Well, no. About the only people calling out anti-China propaganda in the U.S. are socialists. Not all socialists are calling it out, but the only ones calling it out are socialists.
Jeffrey Sachs isn't a socialist and he was calling it out. There was a thread on r/worldnews about the US being the greatest threat to democracy the other day. I checked some of the profiles of people calling it out and many of them didn't seem socialist.
Okay, setting aside absolutes: you're far more likely to find socialists calling this out than non-socialists. And as I outlined above, I'm a lot more confident that socialists aren't going to backslide as soon as the next breathless report comes out.
What I fear is that in creating this "10 million mass", you end up not creating anti-imperialists, but more fervent ideological enemies to China. You turn an apolitical lib into a "socialist" but in so doing create an ideological cold warrior that's far more useful to imperialists. If I had to choose if some lib were to remain apolitical or turn into a breadtube type, I'd rather they remain passive and apolitical.
Apolitical folks are often at least supportive of imperialism, though -- they're not political, but they'll participate in all sorts of patriotic stuff precisely because they believe that transcends ordinary politics. They'll cheer on the flag at the 4th of July and support the troops and casually demonize The Bad Countries if only because "America, fuck yeah" is such an easy, uncontroversial position that doesn't even require any conventional politics to hold.
We're not going to get to anti-imperialism through political ignorance and apathy. And I don't see how making someone a socialist focused on domestic issues will automatically make them an ideological cold warrior on foreign issues. That just doesn't add up. There's all sorts of anti-imperialist material they'll at least run into when reading up on socialism, and there are all sorts of anti-imperialist socialists they'll start to hear more frequently.
Well, no. About the only people calling out anti-China propaganda in the U.S. are socialists. Not all socialists are calling it out, but the only ones calling it out are socialists.
Jeffrey Sachs isn't a socialist and he was calling it out. There was a thread on r/worldnews about the US being the greatest threat to democracy the other day. I checked some of the profiles of people calling it out and many of them didn't seem socialist.
Okay, setting aside absolutes: you're far more likely to find socialists calling this out than non-socialists. And as I outlined above, I'm a lot more confident that socialists aren't going to backslide as soon as the next breathless report comes out.
What I fear is that in creating this "10 million mass", you end up not creating anti-imperialists, but more fervent ideological enemies to China. You turn an apolitical lib into a "socialist" but in so doing create an ideological cold warrior that's far more useful to imperialists. If I had to choose if some lib were to remain apolitical or turn into a breadtube type, I'd rather they remain passive and apolitical.
Apolitical folks are often at least supportive of imperialism, though -- they're not political, but they'll participate in all sorts of patriotic stuff precisely because they believe that transcends ordinary politics. They'll cheer on the flag at the 4th of July and support the troops and casually demonize The Bad Countries if only because "America, fuck yeah" is such an easy, uncontroversial position that doesn't even require any conventional politics to hold.
We're not going to get to anti-imperialism through political ignorance and apathy. And I don't see how making someone a socialist focused on domestic issues will automatically make them an ideological cold warrior on foreign issues. That just doesn't add up. There's all sorts of anti-imperialist material they'll at least run into when reading up on socialism, and there are all sorts of anti-imperialist socialists they'll start to hear more frequently.