Not really. I’m just pointing out soft imperialism via global market precedent set by exploiting slave labour in a communist dictatorship to avoid having to deal with those pesky unions in the 50s or 60s.

Like how does that make sense? “Of course we’re good capitalists, but let’s utelize brutal authoritarian exploitation in a communist regime to set a labour market precedent which forms a race to the bottom in regards to labour costs.”

Was any of that a good idea? Now that the precedent has been set, will you be able to manufacture fast fashion for Temu in Arlington, Texas? Who will be doing the labour? How can you even “compete” with wage slavery and abject exploitation? Step on in Juan, no need for papers. Tell your wife muchas gracias.

The point is China is the victim - the Chinese people that is. They weren’t helped. The brutal regime set up to oppress them was partly built by us westerners, wantinclg cheap goods, directly empowering Han nationalist fascists (the ruling class of China) who want a return to the “central kingdom”. We kind of helped to create the biggest threat to democracy - in the name of capitalism.

Face it, we’re stupid and spoiled. We have long been exploiting the Chinese people without actually acknowledging that we’re exploiting Chinese people, and that said exploitation has lead us to a path of delusion and self destruction.

Do we continue to pretend? Do you think that imperialism is a good thing at all? Do you think that either soft US imperialism or soft Chinese imperialism are acceptable at all? Have we painted ourselves into a corner ececonomically? Do we just pick a new place where we can exploit wage slavery labour?

Or do we stop the exploitation? I’d like to hear your thoughts on this.