I really don’t get why China helps russians to destroy Ukraine.
Here are a first few consequences:
Russia killed 200-300k ukrainians (mostly the civil population in Mariupol and other cities they occupy). In other cities russians occupied, they raped girls and then killed them. So China has 200-300k fewer clients.
Moreover, a lot of ukrainian citizens now don’t buy chinese stuff, as ukrainians are defending themselves and have less money.
Russia occupied 20% of the territory of Ukraine that was used for agriculture. Russians mined them and even destroyed dam, which made lots of this territory unsuitable for agriculture. Which leads to higher prices for food, grain, etc.
This dam was used for electricity, agriculture, and iron and copper plants. Less supply means higher prices for electricity, iron, and wheat.
China supports destroying Ukraine, which has impact on global growth and increases food prices.
And if food is high-priced, fewer people will buy Chinese shi*.
This is so illogical.
I don't think you understand how markets work.
If there's less of some goods they are priced higher.
If that goods are essential, demand for non-essential goods are lower, as people will have less money.
This is pretty economy basics.
I don't know why you support killing ukrainians, but you can thank your beloved russia and china for high food prices.
I'm not talking about that specifically, but the logic you present is not correct because the Ukrainian market is not very relevant in the big picture compared to that of Russia, and furthermore Ukraine has been a NATO dominated country after the Maidan coup, so China would not aim to have any kind of good relationship with them because it would be undermined by the US.
I live in the Global South, so food prices have not changed because of this, my country sells yours good, we have a nickname by your people: the world's barn.
True, although just having that number is also not that relevant, since this probably will take the effect of an exponential function and the numbers will likely increase rapidly until getting to a certain top. $200 billion might not be much but as the first point in a function of such rapid growth it is relevant.
Another relevant thing to keep in mind is that the more relevant part is that Russia is finding the customers it lost when it left the EU. India, China and other countries are filling that gap which means they can keep selling their goods, and this is not good for the EU because forcibly the prices of such goods will be more expensive now.
That's one way to spin losing access to the two largest, richest markets in the world. It did not end up well for them the last time the iron curtains were drawn
I'm not sure being dependent on China is good for Russia either They're basically now just the mining and resource supplier with no competition to up whatever price China wants to pay them.
True, but the last time the Gobal North had a lot more power in terms of geopolitics, now it's not so much them losing access to the largest richest markets but rather the richest markets isolating themselves more and more from the rest of the world. Who do you think South America or West Asia is going to choose if they have to between US/Europe and China/Russia? Also a couple of years in the past there wasn't such a strong competitor as China is now to the US, the USSR always was almost half the GDP behind the US, while now China is barely behind and even surpasses it in the average GDP, without taking into account the growth of countries like India or Brazil.
And I don't think China will go that route either, if we are to judge with recent policies taken with other countries they will probably help Russia growth since they are still pretty much behind them and have a ton of non extracted resources, and simply by the political system both countries have it's impossible for China to surpass Russia since capitalism isn't as efficient; the only reason why the US and other European countries have so much wealth is because of the historical imperialistic and colonial policies, while China achieved all that simply through centralised planning.
and simply by the political system both countries have it’s impossible for China to surpass Russia since capitalism isn’t as efficient;
China has already surpassed Russia in pretty much all measures inc:
the only reason why the US and other European countries have so much wealth is because of the historical imperialistic and colonial policies, while China achieved all that simply through centralised planning
China has already surpassed Russia in pretty much all measures inc:
Precisely what I've meant, maybe I've worded it poorly. Russia cannot surpass China even with China's help simply because of capitalism's own limitations.
To believe that a country in such a destroyed condition which had just made the transition from feudalism to socialism had the fault for this catastrophe is to be blind to history. Europe has had a lot of famines through its history, China had just been through multiple wars and already was a poor country.
and have now become a market autocracy, not communist.
It's normal to confuse between the two, don't worry, I'd highly recommend you to read Mao Zedong or Deng Xiaoping to understand a bit better the nuances of the role of the market in a socialist society, and how it differs from that in a capitalist society. I pray so that your country can also be free from the torturous chains of the bourgeoisie.
The major contributing factors in the famine were the policies of the Great Leap Forward (1958 to 1962) and people's communes, launched by Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party Mao Zedong, such as inefficient distribution of food within the nation's planned economy; requiring the use of poor agricultural techniques; the Four Pests campaign that reduced sparrow populations (which disrupted the ecosystem); over-reporting of grain production; and ordering millions of farmers to switch to iron and steel production
Central planning literally made it worse.
And locking up political enemies is pretty authoritarian...
Authorities often label independent or investigative coverage as "fake news".[2] Since Xi Jinping became the general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 2012, various commentators, protesters, feminists, lawyers, journalists, and activists have been arrested, detained, jailed, and threatened for attempting to exercise press freedom.[3][4] As of 2023, Reporters Without Borders called China "the world’s largest jailer of journalists."[
It's a shame because I don't like lot of things here in the EU but we have probably the best life in history, so throwing that away for some dictators dream seems just idiotic.
It's a shame because it seems you can't discuss with them, it's so black and white.
Cheers.
And locking up political enemies is pretty authoritarian…
Isn't your shithole country torturing Assange right now for exposing US war crimes?
The old whataboutism.
We are not all from the USA and no country is perfect, that doesn't mean any single country gets a pass in my opinion.
