Charging a drowning man "whatever the market will bear" for a life preserver. Plus the people don't make those deals, self interested borugeious do.
The cool thing about Justice is it's often extremely simple. "Nuance" is usually just whining about why the status quo is inevitable and change is futile.
"Agreement under coercion, duress, or from subterfuge is not actual consent."
Just cut straight through the lies their premise is based on: the deals come under the threat of violence from the imperial hegemon, out of sheer material desperation, or through trickery and corruption from comprador fucks, all of which invalidate the idea that there is genuine agreement.
It's identical to libertarian logic that all consented contract work is good and defensible. The real trick there is they just want you to avoid thinking about things like, "work or starve" and imbalances of power creating levels of coercion.
So if they think badly of libertarians, you can just make the comparison.
If they like libertarians... actually I'd still just make fun of them for being libertarian.
"If a person hands me their wallet when I ask, while holding a gun that's ok because they agreed to it?"
At some point you just gotta face that if people feel that their treats would be threatened, they will do any and all mental gymnastics to justify anything.
How do you counter the assertion: "Asymmetrical trade deals and resource extraction are justified because client states approve of it" ?
all bourgeois transactions are coerced. you should counter this the same way that you counter reactionaries who claim that the relationship between owner and worker is "consensual" because the worker "freely" fills out an application and "asks" the business owner for a job, as though the job itself were an object of desire, rather than something the worker seeks out because the alternative (homelessness, poverty, starvation, death) is even worse. No worker wants to be exploited by a capitalist for surplus value.
As for client states and imperial core states... well it's similar, just on a bigger level. But you also have the element of the "comprador bourgeoisie" (who fuck over their own nations' development to feed superprofits to the imperial core capitalist) who are distinct from the "national bourgeoisie" (who exploit the proletariat but still perform the true historical role of the bourgeoisie which is to break up pre-capitalist economic formations and develop productive forces.)
Who in the client states approve of it? Is it the workers, the farmers, the people working 14 hour days in sweatshops? Or is it the bourgeois class of that country, the rich landowners and the factory owners?
The baby nodded, so you can't really call what I did with the candy 'stealing'. Also, those beads are super special, don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Furthermore, the reason you feel compelled to put all the cash in the bag has nothing to do with what I happen to be waving around, lucky coincidence!
