I dont have to try. Theyre selling everything to tye chinese already. Acting like china 2ont use these for military opperations when needed is just stupid
Chinese firms are present in over a third of all African port developments, some of which COULD be used for expanded Chinese naval presence on the continent.
wooooow it could be used jesus christ we need to stop that.
It does if youre literate. Thats a tall ask on here though.
China gains as much as $13 in trade revenues for every $1 invested in ports. A firm holding an operating lease or concession agreement reaps not only the financial benefits of all trade passing through that port but can also control access
Chinese firms hold operating concessions in 10 African ports. Despite the risks over loss of control, the trend on the continent is toward privatizing
Ports in which Chinese firms have equity arrangements provide similar leverage over port operations. Notably, under China’s technical standards for “military civil fusion” (junmin ronghe; 军民融合), many Chinese state owned commercial shipping and civilian air cargo capabilities meet military specifications for defense logistics purposes.
China gains, so does the countries it trades with. Nobody is performing charity here, but mutual cooperation. You keep confusing potential for millitarization with active domination, because you’re working backwards from the conclusion that China is trying to dominate Africa and looking for any evidence to confirm that for you. Looking at the actual material facts, though, this is far from the truth.
I think it is more that Americans are so used to extractive austerity and warfunding/fighting that we’ve completely forgot that economies can build civil society.
I have read, and China is absolutely not doing “the #ame thing just through financial means.” Financial domination secured with millitant means is the western method. China is not debt trapping poor African nations. We can see that this isn’t the case when we can observe countries in BRI engaging in rapid development and industrializing, and this is confirmed by China forgiving tons of debt. The goal of China isn’t to make countries reliant on them, or to earn money from debt, it’s because China gains personally through mutual development. Here are some articles debunking the “debt trap” myth:
There are many more examples I can use. China isn’t doing this out of the goodness of their own heart, but because they stand to gain from mutual development. A more developed global south means China is less reliant on the US Empire as a customer, provides new avenues to facilitate trade, and creates more markets for customers. The west harvests the global south for cheap labor and resources, and we can see hard comparisons in data between BRI participants and those imperialized by the west to see fundamentally different results.
It’s clear at this point: participation in BRI results in sustained and rapid development and mutual cooperation, and working with the west results in sustained impoverishment. It appears that you believe any cooperation between more developed and less developed countries is inherently imperialist, and impossible to be mutually beneficial. I’d like to see proof.
The only thing clear is if yoy do business with them they will take control of whatever it is they build. And acti g like they wont use it for military means when needed is a childs mentality.
Linking a bunch of people fearmongering about China’s increasing presense in Africa doesn’t actually mean this is to take away sovereignty from African countries. China gains from this mutual cooperation, but so do African countries, and unlike the west China doesn’t force trade at the barrel of a gun. That’s part of why it’s mutally beneficial, and results in development in Africa, vs underdevelopment and western enrichment.
All this really proves is that you have a deeply chauvanistic view of China, assuming that every country is as evil as the west. The simple reason why China isn’t economically compelled to imperialize is because it isn’t dominated by finance capital, and thus prioritizes long-term results. It’s simply better for everyone for their to be mutual cooperation, but western countries are dominated by the profit motive and finance capital, which compels them to take short term gains via looting the global south.
I suggest you read the articles I have already linked, they help debunk the fearmongering from your gish-gallop.
Territorial dispute with the Philippines (not “philipenes”) does not mean China is imperialist, nor does it mean they have a more “submissive and obedient population.” Can you elaborate on that last part, because it sounds like orientalism.
No. Its not. Go read about their lease agreements. Theyre doing the same thing just through financial means.
Construction projects =/= military occupation, try harder
https://africacenter.org/spotlight/china-port-development-africa/
I dont have to try. Theyre selling everything to tye chinese already. Acting like china 2ont use these for military opperations when needed is just stupid
wooooow it could be used jesus christ we need to stop that.
Your car could in theory be used to run over 100s of pedestrian and commit manslaughter! THAT MAKES YOU A TERRORIST!!!
The finger that you are using to point at me could be used to fire a gun. You’re the murderer here.
This does absolutely nothing to support your dumbass claims, try again
It does if youre literate. Thats a tall ask on here though.
China gains as much as $13 in trade revenues for every $1 invested in ports. A firm holding an operating lease or concession agreement reaps not only the financial benefits of all trade passing through that port but can also control access
Chinese firms hold operating concessions in 10 African ports. Despite the risks over loss of control, the trend on the continent is toward privatizing
Ports in which Chinese firms have equity arrangements provide similar leverage over port operations. Notably, under China’s technical standards for “military civil fusion” (junmin ronghe; 军民融合), many Chinese state owned commercial shipping and civilian air cargo capabilities meet military specifications for defense logistics purposes.
