• zifnab25 [he/him, any]
    ·
    3 years ago

    I tried to explain third worldist thought to a Redditor over there once and they called it “reactionary”.

    Reactionaries come from outside the Imperial Core, and the farther outside the Core you live, the more Reactionary you become.

    Just admit that you have a nice job in the imperial core and aren’t prepared to go though the rationale of why that is, and what global equity would mean.

    What's been so incredibly about the last 40 years is that we've seen Maoism play out on a global stage. The region of China transforms from a fractured patchwork of colonies into a single industrialized super-state. And what is the result? Extraordinarily cheap consumer goods, a surge in global GDP, staggering leaps in technological progress, and a global tide of human development that has lifted virtually every single ship touching the Pacific Rim.

    Global Equity means Global Prosperity. We are far better off living in a world in which every nation enjoys the benefits provided within an imperial nation. Not only does it fail to cost us anything but our pride, it yields enormous dividends inside a single generation.

    The real price of global equity is imperial hegemony. No single world-spanning currency printed out of the US Mint. English no longer being the lingua franca on a World Stage. American CEOs no longer operating impudently as both global taskmasters and cultural evangelicals. No more imprinting Americanism upon the world as a condition for accessing networks of international trade and travel.

    That's all we're giving up. And the vast majority of us never see the benefits this hegemony provides.

    • ClimateChangeAnxiety [he/him, they/them]
      ·
      3 years ago

      If global wealth were equally divided, the median American would be nearly twice as wealthy as they are now. That mostly shows just how bad wealth inequality is in the US itself. The only countries that would actually be worse off are Klanada and a few countries in E*rope.