• superkret@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    So they’re now outsourcing production to the West? We’ve really come full circle.

    • baru@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Why do you assume the West? China often expands to other Asian countries. Or pretend to. E.g. after tariffs are applied to China you’ll often see a huge increase in intra Asia trade. Followed by different Asian countries heavily increasing their exports. Usually by hiding the true origin (tariffs are applied to the origin, not some transhipment place).

      • Hawk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 month ago

        Also a lot of infrastructure in Africa is being funded in China, their position there is only going to grow stronger.

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    And then we have mass worker revolts to seize the means of production in these countries right? Right?

    • CyberMonkey404@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Woulda been funny. Not just for the obvious benefit of having an uprising and potential revolution in Europe, but also to see how genuine those “red millionaires” are about socialism with Chinese characteristics

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        A bit nitpicky, but the idea behind SWCC isn’t that the Capialists in the PRC are “the people’s Capitalists” or anything, but that the State as a DotP allows market competition in a controlled manner similar to a birdcage. As these markets form monopolist syndicates, they centralize, and socialize, by which point the CPC increases public owership. Communism is achieved by degree, not by decree. Trying to achieve Communism through fiat has historically resulted in struggles and difficulties.

        I recommend reading Socialism Developed China, Not Capitalism for an overview of what that entails.

        • InputZero@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 month ago

          You’re asking for people to be empathetic to an enemy on the internet. Good fucking luck with that. In real life I hope the people who call for violent revolution are just blowing off some steam and aren’t actually advocating for the wonton destruction of uncountable lives. Like you I’m concerned they’re not, but I’ve learned that there’s no room for nuance online.

          Which is why to everyone else I’m saying this, just because I said I don’t want an enormous number of people to die, doesn’t mean that I don’t want to see capitalism fall. I just don’t want to commit a Holocaust doing it. Now go ahead and downvote me now.

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 month ago

            “The very concept of “revolutionary violence” is somewhat falsely cast, since most of the violence comes from those who attempt to prevent reform, not from those struggling for reform. By focusing on the violent rebellions of the downtrodden, we overlook the much greater repressive force and violence utilized by the ruling oligarchs to maintain the status quo, including armed attacks against peaceful demonstrations, mass arrests, torture, destruction of opposition organizations, suppression of dissident publications, death squad assassinations, the extermination of whole villages, and the like.”

            -Michael Parenti, Blackshirts and Reds

            Revolution has saved countless lives the world over, to denounce revolution without denouncing the incredible violence of the status quo is anti-Leftism.

            • InputZero@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 month ago

              Okay, so I never said never use violence or to just accept the status quo. Don’t put words in my mouth. I’m not so nieve that I think any real change won’t happen without a lot of violence. Violence is distasteful and should be avoided, but is also sometimes necessary. If King Louis’ head didn’t get chopped off, I would probably have been born a literal serf instead of a modern version of one. If the oligarchs of today lost their heads I wouldn’t feel a thing, when they bite the dust I don’t. I just think the conversation on lemmy.ml needs to take a pause and think for a second. Cause it seems to me that many people here want to kill everyone who is higher up on the social ladder than they are. That just perpetrates the endless cycle of violence, it doesn’t make a better world.

              Sure the world would be better without Jeff Bezos, or Elon Musk, or many others. I’ve read discussions people seemed to take seriously suggesting that millions to tens of millions of people in their country deserve to die. Apparently saying don’t kill people with complete disregard for the importance of life is a bridge too far for this part of the internet.

              • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                1 month ago

                Cause it seems to me that many people here want to kill everyone who is higher up on the social ladder than they are

                Can you explain? This doesn’t seem to be the case at all. Maybe it’s just that I’m a Marxist-Leninist and understand what other Marxists are getting at better.

                I’ve read discussions people seemed to take seriously suggesting that millions to tens of millions of people in their country deserve to die

                Do you have an example?

  • Pika@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I’m not sure why we care. It’s just simple competition, if your opponent is able to sell a cheaper product, either lower your price or deal with it. It’s basic capitalism.

    While I’m for tariffs on import to at least make cost equal to minimum wage for workers (to equate for the pay wage differential) if the factories are being built in house, it means they are following country standards including wages, I don’t see the issue.

    • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Free market propaganda has never been applied under equal circumstances. It is rhetoric used by capital to reduce or destroy regulations, labor, national sovereignty, etc. Western industrialized capitalist coubtries built their industry and infrastructure using tariffs to protect it, then turned around and demanded the opposite from other countries so that they would have to buy their products and sell whatever those colonizer countries wanted (at the time, usualky raw materials).

      Now that other countries are ascendant, US-based “free market” capital is gladly re-embracing protectionist logic. It has only ever been about maximizing their profits. The “theory” of free markets tails capital, it isn’t a science or even a valid line of thought.

      • azl@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 month ago

        And this behavior is somehow sold to the public as a way to boost the economic wellness of the people living under the isolationist programs, but instead it enables profiteering corporations to exert more control over the artificially narrowed market space.

        Locking the door with the fox(es) in the henhouse.

        • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          In some cases it has improved public welfare as industrial capital demanded infrastructure and education, though of course they also demanded as much of your day as possible for as little wage as possible. And as finance wins out it acts like a parasite on productivity while still demanding maximum time and minimal wages.

    • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      economics is far from a simple competition… things like game theory lead to monopolies being bad for everyone, and that’s what china wants in a lot of cases. the chinese government subsidises some of its industries dramatically so they can take over a global market and then slowly backs off the subsidies when they’ve killed their competition

      it’s similar to microsoft’s embrace, extend, extinguish strategy

  • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    Seems like a short lived plan. Just need to change laws so that Chinese owned vehicles have a tariff, no matter where they’re made. Of course, then they just create shell companies in the states/EU and the game of cat and mouse continues.