Not really. They are not exactly relaxing when it comes to western imperialism and opposing it.
There just is not exactly much to do against it if they don’t want to jeopardise their own people, their goal of a multipolar world and the idea of socialism in the world.
We are talking about nuclear powers and china is not that well liked yet in the west. They also don’t want to make it seem like they are behind the Palestinian struggle and therefore give an excuse for the genocide because the evil and powerful CCP is behind it and not normal people that wanted to live in peace and are violently resisting due to being attacked.
To paint china as simply relaxing on this issue is a huge insult imo and we should trust our comrades conducting one of the most successful socialist experiments a little bit more. Especially when we consider that the USSR might have spread itself a bit thin by helping around the globe before securing themselves
Or they could not do that because there is nothing specifically wrong from profiting off of your enemies’ actions as long as you don’t rely on it for your entire economy. We don’t really deal with moralist arguments here
Yes, and the trade with the entity was that China got US miltech in the 90s (when it was still the top provider in the world) when no one else would trade it with them bc of sanctions and in exchange the colony gets AC units and some agriculture. Basically consumer goods.
I’m not going to do a good trade bad trade comparison because that’s meaningless but this was the historical reason for the normalization of relations with the zionist entity and the exporting country does get the most benefit out of it. There is a strict ban on exporting weapons or anything that could be made into weapons.
I can’t be in their mind but China is probably worried that if they completely change course it will only alienate them from the ties they’ve built in the region. Most countries in the region have normalized relations with the occupation, what is China supposed to do when they inherited a situation they had no hand in forming? Instead of yelling at them on english websites the CPC doesn’t read we should be demanding that our governments send Cuba oil.
Seems like sound logic. Trade with the genocidal ally of the increasingly fascistic global military super power while they systematically eliminate all other smaller “AES” states and major trade partners you have (or economically force them into submission) while you sit back and shore up your metaphorical walls.
You idealist China shills are nothing if not consistent.
You respond to differing opinions with a haughty demeanor. Then, when a counter argument is made, you resort to childish name calling when your rehearsed responses are no longer sufficiently up to the task.
“Rehearsed responses” motherfucker, THE TRUTH DOESN’T CHANGE.
Y’all always reveal yourself with that exact bullshit. Of course the responses are gonna sound the same, they were forged in truth and there is only one mold.
There are no opinions to be had here, it’s just you being wrong. All your arguments have been defeated thoroughly in this very thread by others already
I will concede the trade point in a general sense. But the point I was trying to make is that, to our collective dismay I’m sure, the US is tightening a noose around China.
Russia is floating the idea of trading with dollars again in Ukraine negotiations. India recently made a trade deal with the US for oil. Depending on how these things play out, BRICS will be considerably weakened.
The US is moving a large amount of armaments to the Philippines. They are amassing a fleet to strike Iran. South Korea is still… South Korea.
I disagree with what I assume is you and your comrades support of China’s lack of direct support for socialist movements abroad. It looks to me as though they will soon be in a very weak position on the global playing field. In my opinion, that direct support could have made a difference. Reeling in trade with their ideological enemies could as well. Should this play out in favor of the US, they will likely have to make more concessions to the bourgeoisie than they already have.
Unless the US economy finally gives way to the rot that has been spreading across it’s foundations. Which China may be banking on. The “gamble” I mentioned previously.
You’re identifying the same contradiction I am, just seemingly analysing it differently and drawing different conclusions from it.
The U.S. is clearly attempting to tighten the noose but that’s not new. That’s been the defining feature of China’s external environment since at least 2011, and realistically since 1949. Encirclement, sanctions pressure, proxy wars, tech embargoes, financial warfare, the standard imperialist containment. What’s different now is simply that China is large enough to be treated as an existential rival rather than a manageable subordinate.
Despite agreeing on this I heavily disagree with your analysis and conclusions. You’re assuming that earlier or more direct revolutionary intervention abroad would have meaningfully altered this trajectory. I see no historical basis for that.
