What you are is an apologist for the status quo who has a paper thing understanding of political economy and use human rights as a shield to condemn people calling out your nonsense.
Fact, Chinese military industrial complex companies are selling arms to Africa.
You are calling me an apologist… Because I hate the military industrial complex’s business model that grows based on human suffering!? Profits for death.
Let’s turn this around. Why do you defend this practice. How do you rationalize arming people and the resulting civilian death.
This is exactly what the US is doing in Palestine by supplying weapons to Israel. This is exactly what Russia has done in Africa. These countries are playing a bullshit game of imperialism causing untold suffering.
But if China does it, it is okay and we can’t criticize them!? This is what I mean by disingenuous. This is not about idealism. It is about right and wrong and apparently your denialism.
Continuing to show your paper thin moralist understanding of the world.
You are assigning a fixed moral category to the abstract act of supplying weapons while stripping away the concrete political relationship. Arms supplied to an occupying power are not equivalent to arms supplied to a state defending its sovereignty. The relevant questions are: who receives the weapons, against whom are they used, and what political purpose do they serve?
Yes, China exports arms. But supplying Mali or Burkina Faso as they fight US/European bavked jihadist insurgencies is not equivalent to the United States arming Israel or the the RSF (through the UAE). The Sahel’s crisis was intensified by the destruction of Libya and by a regional order shaped by French domination and the CFA-franc system. Treating every arms transfer as morally identical erases the distinction between supporting sovereign resistance and enabling occupation, proxy warfare or mass killing.
China also does not have a US-style, privately dominated military-industrial complex. Its major defence enterprises are publicly owned and directed according to state defence and foreign-policy objectives. Lockheed Martin and similar firms, by contrast, are privately owned institutions whose structural interest is the continual expansion of military contracts, weapons markets and conflict. Which they then “lobby for”, the west’s legalised form of corruption.
You are simply defending the military industrial complex’s killing of civilians for profit. China is now the world’s fourth largest arms supplier by most measures.
The fact that China’s government has compete ownership is even more damning than a government not properly regulating a private defense contractor. At least then they could claim some ignorance to the consequences of arms proliferation.
I find your argument that China sells arms for the right reason both spurious and ideologically driven. It is not what is happening. What is happening is a corporation is making profit off of human death.
I get that you don’t care. You have a million excuses and frankly I am not buying it.
You are not engaging with the argument. You are assigning a fixed moral meaning to the abstract act of supplying weapons while ignoring who controls them, who receives them, and what they are used for. Calling every arms transfer “profit from death” is just an easy handwave to avoid dealing with reality. It is moralism that erases ownership, state power, class interest, and concrete material conditions.
We already know these weapons end up on both sides of conflicts. You are either ignorant or being disingenuous. If it is the former, here is an article.
Due to the way proliferation of arms works you can never ensure your weapons of destruction end up in the right hands, plus you are making a moral decision by deciding which group to arm to begin with. Even if we did give the Chinese MIC the benefit of the doubt they are still aware that they have inadvertently armed both sides.
I don’t buy it as in it is objectively wrong and more disgusting acts of imperialism. You hand wave the civilian death away because you don’t care.
You don’t get to choose the argument. I have presented my belief and the facts that are not debatable.
borcsrt the terms. Because you lack humanity . You are simply wrong in my eyes and that is okay.
Yeah with every response I’m more sure you are a privileged white pacifist from the imperial core. To be consistent you of course must condemn the ANC, the union in the American civil war and the allies in ww2 for the use and dissemination of weapons. I hope you one day grow up but for now please fuck off
Yes, we already know you don’t have an argument so you resort to silly insults that amount to lies and then a generous amount of whataboutism. I am not surprised.
Edit: for clarity I will gladly condem the US. I have studied human rights most of my life and the US is the greatest offender in my eyes.
You condemn the union? Wow you are evil. A pro confederacy pacifist now that’s a first. Do you also condemn the allies? The ANC? The IRA? The militant unions who won the 8 hour work day and 5 day workweek? and If your answer to any of this is no you have quite the inconsistent position.
whataboutism
Nonsense word used by shithead debatebros to avoid comparative argument that would expose their hypocrisy and inconsistencies.
What you are is an apologist for the status quo who has a paper thing understanding of political economy and use human rights as a shield to condemn people calling out your nonsense.
