Certainly compared to the settler imperial core responsible for virtually every war and the racist status quo of systemic deprivation. It is not a serious discussion to imagine otherwise.
We are comparing the current state of countries, yes?
No because what I described is part of a systemic process and is ongoing, has precedent, and has its supporters for future depravity.
Do you think Norway for example currently has an imperialist settler core?
Norway is a subimperialist petrostate of the imperial core. It does the bidding of its masters. It is, primarily, irrelevant, but it does sometimes act as a hanger-on in militarism and it certainly loves to pump the price of oil, e.g. supporting American sanctions on Venezuela that CEPR estimated to kill tens of thousands yearly. But naturally, that skips Westerners’ human rights discourse entirely, they pretend sanctions aren’t civilian-targeted dispossession. In addition, Norway just uses loopholes to hide its role in weapons sales, including to Israel.
What would you call China’s ambitions regarding the nine dash line and Taiwan if not imperialist?
Getting off-track, aren’t you? Or in your mind would you declare any imperialism you can find a human rights violation? If so, hoo boy is my thesis correct.
I’ll entertain those two questions when they can be seated coherently, I.E. we have resolved the actual topic and can discuss what imperialism is, as those questions suggest you don’t know.
So it is comparing the current state, yes? Taking into account how history shapes it sure, but the current state.
I already answered, “No”.
You’ll need to do more to connect oil why pricing oil is racist.
I didn’t say that pricing oil is racist.
Because it competes with other countries like Venezuela?
Pushing for sanctions from the superpowee is a funny thing to call competition.
Please do your best to engage in good faith by reading and addressing what I say. At least, if you’re going to respond. This last response was mostly reading incomprehension, which normally, sure, no biggie, but the amount you didn’t respond to in order to do that? No bueno.
Do you think China is more human rights focused and/or less racist than anywhere else in the world?
Certainly compared to the settler imperial core responsible for virtually every war and the racist status quo of systemic deprivation. It is not a serious discussion to imagine otherwise.
I kind of already said that.
We are comparing the current state of countries, yes? Do you think Norway for example currently has an imperialist settler core?
What would you call China’s ambitions regarding the nine dash line and Taiwan if not imperialist?
No because what I described is part of a systemic process and is ongoing, has precedent, and has its supporters for future depravity.
Norway is a subimperialist petrostate of the imperial core. It does the bidding of its masters. It is, primarily, irrelevant, but it does sometimes act as a hanger-on in militarism and it certainly loves to pump the price of oil, e.g. supporting American sanctions on Venezuela that CEPR estimated to kill tens of thousands yearly. But naturally, that skips Westerners’ human rights discourse entirely, they pretend sanctions aren’t civilian-targeted dispossession. In addition, Norway just uses loopholes to hide its role in weapons sales, including to Israel.
Getting off-track, aren’t you? Or in your mind would you declare any imperialism you can find a human rights violation? If so, hoo boy is my thesis correct.
I’ll entertain those two questions when they can be seated coherently, I.E. we have resolved the actual topic and can discuss what imperialism is, as those questions suggest you don’t know.
So it is comparing the current state, yes? Taking into account how history shapes it sure, but the current state.
You’ll need to do more to connect oil why pricing oil is racist. Because it competes with other countries like Venezuela?
I already answered, “No”.
I didn’t say that pricing oil is racist.
Pushing for sanctions from the superpowee is a funny thing to call competition.
Please do your best to engage in good faith by reading and addressing what I say. At least, if you’re going to respond. This last response was mostly reading incomprehension, which normally, sure, no biggie, but the amount you didn’t respond to in order to do that? No bueno.
holy shit crack a history book
like literally learn the first fucking thing about the situation