The USSR tried exactly what you’re proposing: massive material support to militant movements, open alignment, heavy military commitments across multiple continents. What did that produce? Overextension, economic strain, internal stagnation, and ultimately collapse under imperialist pressure. It’s important to remember that we don’t need to speculate on the what if of the soviet road, there is already a concrete historical outcome.
China clearly learned from the Soviet collapse. The CPC’s post Chairman Mao strategy hasn’t been “abandon internationalism.” as many proclaim. In reality it’s redefining it to prioritize domestic development, industrial capacity, technological sovereignty, and long-term resilience first, because without those, everything else collapses. Revolutionary solidarity means nothing if your own state gets strangled or balkanized and also the Chinese people must come first for the CPC just as the Cuban people must come first for the Cuban government etc.
You also say direct support “could have made a difference.” Made a difference how, exactly? Which movements, specifically, would now be in power and capable of resisting NATO-level pressure? With what industrial base? What logistics? What air defense? What energy independence?
There is a persistent fantasy in some parts of the left that revolutionary movements just need more weapons or money and then history bends. That has unfortunately never been historically true. States survive through production, infrastructure, supply chains, and control over development pathways not donations. Look at what happened to the Soviet backed movements post collapse, they all quickly followed suit.
On BRICS: yes, it’s incredibly fragile. Of course it is. It’s a loose coordination mechanism between mostly bourgeois-national states with competing interests. It is absolutely not a unified socialist bloc. Expecting ideological coherence there is a category error. But even limited dedollarization, parallel payment systems, alternative development finance, and South to South trade corridors materially weaken U.S. monopoly power. That’s a world of difference from before it’s creation even if it has many many issues of it’s own.
Russia flirting with dollars again doesn’t mean “multipolarity is collapsing.” It means Russia is a capitalist state negotiating under wartime pressure. India cutting oil deals with the U.S. means India remains as always India: opportunist, comprador-leaning, and strategically unreliable. None of this is new information to us or to the CPC.
What is new historically is that dozens of Global South countries now have non-IMF, non-imperealist financing and development options, Chinese-built ports, power grids, rail, telecom, and industrial zones. That materially erodes imperial leverage far more than headline-grabbing arms shipments ever could.
You’re also underestimating the retaliation China would face. China openly backing armed movements or unilaterally fully severing trade with “Israel” wouldn’t be some isolated moral gesture. It would immediately escalate to financial sanctions, maritime interdictions, tech embargoes, asset seizures, and possibly kinetic confrontation. And unlike the U.S., China does not yet control the global reserve currency, insurance markets, shipping chokepoints, SWIFT or hold global hegemony. Not to mind the lack of power projection capability within the current PLA. However that is slowly changing along with the other issues mentioned, but the qualitative shift is still likely more than a decade away, if we’re being realistic.
Internationalism under imperialism is constrained by force relations. Pretending otherwise is not serious.
You then say China risks being weakened later and forced into bourgeois concessions. That risk exists regardless. The difference is whether China enters that confrontation with: the world’s largest industrial base, growing technological autonomy, energy diversification, strategic food reserves, alternative trade networks and internal political stability. Or without those things. The CPC has clearly chosen the former which I think we can all agree is the better one.
Finally, on the “gamble” point: yes, China is seemingly betting that U.S. internal decay outpaces its ability to maintain global dominance. But I would heavily disagree with the assertion of some that this is naive, it seems more grounded in observable material trends: deindustrialization, debt saturation, political fragmentation, infrastructure rot, and declining real productive capacity.
They are clearly not passively waiting. It’s much more similar to buying time while building strength(similar in idea to the Molotov-Ribbbentrop).
To reiterate the end of my other comment: this is clearly extremely ugly realpolitik. It’s slow. It’s frustrating. It doesn’t provide emotional catharsis. But it’s consistent with a long-term material strategy aimed at breaking Western monopoly power without triggering premature war that could very likely escalate.
Wanting China to behave like a romanticized 20th-century Soviet Union ignores both historical lessons and present conditions. Scientific socialism means adapting strategy to concrete reality, not demanding heroic gestures that feel righteous but materially weaken the only currently existing pole capable of offering an alternative to and eventually dismantling U.S. hegemony.
