What happened to free trade?

permalink
report
reply
37 points

It’s only free trade if you’re trading with the FREEST COUNTRY ON EARTH 🦅🦅🦅

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

Free trade only ever meant that non-US countries must reduce or remove tariffs and remove capital controls vis a vis the US, so that US capitalists may exploit to their heart’s content.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Every country is absolutely free to trade with the US as much as they want*. Perfectly free trade!

*As long as the trade balance favours the US.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

You see, free trade is only desired when you’re ahead not when you’re behind.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

International transfers of weapons and equipment needed to make weapons has always been excluded and under additional restrictions.

Edit: Arms Export Control Act (AECA)

This is the reason why Microsoft can only sell the Windows OS to Iran if they remove strong encryption support (like newer versions of TLS). It’s nothing new at all.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Meanwhile, 40% of US DoD weapons system and infrastructure supply chains rely on Chinese semiconductors. 😂 https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/65e61e6392aba0fa1dba723e/66104c1d4e3ae7809bcd8082_Govini_2024_Numbers-Matter.pdf

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

Weapons of mass destruction rhetoric ye talkin’… I say its mere pretense…

You seem the type to look at any Global-South country buying ammonium-nitrate fertilizer, who happens to be anti-U.S hegemony, and claim they’re making bombs out of 'em

What weapons exactly?

Mobile electronics, computers, GPS? they’re tools to achieve military strategic goals, but not necessarily military

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I don’t think China has any issues producing electronics, computers, or GPS. LMAO.

Here are the details of the restrictions - https://www.csis.org/analysis/balancing-ledger-export-controls-us-chip-technology-china

We’re talking about chips used pretty much exclusively for Artificial Intelligence use - which China uses to abuse human rights of its citizens and to develop weapons which threaten Taiwan, the Philippines, and all free trade moving through the South China Sea.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Walter White Face: Jesse what the fuck are you talking about?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Arms Export Control Act (AECA)

This is the reason why Microsoft can only sell the Windows OS to Iran if they remove strong encryption support (like newer versions of TLS). It’s nothing new at all - been around as long as I’ve been alive. Free trade rules only apply when national security rules don’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

this is like banning sugar because it is an ingredient in rocket fuel.

Don’t lie to yourself, this is proteccionism.

permalink
report
parent
reply
67 points

Yes US! Embargo every other nation on the planet! Do it! I’m sure it’ll go great for you!

permalink
report
reply
35 points

If everyone is embargoed then no one is. Let the US price itself out of existence lol.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Oh no true at all, somebody sure is. The US would functionally be.
They aren’t far off effectively sanctioning themselves at this point.

permalink
report
parent
reply
62 points

Shares in Tokyo Electron fell 7.5%, leading a drop in Japan’s Nikkei 225 Stock Average. Fellow chip gear providers including Lasertec Corp. and Screen Holdings Co. also ranked among the market’s biggest decliners. ASML’s stock was similarly down 9.9% in Amsterdam, even as the company reported better-than-expected second-quarter bookings. Shares of Applied Materials Inc., Lam Research Corp. and KLA Corp. — the three biggest American makers of chip equipment — also tumbled on Wednesday. Applied Materials, the largest of the three, fell as much as 7.8% in its worst intraday decline since November.

I don’t think the drop in share prices matter that much. The dips from previous announcements of sanctions went away quickly, because the chip industry overall is in a very strong position globally.

The administration is in a tenuous position. US companies feel that restrictions on exports to China have unfairly punished them and are pushing for changes. Allies, meanwhile, see little reason to alter their policies when the US presidential election is just a few months away.

This is really the crux of the issue, and not so much geopolitics. Some of the US companies that pushed for the sanctions (like Micron tech) have themselves suffered from Chinese retaliation (Micron tech “mysteriously” failed its cybersecurity review in China, and China has clamped down on germanium exports).

The American chip-equipment makers — Applied Materials, Lam and KLA — have been pressing their case in a series of recent meetings with US officials, according to people familiar with the situation. They have argued that current trade policies are backfiring, damaging American semiconductor companies while failing to halt Chinese progress as much as the US government hoped. But the companies don’t want the administration to use FDPR. They fear it will provoke Japan and the Netherlands to become defiant and stop cooperating.

Amazing to see western corporate interests just openly dictating government policy. The rest of the article just plainly lays out which company is telling its government to do what. We’ve dropped even the pretenses.

permalink
report
reply
54 points

Its insane how much our favourite capitalist roader was vindicated holy shit. All that’s left is to press the communism button.

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

Western leftists criticizing Deng for his shitty chess moves when it turns out he was playing Go the whole time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Hey that’s my line!

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

I’m not too familiar with Deng. Could you explain more of his geo-politics? Thanks in advance comrade.

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

Short version: he opened china to investment from western capital. The plan was to use western capital to fund the construction of factories with the condition of technology sharing. Gambit was capitalism would willing sell all of its advantages in order to gain profit. The risk being that capitalists would have sway in China (and leftists constantly purity testing China).

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

for more check out https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/ it’s not specifically about Dengism but should give you more than enough context to understand it

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

This has a lot of introductory info on SWCC (Socialism With Chinese Characteristics)

This is pry the best introductory article on SWCC:

The long game and it’s contradictions.

and a good introduction to Deng is his interview with Oriana Fallaci.