Fact, Chinese military industrial complex companies are selling arms to Africa.
You are calling me an apologist… Because I hate the military industrial complex’s business model that grows based on human suffering!? Profits for death.
Let’s turn this around. Why do you defend this practice. How do you rationalize arming people and the resulting civilian death.
This is exactly what the US is doing in Palestine by supplying weapons to Israel. This is exactly what Russia has done in Africa. These countries are playing a bullshit game of imperialism causing untold suffering.
But if China does it, it is okay and we can’t criticize them!? This is what I mean by disingenuous. This is not about idealism. It is about right and wrong and apparently your denialism.
Continuing to show your paper thin moralist understanding of the world.
You are assigning a fixed moral category to the abstract act of supplying weapons while stripping away the concrete political relationship. Arms supplied to an occupying power are not equivalent to arms supplied to a state defending its sovereignty. The relevant questions are: who receives the weapons, against whom are they used, and what political purpose do they serve?
Yes, China exports arms. But supplying Mali or Burkina Faso as they fight US/European bavked jihadist insurgencies is not equivalent to the United States arming Israel or the the RSF (through the UAE). The Sahel’s crisis was intensified by the destruction of Libya and by a regional order shaped by French domination and the CFA-franc system. Treating every arms transfer as morally identical erases the distinction between supporting sovereign resistance and enabling occupation, proxy warfare or mass killing.
China also does not have a US-style, privately dominated military-industrial complex. Its major defence enterprises are publicly owned and directed according to state defence and foreign-policy objectives. Lockheed Martin and similar firms, by contrast, are privately owned institutions whose structural interest is the continual expansion of military contracts, weapons markets and conflict. Which they then “lobby for”, the west’s legalised form of corruption.
You are simply defending the military industrial complex’s killing of civilians for profit. China is now the world’s fourth largest arms supplier by most measures.
The fact that China’s government has compete ownership is even more damning than a government not properly regulating a private defense contractor. At least then they could claim some ignorance to the consequences of arms proliferation.
I find your argument that China sells arms for the right reason both spurious and ideologically driven. It is not what is happening. What is happening is a corporation is making profit off of human death.
I get that you don’t care. You have a million excuses and frankly I am not buying it.
You are not engaging with the argument. You are assigning a fixed moral meaning to the abstract act of supplying weapons while ignoring who controls them, who receives them, and what they are used for. Calling every arms transfer “profit from death” is just an easy handwave to avoid dealing with reality. It is moralism that erases ownership, state power, class interest, and concrete material conditions.
We already know these weapons end up on both sides of conflicts. You are either ignorant or being disingenuous. If it is the former, here is an article.
https://www.btl-research.com/p/chinese-weapons-on-both-sides-of
Due to the way proliferation of arms works you can never ensure your weapons of destruction end up in the right hands, plus you are making a moral decision by deciding which group to arm to begin with. Even if we did give the Chinese MIC the benefit of the doubt they are still aware that they have inadvertently armed both sides.
I don’t buy it as in it is objectively wrong and more disgusting acts of imperialism. You hand wave the civilian death away because you don’t care.
You don’t get to choose the argument. I have presented my belief and the facts that are not debatable.
borcsrt the terms. Because you lack humanity . You are simply wrong in my eyes and that is okay.
Yeah with every response I’m more sure you are a privileged white pacifist from the imperial core. To be consistent you of course must condemn the ANC, the union in the American civil war and the allies in ww2 for the use and dissemination of weapons. I hope you one day grow up but for now please fuck off
Yes, we already know you don’t have an argument so you resort to silly insults that amount to lies and then a generous amount of whataboutism. I am not surprised.
Edit: for clarity I will gladly condem the US. I have studied human rights most of my life and the US is the greatest offender in my eyes.
You condemn the union? Wow you are evil. A pro confederacy pacifist now that’s a first. Do you also condemn the allies? The ANC? The IRA? The militant unions who won the 8 hour work day and 5 day workweek? and If your answer to any of this is no you have quite the inconsistent position.
Nonsense word used by shithead debatebros to avoid comparative argument that would expose their hypocrisy and inconsistencies.
Who’s we? You speaking French now?
None of us here agree with your braindead take lol. Look at the votes if you don’t believe me.