Boycotting Israel would be a unilateral movement of active hostility that, unfortunately, would be viewed with hostility by the US and its vassals. China gets away with bilateral trade wars because they are acting in response to actions taken against it directly, not for a third party.
The US views China’s mere existence as a hostility. What would the US do in response, launch missiles? Economic sanctions against China would hurt the US more than they hurt China, no?
Obviously the West holds 1000x more culpability for Israel. I’m not saying “China bad”; I’m just trying to do “ruthless criticism”.
I am not gonna pretend like I specifically know a lot about their trade with Israel and why they continue some of their trade, but then also block investments in Israel.
I just know that they have been building up one of the most successful socialist experiments ever and that they have been phenomenal at navigating their politics and economy as to lift their people up into greater heights while not relying on the destruction of other people to achieve that.
I am sure that Israel is not an integral part of their economy and I am also sure that banning trade will not affect Israel at all because America and the EU are gonna pick up the slack
Anyway, trade is not support so maybe they just don’t see it as a problem at all and are concentrating on navigating the downfall of the empire and dodging the lash outs while trying not to agitate them into nuclear war.
What anti-imperialist causes is China supporting in any significant manner, besides just improving its own productive forces? Cuba is about to be destroyed through sanctions, Venezuela just had a coup orchestrated by the hegemon, one that China probably did nothing to intervene in. What exactly is China doing besides profiting from all sides?
I swear you people just really want to start WW3 out of nowhere and it’s driving me crazy
Imagine if we held all parties to the same standard we hold China wrt this genocide
Go and grab a gun and fight for the Palestinian resistance otherwise stfu I swear to god. Trade isn’t support! Trading with the entity is no worse than trading with the US itself.
Cuba is building up its solar energy infrastructure and is able to do so purely because of the existence of China. The global south is able to develop past neocolonial condemned poor development solely because of the USSR and now China. They are fulfilling an important role even if you personally would rather see a few million Chinese people die for the cause.
LOL when you resort to dogshit arguments like this. Comparing 1 guy in living in the West vs the 2nd largest super power in the world. Get a grip. China does nothing cause all they care about is themselves and they don’t care how much they have to trade with an entity that kills babies for fun to get there.
sorry, you’re right, the biggest opposition to the Western empire and capital should come from the destitute poor in the imperial core who are actively being hunted down by cops and ICE. Incredible vision for the future, sorry Palestine
Yeah the PRC just popped into existence and was never poor and destitute and being hunted by fascists you’re right we shouldn’t do anything and if the Chinese don’t sacrifice themselves by the millions they are the reason why everyone around the world suffers.
So we can agree that sanctioning and blockading countries is effectively an act of war when the US and its vassals do it but if China were to do it, no one on the international diplomatic stage would care at all and would let it slide with no reprisals.
You have not thought this through. At all. It is pathetic.
Exerting influence through these economic levers is just something the Chinese leadership isnt going to do - they are drawing off lessons learned from the USSR’s collapse. The diplomatic position remains anti-colonial.
My dude, CIA assets embedded in China are going to start blowing up Chinese bridges and power plants from within if China actually boycotts the Zionist entity because the boycott would be an act of war that would demand a response from the enemy. Since China is already an economic superpower, they would wage war through noneconomic means, first with sabotage and cyberwarfare before escalating to proxy wars and eventually direct kinetic warfare. Iran has launched cruise missiles at the Zionist entity, and for that, they have to go through two attempts at regime change, one while the war officially commenced and one that just recently passed with the failed color revolution attempt, both of which were incredibly violent, as in “protestors” with full auto rifles firing at crowds along with sabotage like burning down mosques and attempts at storming military bases.
