This WaPo article is unreal: they unironically mock China for not being imperialist and failing to use force to defend its interests, arguing that they’re losing out to the U.S. (in Venezuela, Panama, etc.) which does precisely that.
In essence the article can be summarized as: “You Chinese losers thought you could gain influence by actually building things? The only thing that actually works is bombing people.”
I’m not even exaggerating. The author literally writes that “China can spend all the money on infrastructure it wants… But in a crunch, it is only military force that counts.”
He argues that China’s approach was “a colossal waste of money” because “control of infrastructure can be changed” with a US-led “change of regime” and “ownership of any asset can be overturned.”
His article’s conclusion? “You can’t buy an empire, nor can you purchase global influence. It is only hard power that counts for anything.”
As cynical and brutish as the article is, it’s also refreshingly honest. It is factual that China’s strategy was to win over the Global South by investing in their infrastructure and development, while the U.S. maintains its influence through regime change, various forms of coercion, and the threat (or use) of force.
The conclusion that it is China that should feel embarrassed by this as opposed to the U.S. is, however, completely insane.
Every sane person on earth should hope that it is China’s approach that ultimately prevails, for the sake of our collective future as humanity. China is ultimately trying to prove that one can prevail geopolitically without violence, by building instead of destroying: don’t be like this idiot WaPo writer and root for the answer to be “no”.
From: https://xcancel.com/RnaudBertrand/status/2026542244631818527
Saying the quiet part out loud just because they’re too arrogant & condescending to realize.
Based Maoist Bezospost admits that power comes from the barrel of a gun
Its quite funny that WaPo journalist thinks the CPC does not understand where political power comes from.
China is building lasting friendship ties, helping build vital infrastructure. The US is slapping on zip ties, destroying vital infrastructure. It’s a real mystery which one creates blowback and which one is sustainable.
You can make a man dance with a gun, but you will not stop him from slitting your throat when you sleep.
Well said. If the only way you keep people on your side is through violence and intimidation, you are inevitably on a clock to where eventually you are no longer strong enough, and then the people you repressed will take their revenge.
No one stays strong forever. Neither people nor countries. Eventually you will decline and someone else will be stronger than you. That’s why it’s best to treat others well when you are in a position of strength.
Powerful words.
Huh. I actually tend to agree with the Chinese approach. These are short term victories for the US.
Same. Every action comes with a reaction. The more aggressive the US gets the more pushback there will be. They are accelerating their own imperial decline.
There are good reasons why, for so long, the US largely refrained from blatant aggression (except where they could weave a credible narrative to justify it as “defensive”) and direct use of hard power coercion, and preferred soft power subversion instead.
It wasn’t because they couldn’t use hard power - if anything they were more militarily dominant in the past - but because domination through economic superiority is preferable. It creates much less resistance.
The imperialists of the past were no less brutal or ruthless, but they weren’t stupid. They understood that maintaining western hegemony depended on the illusion of international law.
The fact that they are now having to resort to direct aggression is the opposite of a sign of strength, it’s a sign of weakness and desperation.
They’re all too eager to point out the speck in the enemy country’s eye without noticing the giant beam in their own.
Wait, the Washington Post used to print that the Belt & Road Initiative was a way to turn countries into debtor slaves to China. What changed?
They were so busy bragging about being the #1 enemy of world peace that they forgot their own narrative.