More of his writings are on https://dengxiaopingworks.wordpress.com/

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

I’m not sure I would call him vindicated. He definitely bought into some of the free market economics of the 1980s which could have ended really badly. Reform and opening up only really succeeded because the Chinese government was willing to slow the pace of reform when Deng was pushing them to move faster. He also had China invade Vietnam which was a huge L.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

True, the Sino Vietnamese war was an L, as expected of post Sino Soviet split Chinese foreign policy. And yeah I had the same concerns over liberalizing too fast, esp in the Jiang and Hu era, but it seems like that’s been reigned in too. Trust the process I guess.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Tbf only left-deviationists like the gang of four called im that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Capitalist roader (affectionate)

permalink
report
parent
reply

Amazing to see western corporate interests just openly dictating government policy

You mean like the time the CIA couped Guatemala in 1954 for banana companies?

permalink
report
parent
reply
38 points

Yeah I guess. There’s still something about seeing the fuckery with your own eyes. It’s one thing reading about banana dictatorships in the history books, and another to live through a tech dictatorship right now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I don’t think their pleas will work. They’re not important or big enough. NVIDIA went begging for the US to let them continue to profit from China and they’re way more important and they said no and the head of sanctions basically directly threatened them saying she’d adjust sanctions daily to prevent them getting around them with new products if necessary. Though financial capital has had and still has some interests in China, industrial capital in the west increasingly doesn’t benefit from continued trade and in fact as much of it is defense adjacent, benefits from fear-mongering, sanctions, and increasing tensions.

I have little doubt the US will continue to press the sanctions button harder and harder on China. They will hurt their own industries but help them briefly with short-term protectionism benefits. In the end though it will force China to develop their own which will hurt the west but that’s deferred pain and they hope to have a better plan or position by then.

permalink
report
parent
reply
61 points

How to make other countries abandon the dollar 101

permalink
report
reply
14 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
45 points

They can’t until they can. Nothing stays the same forever.

permalink
report
parent
reply

US copium trying to sanction China by proxy. China already has advanced semiconductor tech.

permalink
report
reply
9 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

Good post, but disagree on the last bit. China has been building alternatives to the U.S. model for a reason — they can offer their services to other countries alienated by the U.S. system (remaining AES countries, the Global South) and anyone else who sees the obvious writing on the wall and is in a position where they don’t have to continue bowing down to their dying master

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points
*

Exactly. I don’t buy into the pessimism because China has been building its own alternatives to Amazon and Google for precisely such a scenario. And yes, the West may not adopt them but the world is bigger than just this increasingly insular and self-isolated West, and the rest of the world will get the best of both worlds. The global south will have no issues using Chinese platforms in parallel with Western platforms, and eventually, hopefully, even making their own. That is just one of the many benefits of multipolarity.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

I don’t understand this analysis. Surely it would be easier for the Americans to control and damage the Chinese economy if Xi Jinping and Chinese business leaders were typing out emails and memos on backdoored Microsoft software or iPhones. Forcing Huawei to develop their own tech via hostility means that the Chinese market is lost forever and now the American security apparatus has to deal with an opaque ecosystem they can’t backdoor.

I’ve heard people say that the October Hamas attacks on Israel were so surprising because they were planned entirely via Chinese tech and therefore was not picked up by Zionist elint. I don’t necessarily think that’s true or even the only reason, but it’s not an implausible example of how forcing China to make its own systems is a huge own goal.

All this hostility has just made China more and more self sufficient. I just don’t see how that gives the US more leverage than a China which is completely dependent on Western tech.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

The result is that Huawei displaces all its domestic competitors within China, but the other companies are now also taking over Huawei’s share in the global market.

Other Chinese companies aren’t able to produce what Huawei is making, so what this means is that the largest Chinese domestic buyers (the military, the bureaucracy, the academy) are less and less dependent on international trade to function, making the Chinese state more resilient along multiple dimensions specifically because Huawei is building advanced tech.

The US can damage China’s economy as long as China continues to stay as a net exporter country

And it will essentially ALWAYS be a net exporter in pure dollar values because it has the second largest population in the world. It will always need to import low cost commodities like food and it will always be able to outproduce everyone on high priced commodities like electronics. There is really no risk of China being a net importer in the next century.

The vast majority of the businesses around the world are too deeply tied to the US controlled infrastructures like Amazon/Google

I think you overstate this. There are plenty of companies that use those infrastructures purely for commodity virtualization and seamlessly move been cloud providers based entirely on price, not on technological features. Then there’s the massive amount of infrastructure that is private and not on the cloud at all. They’re already locked in to domestic technology because American companies like IBM, EMC, and Oracle trapped them decades ago. Those people were never going to move their workloads to Chinese infrastructure, but if they have a presence in China they are absolutely going to buy Chinese hardware to build their new private infrastructure.

There are a set of companies that are on USA-based public cloud providers that are serving USA-based customers and they would never want to be on Chinese-located tech because it’s too far from their markets. Then there’s a set of companies on USA-based public cloud providers that serve AsiaPac and use AWS/Google/Microsoft because those companies have physical presence in China. China has the power to influence exactly how those data centers work and in fact many of those data centers are already contract data centers meaning they are Chinese companies under the hood providing the facilities for USA companies for their presence in AsiaPac.

In short, the number of computing dollars that could go to China but won’t because of the USA is going to be very small relative to the total market size. The much larger dollar values are in which chips get used where.

permalink
report
parent
reply

GenZedong

!genzedong@lemmygrad.ml

Create post

This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.

This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.

We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.

Rules:

  • No bigotry, anti-communism, pro-imperialism or ultra-leftism (anti-AES)
  • We support indigenous liberation as the primary contradiction in settler colonies like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel
  • If you post an archived link (excluding archive.org), include the URL of the original article as well
  • Unless it’s an obvious shitpost, include relevant sources
  • For articles behind paywalls, try to include the text in the post
  • Mark all posts containing NSFW images as NSFW (including things like Nazi imagery)

Community stats

  • 79

    Monthly active users

  • 3.6K

    Posts

  • 31K

    Comments