Can China be condemned for not being willing to pay the human cost for the sake of liberating Palestine? For someone living in Yemen or Iran or Lebanon, who live in a society that have already offered martyrs for the sake of Palestine, yes they’re justified in condemning China for not willing to offer martyrs of their own although I doubt they would agree to shipping Yemeni/Iranian/Lebanese troops to China for the sake of fighting Chinese border disputes. But for Westerners, including an Aussie sexpat holed up in Argentina, who have not only not offered martyrs but have collectively sustains the Zionist entity in the first place, not so much.
Yes, unironically - do you expect Palestinians to swim across the ocean to come clean up the mess that your people is causing? Its the US thats bombing them!
Well, the reality is that US capital is bombing Palestine, and that the people responsible for stopping them, the oppressed in the imperial ore are or have been rendered fucking useless.
Just like literally every country that has experienced revolution, yes. You think the commies in 1917 russia where not hunted down before they won? Feudal China fucking loved the commies, everyone knows that of course. The commies famously had a great and easy revolution in germany as well and the police just let them be.
Zero thought behind that reply and clearly just written in order to try to affirm your anti-china bias.
What anti-imperialist causes is China supporting in any significant manner, besides just improving its own productive forces? Cuba is about to be destroyed through sanctions, Venezuela just had a coup orchestrated by the hegemon, one that China probably did nothing to intervene in. What exactly is China doing besides profiting from all sides?
North Korea? Did the entire Korean war just go over your head?
The implicit threat from America has always been that if China starts exerting influence over Palestine, they will escalate North Korea - China is still technically at war with the US over this, peace was never agreed.
Imagine if we held all parties to the same standard we hold China wrt this genocide
But we do. Nobody criticizes any country for trading with the US despite the US being more heinous than the Zionist entity. It’s not comparable if you consider its entire history or the fact that the Zionist entity is a military, economic, intelligence, and somewhat political extension of the US anyways.
Nobody who hasn’t fallen for NATO talking points criticizes the Soviet Union trading with fascist Germany while the non-aggression pact was in effect and nobody criticizes the Soviet Union for trading with fascist Japan while the other non-aggression pact was in effect.
Nobody who hasn’t fallen for NATO talking points criticizes the Soviet Union trading with fascist Germany while the non-aggression pact was in effect and nobody criticizes the Soviet Union for trading with fascist Japan while the other non-aggression pact was in effect.
That’s a very good point, but the difference I see is that Israel and China are nowhere near economic peers. A boycott would devastate Israel and China would barely feel a thing from the loss in trade.
the Zionist entity is a military, economic, intelligence, and somewhat political extension of the US anyways.
There’s no such thing as an independent boycott of the Zionist entity especially since the Zionist entity is completely reliant on the US anyways. If anything, the real cynical kabuki theatre pro-wrestling move would be to partially boycott the Zionist entity while simultaneously increase trade with the US with the understanding that the US would use the increase in traded commodities to further subsidize the Zionist entity and fill in the holes left by the “boycott.”
The only real way to economically hurt the Zionist entity is to hurt the Zionist entity’s master. Notice how a lot of countries that have no economic ties to the Zionist entity like the DPRK also don’t have economic ties with the US either. Because the US is very willing to subsidize the Zionist entity and because the US has a much bigger economy than the Zionist entity’s, a complete boycott the Zionist entity is essentially just a partial boycott of the US and the Zionist entity. For various reasons, China is not ready to wage economic warfare in so open a fashion against the US.
A boycott could work if the US vassal is unimportant enough that the US would rather leave them to their fate than save them. If China boycotts an expendable US vassal and the US refuses to save them, it could open up opportunities for the US compradors in charge to be overthrown, ideally by anti-imperialist forces. However, this is 100% untrue for the Zionist entity, which is probably the US’s most valuable vassal to the point where it’s not even a vassal anymore since the Israeli political class is completely self-aware of the settler-colony’s value in destroying WANA unity among many other things.
Not really. They are not exactly relaxing when it comes to western imperialism and opposing it.
There just is not exactly much to do against it if they don’t want to jeopardise their own people, their goal of a multipolar world and the idea of socialism in the world.