Screeching whataboutism is a logical fallacy used to justify having double standards for yourself and your adversaries. If the things you claim to happen in China are actually happening in your own country then that's what you should be focused on. Meanwhile, it's not just USA that's at fault in the west. Every western country commits horrific atrocities. For example, France is doing brutal crackdowns on protesters with militarized as we speak.
Maybe if westerners focused on fixing up their own shithole countries instead of yapping about China all the time, the west wouldn't be where it is today.
I'm not creeching :-)
And whataboutism is what you just did, answering critic with "what about that country?!".
Once again, whataboutism is not a sound argument. It's a logical fallacy and using it discredits any argument you might've had.
I really don’t get why China helps russians to destroy Ukraine.
Here are a first few consequences:
And if food is high-priced, fewer people will buy Chinese shi*.
This is so illogical.
I don't think you understand how markets work.
If there's less of some goods they are priced higher.
If that goods are essential, demand for non-essential goods are lower, as people will have less money.
This is pretty economy basics.
I don't know why you support killing ukrainians, but you can thank your beloved russia and china for high food prices.
I'm not talking about that specifically, but the logic you present is not correct because the Ukrainian market is not very relevant in the big picture compared to that of Russia, and furthermore Ukraine has been a NATO dominated country after the Maidan coup, so China would not aim to have any kind of good relationship with them because it would be undermined by the US.
I live in the Global South, so food prices have not changed because of this, my country sells yours good, we have a nickname by your people: the world's barn.
I always doubt headlines with % in and no numbers
That's not a lot.
True, although just having that number is also not that relevant, since this probably will take the effect of an exponential function and the numbers will likely increase rapidly until getting to a certain top. $200 billion might not be much but as the first point in a function of such rapid growth it is relevant.
Another relevant thing to keep in mind is that the more relevant part is that Russia is finding the customers it lost when it left the EU. India, China and other countries are filling that gap which means they can keep selling their goods, and this is not good for the EU because forcibly the prices of such goods will be more expensive now.
That's one way to spin losing access to the two largest, richest markets in the world. It did not end up well for them the last time the iron curtains were drawn
I'm not sure being dependent on China is good for Russia either They're basically now just the mining and resource supplier with no competition to up whatever price China wants to pay them.
True, but the last time the Gobal North had a lot more power in terms of geopolitics, now it's not so much them losing access to the largest richest markets but rather the richest markets isolating themselves more and more from the rest of the world. Who do you think South America or West Asia is going to choose if they have to between US/Europe and China/Russia? Also a couple of years in the past there wasn't such a strong competitor as China is now to the US, the USSR always was almost half the GDP behind the US, while now China is barely behind and even surpasses it in the average GDP, without taking into account the growth of countries like India or Brazil.
And I don't think China will go that route either, if we are to judge with recent policies taken with other countries they will probably help Russia growth since they are still pretty much behind them and have a ton of non extracted resources, and simply by the political system both countries have it's impossible for China to surpass Russia since capitalism isn't as efficient; the only reason why the US and other European countries have so much wealth is because of the historical imperialistic and colonial policies, while China achieved all that simply through centralised planning.
China has already surpassed Russia in pretty much all measures inc:
China GDP 17T Russia GDP 1.7T
https://data.worldbank.org/?locations=CN-RU
They also killed millions with central planning,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine
and have now become a market autocracy, not communist.
China is an old country, they've had plenty of imperialistic and colonial habits and still do, have you heard of the Hui?
https://thediplomat.com/2021/06/chinas-repression-of-the-hui-a-slow-boil/
Precisely what I've meant, maybe I've worded it poorly. Russia cannot surpass China even with China's help simply because of capitalism's own limitations.
To believe that a country in such a destroyed condition which had just made the transition from feudalism to socialism had the fault for this catastrophe is to be blind to history. Europe has had a lot of famines through its history, China had just been through multiple wars and already was a poor country.
It's normal to confuse between the two, don't worry, I'd highly recommend you to read Mao Zedong or Deng Xiaoping to understand a bit better the nuances of the role of the market in a socialist society, and how it differs from that in a capitalist society. I pray so that your country can also be free from the torturous chains of the bourgeoisie.
Central planning literally made it worse.
And locking up political enemies is pretty authoritarian...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_the_press_in_China
You're fighting a tankie it seems.
Which means "communism" good, Europe & USA bad.
It's a shame because I don't like lot of things here in the EU but we have probably the best life in history, so throwing that away for some dictators dream seems just idiotic.
It's a shame because it seems you can't discuss with them, it's so black and white.
Cheers.
Isn't your shithole country torturing Assange right now for exposing US war crimes?
The old whataboutism.
We are not all from the USA and no country is perfect, that doesn't mean any single country gets a pass in my opinion.
Screeching whataboutism is a logical fallacy used to justify having double standards for yourself and your adversaries. If the things you claim to happen in China are actually happening in your own country then that's what you should be focused on. Meanwhile, it's not just USA that's at fault in the west. Every western country commits horrific atrocities. For example, France is doing brutal crackdowns on protesters with militarized as we speak.
Maybe if westerners focused on fixing up their own shithole countries instead of yapping about China all the time, the west wouldn't be where it is today.
I'm not creeching :-)
And whataboutism is what you just did, answering critic with "what about that country?!".
Once again, whataboutism is not a sound argument. It's a logical fallacy and using it discredits any argument you might've had.