this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2024
37 points (93.0% liked)

World News

39019 readers
2148 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sunzu@kbin.run -3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Well, looks like they are trying to feed their own industry first.

I don't see this either shocking or surprising. China will do what is best for China, we do what is best for ...

[–] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

What is best for China is peaceful coexistence and small concessions to incentivize trade and development of the world.

What China is doing is maliciously taking everything they can get their hands on until every bridge is burned, and by the looks of it they're ramping up military production to cross the river and keep taking.

Exactly the sort of shortsighted belligerent actions you would expect from a dictatorship.

[–] sunzu@kbin.run 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I am not here to excuse China's behavior but this action appears to be part of the trade war that US and EU started... for valid reasons.

We do a lot to make other countries "uncomfortable", there is nothing special about Chinese behavior here per se.

Let's not forget that we enabled China's rise. People within western governments who committed this crime are not held accountable for this blunder.

Now they are gearing us for what appears to be at very least economic conflict but likely a war. This is very concerning.

small concessions to incentivize trade and development of the world.

FYI we don't do this btw

[–] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today -2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

LMAO, China has been playing games with currency values and undercutting electronics manufacturers for decades.

FYI we don’t do this btw

In 1979, President Carter proposed a Trade Agreement that changed China to favored trader status with much lower tariffs across the board, and in return China agreed to a cap on textile output so as not to flood the market with cheaper goods than the USA was producing.

The 1980s saw even more favorable deals in exchange for similar restrictions as Reagan was eager to work with China.

Trade broke down in the 1990s over China committing crimes against their own people, broadcasted live across the entire world.

In 2000 President Clinton helped China enter the WTO to renew trade again.

And in return they spent the last 24 years shitting the bed, doing everything in their power to mess with any market they can, like sharks drawn to blood.

[–] sunzu@kbin.run 2 points 4 months ago

From my perspective it looks like US "spent the last 24 years shitting the bed" while enabling this behavior. Again, people who made these decisions are not held accountable.

Fuck china and all but poor leadership is primary reason why we are here... with china being a bad faith actor being no 2.