We are talking about nuclear powers and china is not that well liked yet in the west. They also don’t want to make it seem like they are behind the Palestinian struggle and therefore give an excuse for the genocide because the evil and powerful CCP is behind it and not normal people that wanted to live in peace and are violently resisting due to being attacked.
To paint china as simply relaxing on this issue is a huge insult imo and we should trust our comrades conducting one of the most successful socialist experiments a little bit more. Especially when we consider that the USSR might have spread itself a bit thin by helping around the globe before securing themselves
They could stop profiting off of a genocidal fascist state for one.
Or they could not do that because there is nothing specifically wrong from profiting off of your enemies’ actions as long as you don’t rely on it for your entire economy. We don’t really deal with moralist arguments here
Yes, and the trade with the entity was that China got US miltech in the 90s (when it was still the top provider in the world) when no one else would trade it with them bc of sanctions and in exchange the colony gets AC units and some agriculture. Basically consumer goods.
I’m not going to do a good trade bad trade comparison because that’s meaningless but this was the historical reason for the normalization of relations with the zionist entity and the exporting country does get the most benefit out of it. There is a strict ban on exporting weapons or anything that could be made into weapons.
I can’t be in their mind but China is probably worried that if they completely change course it will only alienate them from the ties they’ve built in the region. Most countries in the region have normalized relations with the occupation, what is China supposed to do when they inherited a situation they had no hand in forming? Instead of yelling at them on english websites the CPC doesn’t read we should be demanding that our governments send Cuba oil.
Good quote!
Seems like sound logic. Trade with the genocidal ally of the increasingly fascistic global military super power while they systematically eliminate all other smaller “AES” states and major trade partners you have (or economically force them into submission) while you sit back and shore up your metaphorical walls.
Sounds like a one hell of a gamble to me.
Yada yada. The other comments in this thread already addressed everything and explained in easy terms why China is doing what they are doing.
Thank you for the well thought out eloquent response. It contributed much to the discussion.
There is just no more discussion to be had. All the bullshit you come up with has already been answered in this very thread.
Stop being a racist failure and just read the 100 comments here and be educated
You idealist China shills are nothing if not consistent.
You respond to differing opinions with a haughty demeanor. Then, when a counter argument is made, you resort to childish name calling when your rehearsed responses are no longer sufficiently up to the task.
What Is To Be Done?
“Rehearsed responses” motherfucker, THE TRUTH DOESN’T CHANGE.
Y’all always reveal yourself with that exact bullshit. Of course the responses are gonna sound the same, they were forged in truth and there is only one mold.
There are no opinions to be had here, it’s just you being wrong. All your arguments have been defeated thoroughly in this very thread by others already
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/
Stop being a dogmatic idealist, Read it and weep.
Easier to link than redo
I will concede the trade point in a general sense. But the point I was trying to make is that, to our collective dismay I’m sure, the US is tightening a noose around China.
Russia is floating the idea of trading with dollars again in Ukraine negotiations. India recently made a trade deal with the US for oil. Depending on how these things play out, BRICS will be considerably weakened.
The US is moving a large amount of armaments to the Philippines. They are amassing a fleet to strike Iran. South Korea is still… South Korea.
I disagree with what I assume is you and your comrades support of China’s lack of direct support for socialist movements abroad. It looks to me as though they will soon be in a very weak position on the global playing field. In my opinion, that direct support could have made a difference. Reeling in trade with their ideological enemies could as well. Should this play out in favor of the US, they will likely have to make more concessions to the bourgeoisie than they already have.
Unless the US economy finally gives way to the rot that has been spreading across it’s foundations. Which China may be banking on. The “gamble” I mentioned previously.
Apologies for the long effort post incoming.
You’re identifying the same contradiction I am, just seemingly analysing it differently and drawing different conclusions from it.
The U.S. is clearly attempting to tighten the noose but that’s not new. That’s been the defining feature of China’s external environment since at least 2011, and realistically since 1949. Encirclement, sanctions pressure, proxy wars, tech embargoes, financial warfare, the standard imperialist containment. What’s different now is simply that China is large enough to be treated as an existential rival rather than a manageable subordinate.