You just make a thing up and attach it to a vague hypothetical scenario you can’t even imagine into words
And your link is supposed to support that ‘if you’re literate’?
Log off until you can calm down to a point that you’re thinking about what you say before you press the reply button
China gains, so does the countries it trades with. Nobody is performing charity here, but mutual cooperation. You keep confusing potential for millitarization with active domination, because you’re working backwards from the conclusion that China is trying to dominate Africa and looking for any evidence to confirm that for you. Looking at the actual material facts, though, this is far from the truth.
🤡
You’ve got nothing and you know it
I think it is more that Americans are so used to extractive austerity and warfunding/fighting that we’ve completely forgot that economies can build civil society.
“go read this thing I haven’t read, I assume it supports my argument”
Me telling people to read Capital
Join comrade @oscardejarjayes@hexbear.net 2026 Capital reading group! They just started, you can absolutely catch up!
You have the perseverance of a saint
🫡
I have read, and China is absolutely not doing “the #ame thing just through financial means.” Financial domination secured with millitant means is the western method. China is not debt trapping poor African nations. We can see that this isn’t the case when we can observe countries in BRI engaging in rapid development and industrializing, and this is confirmed by China forgiving tons of debt. The goal of China isn’t to make countries reliant on them, or to earn money from debt, it’s because China gains personally through mutual development. Here are some articles debunking the “debt trap” myth:
Five Imperialist Myths About China’s Role in Africa
China debt trap? PH an ‘expert in bad loans,’ Locsin says
Deborah Brautigam Debunks the Chinese Debt Trap Theory in New Research Paper
China’s Debt Relief for Africa: Emerging Deliberations
There are many more examples I can use. China isn’t doing this out of the goodness of their own heart, but because they stand to gain from mutual development. A more developed global south means China is less reliant on the US Empire as a customer, provides new avenues to facilitate trade, and creates more markets for customers. The west harvests the global south for cheap labor and resources, and we can see hard comparisons in data between BRI participants and those imperialized by the west to see fundamentally different results.
It’s clear at this point: participation in BRI results in sustained and rapid development and mutual cooperation, and working with the west results in sustained impoverishment. It appears that you believe any cooperation between more developed and less developed countries is inherently imperialist, and impossible to be mutually beneficial. I’d like to see proof.
https://africacenter.org/spotlight/china-port-development-africa/
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3335506/skin-game-china-pivots-operating-african-railways-ports-funding-shift
https://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australianoutlook/harbors-of-power-how-chinas-african-ports-are-shaping-indias-ocean-strategy/
https://www.extremarationews.com/post/china-s-expanding-military-footprint-presence-and-strategy-in-the-red-sea-mediterranean-and-north
https://www.enr.com/articles/60580-china-port-construction-in-africa-raises-concern-about-military-use
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W3Ek6HZ5nD4&t=670
https://newsletter.boundlessdiscovery.com/p/ports-of-power-china-s-expanding-grip-on-africa-s-trade-gateways
The only thing clear is if yoy do business with them they will take control of whatever it is they build. And acti g like they wont use it for military means when needed is a childs mentality.
Linking a bunch of people fearmongering about China’s increasing presense in Africa doesn’t actually mean this is to take away sovereignty from African countries. China gains from this mutual cooperation, but so do African countries, and unlike the west China doesn’t force trade at the barrel of a gun. That’s part of why it’s mutally beneficial, and results in development in Africa, vs underdevelopment and western enrichment.
All this really proves is that you have a deeply chauvanistic view of China, assuming that every country is as evil as the west. The simple reason why China isn’t economically compelled to imperialize is because it isn’t dominated by finance capital, and thus prioritizes long-term results. It’s simply better for everyone for their to be mutual cooperation, but western countries are dominated by the profit motive and finance capital, which compels them to take short term gains via looting the global south.
I suggest you read the articles I have already linked, they help debunk the fearmongering from your gish-gallop.
Five Imperialist Myths About China’s Role in Africa
China debt trap? PH an ‘expert in bad loans,’ Locsin says
Deborah Brautigam Debunks the Chinese Debt Trap Theory in New Research Paper
China’s Debt Relief for Africa: Emerging Deliberations
Sure thing. Tell the philipenes about how nice chinas miltary is
https://youtu.be/XfqFUjpOrLE
https://youtu.be/2LalZrkKxo4
Didnt realize this was an ml instance. Theyre no different just more structured in their excution and a much more submissive and obedient population.
Territorial dispute with the Philippines (not “philipenes”) does not mean China is imperialist, nor does it mean they have a more “submissive and obedient population.” Can you elaborate on that last part, because it sounds like orientalism.
meanwhile in the real world https://jasonhickel.substack.com/p/is-china-doing-colonialism-in-africa