Currently, US capitalists exploit workers both in the US and in poorer countries, with the later being super-exploited. Under this arrangement, the vast majority of the value created by both groups of workers is captured by a handful of capitalists.
A socialist US would cease exploiting other countries (including China) and instead pursue mutually beneficial trade (much like China does). This would likely include some amount of reparations and re-building of local industry, easily funded with the vast amount of value no longer stolen from all workers.
US trade with China is currently mutually beneficial. That's why China participates.
Give me more detail on what that means. If the US Communist party took over absolute leadership of the US tomorrow, what differences would there be in the US China trade agreement.
The amount of benefit is not equal. Imperialist countries (US, western EU, etc.) have extremely favourable terms obtained under military threat. Often onerous terms are imposed, like privatisations or deregulation.
One recent example is Bolivia’s rare earth mining. A German company was offering only ~5% of the value of extracted material in exchange for the capital required, while a Chinese SOE offered 50%. Not long after there was a US-backed fascist coup which was only recently defeated.
Has the US not invaded, coup-ed and threatened numerous countries? Is it not now occupying several? Does it not have bases encircling all countries opposed to its imperialism? I thought this was common knowledge.
The IMF, World Bank and European Central Bank do indeed offer predatory loans with strict conditions (like privatisation, deregulation, austerity) and at usury rates. Countries have a choice between this and being blockaded through military power, like Iran, Syria, Libya, DPRK, etc.
That is the official narrative, the western democracies versus us autocratic barbarians everywhere else. Even if such an absurdity were somehow true, surely at least sovereignty should count for something.
In reality, countries in your “sphere” are either allied exploiters or exploited (and not at all prosperous). Anyone that threatens profits is painted as evil, regardless of the truth. After so many sanctions, coups and wars based on what later turned out to be blatant lies, surely you could reserve some scepticism.
Rofl. It’s factual that many countries the US is at odds with are autocratic. North Korea (obvious), China (the people do not vote), Iran (the ayatollah controls everything)…
All countries in the US-sphere, they have direct voting by the people to elect the government.
So you’re completely wrong on that.
Next point. So western Europe, Eastern Europe, balkans, Japan, South Korea, Colombia, Mexico, Philippines, Canada, Australia/NZ… they are all exploited or exploiters?
I see you’re determined to just repeat imperialist propaganda. And yet it clearly keeps you uninformed, since both the DPRK and China do in fact have elections that the vast majority of citizens vote in. Their democratic systems are different from the liberal ones, but not missing.
It is certainly true that we Eastern Europeans are exploited by Western Europe and the US. We were forced to privatise healthcare, housing, trains, etc., deregulate labour protections, implement austerity measures, all to be allowed to trade with the rest of the world. And our labour is clearly exploited, since most jobs are with foreign companies that pay a pittance and extract value from our countries.
"...since both the DPRK and China do in fact have elections that the vast majority of citizens vote in"
Pretty much just lol to that one. So you're telling me the NK people elected Kim? And Chinese elected Xi? Lol.
Exploited? A country like Poland is doing many times better than it did 30 years ago. IT sector, agriculture, tourism, etc. Every Eastern European country is on the up. Ukraine as well. Because the cost of living is cheaper, the cost of labor is cheaper is as well.
As I said, first the imperialism would stop. No more military threats, no more WTO enforcing unfair rules, forgiving all IMF loans, etc.
That would allow trade to no longer be based such an extreme difference in the price of labour, so the victim countries could retain a majority of the value of their labour. By no longer losing value to profits at every step of production and distribution, consumer prices wouldn’t have to increase and could even be lowered in most cases.
Merely dismantling the US army would vastly reduce global carbon emissions. Building high density housing, public transportation, universal healthcare, public utilities, etc. would further reduce the US’s majority contributions.
Countries that were kept poor for centuries could be gifted low-carbon energy sources as part of reparations, so as to not need to emit carbon to develop.
A lot can be done once the oppressor countries stop constantly extracting value for a few individuals.
> That would allow trade to no longer be based such an extreme difference in the price of labour
That doesn't make sense. The entire reason the WTO was interested in China (and any other poor country) was because they had cheap labor. It's not like the WTO is depressing wages.
>By no longer losing value to profits at every step of production and distribution, consumer prices wouldn’t have to increase
Wait, we pay everyone more but we don't have to pay for production and distribution?
>Merely dismantling the US army would vastly reduce global carbon emissions. Building high density housing, public transportation, universal healthcare, public utilities, etc. would further reduce the US’s majority contributions.
I agree but it's completely non-sequitar.
> Countries that were kept poor for centuries could be gifted low-carbon energy sources as part of reparations, so as to not need to emit carbon to develop.
Again, non-sequitar but what are these countries going to do with some solar panels? They're dirt poor. You might as well buy them some air pods.
> A lot can be done once the oppressor countries stop constantly extracting value for a few individuals.
It's not a zero sum game. Richer countries do extract value from poorer countries but the poorer countries also extract value from the richer countries. Just because the majority of the advantage comes from the richer country doesn't mean the poorer country is losing, they just win much less.
In general, you're making a lot of points about globalism that I generally agree are problems but you're offering no solutions past stop doing the bad thing and everything will be good. I don't care about labels of imperialism, oppressors or communist, I care what actually can be done in the real world to make the world work better. Keep in mind that while China is sort if at odds with the WTO, it's not because they don't think it's ethical, they don't like it because it's not them.
WTO terms are designed specifically to extract profits and prevent independent development. Refusing such terms comes with sanctions, coups and sometimes invasions. The US army are ultimately the enforcers of this exploitation.
Solar panels are quite useful in many poor countries, actually. But indeed much more is needed in terms of means of production: agricultural equipment, infrastructure, factories, etc. Expertise and technology (which are restricted by IP laws) are also needed. All of this is what the Belt and Road Initiative does.
If you look at it over time, the poor countries only get poorer over time. It may not be a zero sum game, but development is actively prevented. The only exceptions are countries where workers have at least some control over the state.
That’s where the solution lies: ending the control of capitalists over the world. The poor countries have succeeded a few times with good results, but the rich countries doing it would have a much bigger impact.
Poverty has decreased in China in spite of US imperialism, not because of it. Most notably, poor capitalist countries have had poverty increase in the past several decades instead.
All countries that have had a successful socialist revolution so far were oppressed impoverished ones. They all then went on to develop very quickly, in spite of constant attack from the imperialist countries. An already-developed former imperialist country would face no such challenges.
You think the working class is in control of China? The working class that has nets installed in their job provided dormatories because too many of them are commiting suicide?
A certain level of exploitation is demanded by imperialists in exchange for capital investment and allowing trade. The working class of any victim nation is forced to accept deregulation like this if they wish a change at developing.
Vietnam made a similar choice in a similar position. In both countries working conditions and labour laws have been steadily improving. This change is only possible if the workers as a class are in control of the state.
A socialist US would cease exploiting other countries (including China) and instead pursue mutually beneficial trade (much like China does). This would likely include some amount of reparations and re-building of local industry, easily funded with the vast amount of value no longer stolen from all workers.