Despite agreeing on this I heavily disagree with your analysis and conclusions. You’re assuming that earlier or more direct revolutionary intervention abroad would have meaningfully altered this trajectory. I see no historical basis for that.
The USSR tried exactly what you’re proposing: massive material support to militant movements, open alignment, heavy military commitments across multiple continents. What did that produce? Overextension, economic strain, internal stagnation, and ultimately collapse under imperialist pressure. It’s important to remember that we don’t need to speculate on the what if of the soviet road, there is already a concrete historical outcome.
China clearly learned from the Soviet collapse. The CPC’s post Chairman Mao strategy hasn’t been “abandon internationalism.” as many proclaim. In reality it’s redefining it to prioritize domestic development, industrial capacity, technological sovereignty, and long-term resilience first, because without those, everything else collapses. Revolutionary solidarity means nothing if your own state gets strangled or balkanized and also the Chinese people must come first for the CPC just as the Cuban people must come first for the Cuban government etc.
You also say direct support “could have made a difference.” Made a difference how, exactly? Which movements, specifically, would now be in power and capable of resisting NATO-level pressure? With what industrial base? What logistics? What air defense? What energy independence? There is a persistent fantasy in some parts of the left that revolutionary movements just need more weapons or money and then history bends. That has unfortunately never been historically true. States survive through production, infrastructure, supply chains, and control over development pathways not donations. Look at what happened to the Soviet backed movements post collapse, they all quickly followed suit.
On BRICS: yes, it’s incredibly fragile. Of course it is. It’s a loose coordination mechanism between mostly bourgeois-national states with competing interests. It is absolutely not a unified socialist bloc. Expecting ideological coherence there is a category error. But even limited dedollarization, parallel payment systems, alternative development finance, and South to South trade corridors materially weaken U.S. monopoly power. That’s a world of difference from before it’s creation even if it has many many issues of it’s own.
Russia flirting with dollars again doesn’t mean “multipolarity is collapsing.” It means Russia is a capitalist state negotiating under wartime pressure. India cutting oil deals with the U.S. means India remains as always India: opportunist, comprador-leaning, and strategically unreliable. None of this is new information to us or to the CPC.
What is new historically is that dozens of Global South countries now have non-IMF, non-imperealist financing and development options, Chinese-built ports, power grids, rail, telecom, and industrial zones. That materially erodes imperial leverage far more than headline-grabbing arms shipments ever could.
You’re also underestimating the retaliation China would face. China openly backing armed movements or unilaterally fully severing trade with “Israel” wouldn’t be some isolated moral gesture. It would immediately escalate to financial sanctions, maritime interdictions, tech embargoes, asset seizures, and possibly kinetic confrontation. And unlike the U.S., China does not yet control the global reserve currency, insurance markets, shipping chokepoints, SWIFT or hold global hegemony. Not to mind the lack of power projection capability within the current PLA. However that is slowly changing along with the other issues mentioned, but the qualitative shift is still likely more than a decade away, if we’re being realistic. Internationalism under imperialism is constrained by force relations. Pretending otherwise is not serious.
You then say China risks being weakened later and forced into bourgeois concessions. That risk exists regardless. The difference is whether China enters that confrontation with: the world’s largest industrial base, growing technological autonomy, energy diversification, strategic food reserves, alternative trade networks and internal political stability. Or without those things. The CPC has clearly chosen the former which I think we can all agree is the better one.
Finally, on the “gamble” point: yes, China is seemingly betting that U.S. internal decay outpaces its ability to maintain global dominance. But I would heavily disagree with the assertion of some that this is naive, it seems more grounded in observable material trends: deindustrialization, debt saturation, political fragmentation, infrastructure rot, and declining real productive capacity. They are clearly not passively waiting. It’s much more similar to buying time while building strength(similar in idea to the Molotov-Ribbbentrop).
