183

90%, of labor driving the world economy are carried out by workers in the global South. Any political theory that neglects to center these workers as key agents of revolutionary change is misguided. (lemmy.ml)

submitted 2 months ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net

28 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/19526537

source https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-49687-y

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] lil_tank@hexbear.net 28 points 2 months ago

China in the 'global south' post 2008 is patently ridiculous. I really want to see what these percentages would say if China was included in the 'global north'.

China did not industrialize on the basis of a colonial empire so putting it in the global south makes sense. You could define the global north/south as a rich/poor division but it isn't super useful in terms of recent historical material dynamics since the south will eventually get richer despite colonialism while the north will struggle because it doesn't know how to develop without colonialism

[-] impartial_fanboy@hexbear.net 4 points 2 months ago

China did not industrialize on the basis of a colonial empire

It didn't industrialize directly from a colonial empire, yes. However the capital that flowed into it certainly was, if China had not opened itself up to foreign capital it would not have industrialized anywhere near as fast as it did.

since the south will eventually get richer despite colonialism

Until they saturate their markets and start to look outside their borders for new markets.

while the north will struggle because it doesn't know how to develop without colonialism

Colonialism is a product of capitalism, if you got rid of the entire global north but let the global south continue capital accumulation they would recreate colonialism, by necessity. No one knows how to develop without colonialism because no one knows how to develop without capitalism.

[-] lil_tank@hexbear.net 9 points 2 months ago

However the capital that flowed into it certainly was, if China had not opened itself up to foreign capital it would not have industrialized anywhere near as fast as it did.

They found a strategy to avoid being cold-wared by the global north, that's not something a global north country does by definition

Until they saturate their markets and start to look outside their borders for new markets.

It's not just capitalism in a vacuum, it's a set of specific things that systematically happened in capitalist global north nations because they were dictatorships of the bourgeoisie. The phenomenon includes monopolies, banks and financial markets, three things that China is actively keeping under control.

[-] Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 2 months ago

Colonialism is a product of capitalism, if you got rid of the entire global north but let the global south continue capital accumulation they would recreate colonialism

The first statement is true, but the second statement does not follow from it. The European colonial empires, and the American financial empire all formed under very specific historical circumstances.

The removal of the global north by magic will not only reshape the entire world, but will new colonial empires form in the aftermath? On what basis can we say yes?

The global north citizenry projects its imperialist realism onto all humans.

[-] impartial_fanboy@hexbear.net 1 points 2 months ago

The dynamics of capital. It's a given, which is why I caveated it with 'if they continue capital accumulation'.

Could they be nicer about? Perhaps, but that would be due to technological development allowing them to carry out their exploitation with less direct violence, not because they are somehow morally superior for having been colonized. Just as the American Empire is/was less brutal than the British.