including Haiti. It was a concept explained by Rosa Luxembourg many years ago
I see, so aiding an impoverished country to develop is imperialism? So they should just be left to wither away in backwardness and obscurity should they? Not much socialist solidarity in that attitude. Is anyone on this site actually a socialist or are you all just play acting?
Pol Pot and his friends from the West. At the present time it can be said that the Chinese ruling class( Eastern power ) will support any reactionary government which promote their own class interests, they are supporting the reactionary government of North Korea. I do remember when they used all the Maoists groups in order to promote their interests with Taiwan and Hong Kong. China is already kicking butts in Africa, the same things that was done by the prior European colonists. In Latin America Chile is the back door of Chinese economic expansion ( which is imperialism ) and Chileans fishermen are complaining that China large fishing industry is destroying their livelihood
http://www.communistvoice.org/17cChina.html
http://www.communistvoice.org/00China.html
http://www.communistvoice.org/15cChina.html
http://www.communistvoice.org/15cChina.html
There are several articles on China state capitalism written by this ex-Maoist, ex Stalinists group
“I wonder who it was that installed Pol Pot?”
And Pol Pot rules Cambodia today does he? My question, unanswered was, “Name one dictator on earth today installed by China.” So, I ask it again. Name one.
“Or perhaps we should look at Kim Jong-Un”
He wasn’t installed by China either. He was installed by the people of the DPRK. So, you got nothing by the sounds of it.
“Yes, the Chinese “Communist Party” is clearly a great friend to the oppressed workers of North Korea, no self interested foriegn policy there.”
I dunno, life doesn’t look so bad in DPRK, (the county’s actual name). And how are workers more “oppressed” in DPRK than anywhere else? Looks kind of normal to me. No doubt they’d be an extremely successful civilisation were not the US empire attempting to throttle them out of existence.
“(just a note of clarification I am being ironic, just that your use of the spelling color indicates that you are probably not a Scot and maybe even from the good old USA, so you may be unfamiliar with my use of irony)”
Irony is the unexpected. How is a Trot hating actual socialists unexpected? It’s all you people do. Hate on actually existing socialist nations and their people. I chose the name for its meaning as a logical fallacy. You Trots really are the no true Scotsmen of socialism. Not even the driven snow is pure enough to satisfy you lot.
“There are several articles on China state capitalism written by this ex-Maoist, ex Stalinists group”
In other words, not socialists. Nuff said.
“Tibet by invasion would be an example of China’s expansionism.”
You mean the Tibet that was a part of the Middle Kingdom (Zhongguo/China) since 1264? Or the Tibet that was carved off from the Middle Kingdom by an illegal treaty forced on China by Great Britain? You know, the one where the Mandarins were held at gunpoint? Or was your comment directed to the Tibetan peasants who were held in indentured slavery, worse than Europes’, by the Dalai Lhama? The same Dalai Lhama who “possessed 27 manors, 30 pastures and more than 6,000 serfs.”
http://www.bjreview.com/Tibet_in_50_Years/2009-03/05/content_182622.htm
http://dalailama.factsreveal.org/dalai-lama-owned-6000-serfs
Are you aware that Tibet and China had been engaging in Royal weddings for a couple of thousand years? Probably not. So you’ve learned something today.
“The Chinese loans and business investment have propped up many African dictators.”
The Chinese build infrastructure which brings development. It does not install dictators, engineer coups, demand structural adjustment programs or invade.
“It has been engaged in a number of missions across the continent, with troop contributions to peacekeeping operations in Sudan, South Sudan, Liberia, Mali and the Democratic Republic of Congo.”
And what is your specific objection to those operations?
“It has also contributed millions of dollars of equipment to the African Union, And a military base was opened in Djibouti.”
Yes, its one and only foreign military base. What an expansionist Empire China is, no?
“It is not philanthropy. It is the same old scramble for Africa for geo-politics, only difference is China is the new boy on the block.”
No, you are confused because you project your western biases and prejudices upon a culture that is alien to you. You have no conception that the Chinese behave in a completely different manner to your imperialist US and EU brethren. I imagine you to be the woman asking the question in the following video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03l3Ra4bL_A
“Many smaller nations SE Asian countries seek the rights to the resources in the South China Sea. Unable to stand up to the potential power of China, they seek the aid of the USA who are only too happy to oblige for their own mercenary purposes.”
The South China Sea is contested territory. There is a dispute resolution mechanism in place through ASEAN. did you know that?
https://www.chinausfocus.com/peace-security/south-china-sea-disputes-the-asean-draws-the-line
“One country, in particular, Vietnam, may well recall actual Chinese aggression and its invasion after it had expelled the Americans. Another example of China’s expansionist policy, you have ignored.”
Expansionist? Do you know anything about the war whatsoever? It was over in two weeks with China fully withdrawing from all Vietnamese territory. Funny kind of “expansionism” that. But then what would you care anyway? I’m sure you hate “state capitalist” Vietnam as much as you hate “state capitalist” China. Is there any socialism anywhere you actually approve of? LOL
“The apologists of Chinese state capitalism (you included) look frighteningly similar to the apologists of Stalinism”
I’m no Stalin apologist because there’s nothing to apologise for. Unlike the obscurantist esoterics who appear to populate this site, he was the actual real deal. A communist who won state power, developed his country from feudal backwater to global super power, shredded the fascist scum of Europe and made the world’s capitalist class quake in its boots. And you fault the man for that? Funny kind of socialists you lot are here.
“the same familiar policy of exploiting the workers”
Sure, eliminating illiteracy and famine, doubling life expectancy, guaranteeing the right to work, culture and housing is such exploitation! Some people just talk, others act. I think I know what camp you belong to.
I actually recommend you read Stalin
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/12/x01.htm
Future society will be socialist society. This means primarily, that there will be no classes in that society; there will be neither capitalists nor proletarians and, consequently, there will be no exploitation. In that society there will be only workers engaged in collective labour.
Future society will be socialist society. This means also that, with the abolition of exploitation commodity production and buying and selling will also be abolished and, therefore, there will be no room for buyers and sellers of labour power, for employers and employed— there will be only free workers.
Future society will be socialist society. This means, lastly, that in that society the abolition of wage-labour will be accompanied by the complete abolition of the private ownership of the instruments and means of production; there will be neither poor proletarians nor rich capitalists—there will be only workers who collectively own all the land and minerals, all the forests, all the factories and mills, all the railways, etc.
As you see, the main purpose of production in the future will be to satisfy the needs of society and not to produce goods for sale in order to increase the profits of the capitalists. Where there will be no room for commodity production, struggle for profits, etc.
It is also clear that future production will be socialistically organised, highly developed production, which will take into account the needs of society and will produce as much as society needs. Here there will be no room whether for scattered production, competition, crises, or unemployment.
Where there are no classes, where there are neither rich nor poor, there is no need for a state, there is no need either for political power, which oppresses the poor and protects the rich. Consequently, in socialist society there will be no need for the existence of political power.
As you prefer 12th C history, perhaps this piece might interest you
VNN: In the past, Vietnam many times was invaded by its “northern feudal neighbor”. China was always an aggressive giant. However, miraculously, Chinese troops have always suffered bitter defeats, despite their great strength. These have been recorded in history. What do you think was the Vietnamese strength which helped drive the Chinese out of Vietnamese territory?
NKT: All Chinese dynasties, since the Qin Shi Huang reign, have nurtured hegemony. They sent their best generals and powerful armies to Vietnam,
Since you adopt the nom de plume of True Scotsman, perhaps you justify the subjugation of Scotland because of a 12th C king of England asserted his claim to it?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.