To reiterate the end of my other comment: this is clearly extremely ugly realpolitik. It’s slow. It’s frustrating. It doesn’t provide emotional catharsis. But it’s consistent with a long-term material strategy aimed at breaking Western monopoly power without triggering premature war that could very likely escalate.
Wanting China to behave like a romanticized 20th-century Soviet Union ignores both historical lessons and present conditions. Scientific socialism means adapting strategy to concrete reality, not demanding heroic gestures that feel righteous but materially weaken the only currently existing pole capable of offering an alternative to and eventually dismantling U.S. hegemony.
If China can make moves in the trade war like banning the sale of rare Earth metals then they can boycott Israel IMO
Boycotting Israel would be a unilateral movement of active hostility that, unfortunately, would be viewed with hostility by the US and its vassals. China gets away with bilateral trade wars because they are acting in response to actions taken against it directly, not for a third party.
The US views China’s mere existence as a hostility. What would the US do in response, launch missiles? Economic sanctions against China would hurt the US more than they hurt China, no?
Obviously the West holds 1000x more culpability for Israel. I’m not saying “China bad”; I’m just trying to do “ruthless criticism”.
China is not officially banning the sale of refined rare earths. It mereley does not process export orders by the US.
I am not gonna pretend like I specifically know a lot about their trade with Israel and why they continue some of their trade, but then also block investments in Israel.
I just know that they have been building up one of the most successful socialist experiments ever and that they have been phenomenal at navigating their politics and economy as to lift their people up into greater heights while not relying on the destruction of other people to achieve that.
I am sure that Israel is not an integral part of their economy and I am also sure that banning trade will not affect Israel at all because America and the EU are gonna pick up the slack
Anyway, trade is not support so maybe they just don’t see it as a problem at all and are concentrating on navigating the downfall of the empire and dodging the lash outs while trying not to agitate them into nuclear war.
‘They’re actually sweating profusely and waiting to hit the big communism button’ is really not convincing
Literally no one said that and you made that up completely. They are supporting anti-imperialist causes on the globe just like Russia and the DPRK.
I swear you people just really want to start WW3 out of nowhere and it’s driving me crazy
What anti-imperialist causes is China supporting in any significant manner, besides just improving its own productive forces? Cuba is about to be destroyed through sanctions, Venezuela just had a coup orchestrated by the hegemon, one that China probably did nothing to intervene in. What exactly is China doing besides profiting from all sides?
Imagine if we held all parties to the same standard we hold China wrt this genocide
Go and grab a gun and fight for the Palestinian resistance otherwise stfu I swear to god. Trade isn’t support! Trading with the entity is no worse than trading with the US itself.
Cuba is building up its solar energy infrastructure and is able to do so purely because of the existence of China. The global south is able to develop past neocolonial condemned poor development solely because of the USSR and now China. They are fulfilling an important role even if you personally would rather see a few million Chinese people die for the cause.
LOL when you resort to dogshit arguments like this. Comparing 1 guy in living in the West vs the 2nd largest super power in the world. Get a grip. China does nothing cause all they care about is themselves and they don’t care how much they have to trade with an entity that kills babies for fun to get there.
sorry, you’re right, the biggest opposition to the Western empire and capital should come from the destitute poor in the imperial core who are actively being hunted down by cops and ICE. Incredible vision for the future, sorry Palestine
Yeah the PRC just popped into existence and was never poor and destitute and being hunted by fascists you’re right we shouldn’t do anything and if the Chinese don’t sacrifice themselves by the millions they are the reason why everyone around the world suffers.
Entitled, pathetic behaviour.
Literally noone fucking argued that Chinese people must die to stop this
So we can agree that sanctioning and blockading countries is effectively an act of war when the US and its vassals do it but if China were to do it, no one on the international diplomatic stage would care at all and would let it slide with no reprisals.
You have not thought this through. At all. It is pathetic.
Exerting influence through these economic levers is just something the Chinese leadership isnt going to do - they are drawing off lessons learned from the USSR’s collapse. The diplomatic position remains anti-colonial.
