Was listening to the latest Vox's Worldly podcast (titled "A new "cold war"?") on US-China relations. There was a lot of good stuff there, but I want to push back on one thing, which was how uncritically the PRC's stated geopolitical vision was treated. 1/11
-
Näytä tämä ketju
-
So
@zackbeauchamp argues (about 13m in) that China's policy "out of its experience with colonialism" favors non-interference and national sovereignty. And I think this is just a *very* credulous reading of the PRC's actions and stated policy aims. 2/111 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 12 tykkäystäNäytä tämä ketju -
Sure, the PRC leadership *says* these things (so does Putin!) but then they draw the nine-dash line, dispute borders with everyone, *conquer*Tibet*, and use predatory loans to appropriate resources from developing countries. It's Sovereignty for Me but Not for Thee. 3/11
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 11 tykkäystäNäytä tämä ketju -
Which is exactly what Putin does too. Ask the Ukrainians about the value of Putin's claims of supporting national sovereignty. Borders matter! Except the ones in Eastern Europe. And to be fair to the Worldly folks, a lot of that evidence comes up later in the pod. 4/11
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 5 tykkäystäNäytä tämä ketju -
But it never causes them to backtrack and reassess
@zackbeauchamp honestly rather naive-sounding reading of PRC objectives. It seems to me that when the PRC says Nat.-Sov., what they mean is the 'restoration' (I'd say *creation*) of a "traditional" ordering of states. 5/112 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 4 tykkäystäNäytä tämä ketju -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @BretDevereaux ja @zackbeauchamp
Why do you think that colonialism is the term to describe the kind of international relations the PRC is seeking? Why makes it a better term than say Ming sinocentrism or cold war ideological camps?
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @QuercusCirratus ja @zackbeauchamp
In part because it is readily understandable - it is the word we use for extractive, paternalistic hierarchies between states. I mean, I suppose we could call it a 'Greater East-Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere' but that might a touch on the nose.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä
I also prefer 'colonialism' because a term that traces back to the Ming or Qing ratifies the 'oldness' that the PRC wants to invest this with - which I think is unjustified.
-
-
Finally 'colonialism' has the advantage of de-exoticizing it and forcing us to think about how we would react to this agenda if it came from a more 'familiar' (to western folks) country. If this was France, Germany, Japan etc, we'd know to be appalled. PRC should not get a pass
0 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystäKiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.