My dude, CIA assets embedded in China are going to start blowing up Chinese bridges and power plants from within if China actually boycotts the Zionist entity because the boycott would be an act of war that would demand a response from the enemy. Since China is already an economic superpower, they would wage war through noneconomic means, first with sabotage and cyberwarfare before escalating to proxy wars and eventually direct kinetic warfare. Iran has launched cruise missiles at the Zionist entity, and for that, they have to go through two attempts at regime change, one while the war officially commenced and one that just recently passed with the failed color revolution attempt, both of which were incredibly violent, as in “protestors” with full auto rifles firing at crowds along with sabotage like burning down mosques and attempts at storming military bases.
Can China be condemned for not being willing to pay the human cost for the sake of liberating Palestine? For someone living in Yemen or Iran or Lebanon, who live in a society that have already offered martyrs for the sake of Palestine, yes they’re justified in condemning China for not willing to offer martyrs of their own although I doubt they would agree to shipping Yemeni/Iranian/Lebanese troops to China for the sake of fighting Chinese border disputes. But for Westerners, including an Aussie sexpat holed up in Argentina, who have not only not offered martyrs but have collectively sustains the Zionist entity in the first place, not so much.
Yes, unironically - do you expect Palestinians to swim across the ocean to come clean up the mess that your people is causing? Its the US thats bombing them!
Well, the reality is that US capital is bombing Palestine, and that the people responsible for stopping them, the oppressed in the imperial ore are or have been rendered fucking useless.
I guess Palestine was fucked from the beginning.
It might feel useless but its not useless, keep working for it.
Just like literally every country that has experienced revolution, yes. You think the commies in 1917 russia where not hunted down before they won? Feudal China fucking loved the commies, everyone knows that of course. The commies famously had a great and easy revolution in germany as well and the police just let them be.
Zero thought behind that reply and clearly just written in order to try to affirm your anti-china bias.
time to read Settlers.
deleted by creator
North Korea? Did the entire Korean war just go over your head?
The implicit threat from America has always been that if China starts exerting influence over Palestine, they will escalate North Korea - China is still technically at war with the US over this, peace was never agreed.
But we do. Nobody criticizes any country for trading with the US despite the US being more heinous than the Zionist entity. It’s not comparable if you consider its entire history or the fact that the Zionist entity is a military, economic, intelligence, and somewhat political extension of the US anyways.
Nobody who hasn’t fallen for NATO talking points criticizes the Soviet Union trading with fascist Germany while the non-aggression pact was in effect and nobody criticizes the Soviet Union for trading with fascist Japan while the other non-aggression pact was in effect.
That’s a very good point, but the difference I see is that Israel and China are nowhere near economic peers. A boycott would devastate Israel and China would barely feel a thing from the loss in trade.
There’s no such thing as an independent boycott of the Zionist entity especially since the Zionist entity is completely reliant on the US anyways. If anything, the real cynical kabuki theatre pro-wrestling move would be to partially boycott the Zionist entity while simultaneously increase trade with the US with the understanding that the US would use the increase in traded commodities to further subsidize the Zionist entity and fill in the holes left by the “boycott.”
The only real way to economically hurt the Zionist entity is to hurt the Zionist entity’s master. Notice how a lot of countries that have no economic ties to the Zionist entity like the DPRK also don’t have economic ties with the US either. Because the US is very willing to subsidize the Zionist entity and because the US has a much bigger economy than the Zionist entity’s, a complete boycott the Zionist entity is essentially just a partial boycott of the US and the Zionist entity. For various reasons, China is not ready to wage economic warfare in so open a fashion against the US.
A boycott could work if the US vassal is unimportant enough that the US would rather leave them to their fate than save them. If China boycotts an expendable US vassal and the US refuses to save them, it could open up opportunities for the US compradors in charge to be overthrown, ideally by anti-imperialist forces. However, this is 100% untrue for the Zionist entity, which is probably the US’s most valuable vassal to the point where it’s not even a vassal anymore since the Israeli political class is completely self-aware of the settler-colony’s value in destroying WANA unity among many other things.
I honestly don’t know what you mean by this.