[statuslover9000]

The Sinophobic culture at Anthropic is worrying. Say what you will about authoritarianism, but China’s non-imperialist foreign policy means their economy is less reliant on a military-industrial complex.

All they have to do is continue to pump out exponentially more solar panels and the petrodollar will fall, possibly taking our reserve currency status with it. The U.S. seems more likely to start a hot war in the name of “democracy” as it fails to gracefully metabolize the end of its geopolitical dominance, and Dario’s rhetoric pushes us further in that direction.

[cthalupa]

Look. I think the Chinese AI companies are doing a lot of good. I'm glad they exist. I'm glad they're relatively advanced. I don't think the entire nation of China is a bunch of villains. I don't think the US, even before the current era, is a bunch of do-gooders.

But China has some of the most imperialist policies in the world. They are just as imperialist as Russia or America. Military contracts are still massive business.

I also believe the petrodollar will fall, but it isn't going to be because China built exponentially more solar panels.

[nl]

I think a lot of the conflict about what imperialist policies means is different framing.

For better or worse, inside this the border in this map China has fairly imperialist policies. Outside it not so much: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map_of_National_Shame

That's different to the expansionist imperial policies of Spain in the 1500s or Britain in the 1700s. It also affects a very large proportion of the world's population. That Wikipedia page has some good links for further reading about this.

But it's an important point when considering China's place in the world.

[cthalupa]

We're talking about the modern world, though. China's imperialism over the past half century is not significantly different from any other major world power. The choices we have aren't 1500s Spain or 1700s Britain vs. 2000s China.

And Belt and Road is the Marshall plan writ large, and it was considered to be one of the largest imperialist plans ever by the USA, and B&R covers many many countries outside of that map. You'll notice all of these loans they've offered have very favorable terms for them - it's arguably many times more exploitative than the Marshall plan.

[teyopi]

> But China has some of the most imperialist policies in the world.

Citation needed?

US and allies have invaded or intervened in 20+ countries in last 20 years in the name of "western values" where values means $$$$ and hegemony.

Educate me please with a comparison of what China has done to be "some of the most imperialist policies"?

[ninjagoo]

> Educate me please with a comparison of what China has done to be "some of the most imperialist policies"?

Tibet occupation. Taiwan encirclement and ongoing military exercises. Strong-arming African and Asian countries that made the mistake of signing up for belt & road. Tianenmen Square. Illegal Foreign Police Stations. Uyghurs/Xinjiang genocide and concentration camps. Repeated invasion and occupation of Indian territory in North East and North West. The Great Firewall of China - occupation and suppression of its own populations. Ongoing Han settlement of Tibet, Xinjiang and other ethnic regions. Violent destruction of Hong Kong democracy (that was condition of handover). Spratly Islands occupation. Attacks on Filipino shipping and coast guard. Ongoing attacks on Japan's Senkaku Islands.

[cthalupa]

Tibet Hong Kong / Macau Taiwan Everything constantly in the South China Sea Belt and Roads is effectively the Marshall Plan but even bigger - Africa being the major example, but also Eastern Europe, parts of the middle east, etc. Over 100 countries. This exact playbook is what sets up the infrastructure and reasons for military intervention at a later date - protecting your investments.

[sinuhe69]

Maybe it's time to learn some facts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_Wars

[chipgap98]

In what world does China have a non-imperialist foreign policy?

[statuslover9000]

For example, China operates 1 foreign military base, in Djibouti. How many do you think the U.S. has in the South China Sea alone?

Beyond that, how many people has China killed in foreign military conflicts in the past 40 years? How many foreign governments have they overthrown?

Instead of all this, they’ve used their resources not only to become the world’s economic superpower but also to lift 800 million people out of poverty, accounting for 75% of the world’s reduction during the past 4 decades. The U.S. has added 10 million during that same time period.

[8note]

why use 40 years as the example? its a pretty convenient framing to exclude the foreign governments its toppled. eg. tibet.

the government in exile remains the government in exile.

youd have some standing if china dropped control over its imperial holdings, rather than pretend theyre part of china

[statuslover9000]

First off, I consider the post-Mao / starting with Deng era of Chinese government to be the most relevant when considering who they “are” as a country now.

However, I’d still maintain that before that, China’s foreign policy was more focused on maintaining territorial sovereignty against the threat of Western imperialism vs. focused on expansion or foreign influence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_foreign_relations_o...

Meanwhile, the entire territory of the U.S. is predicated on one of history’s largest genocides, and a consistently expansionary foreign policy on top of that.

[hrn_frs]

Historically speaking, he's right. China has never had an expansionist foreign policy.

[mobilefriendly]

Tibet, the Philippines, and Taiwan would like to have a word, not to mention Chinese military action in support of its North Korea puppet state, and wars with Vietnam and India.

[sinuhe69]

Are you serious? Don't you know how many wars did China wage? It tried to assimilate Vietnam for 1000 years. The last large scale war against Vietnam was just 1979. In fact, China had started war with all its neighbors, with no exception.

[MiSeRyDeee]

Do me a favor and name one single country didn't have war with any of its neighbor.

[dpedu]

Nine-dash line?

[MiSeRyDeee]

In what world does China have a imperialist foreign policy?

[cthalupa]

The one we live in, where they have control over a wide swathe of land mass through imperialism and have actively resisted relinquishing it?

The one we live in, where they are constantly surpassing international law in international waters in the South China Sea?

The one we live in, where they are constantly rattling sabers at South Korea and Japan when it comes to military expansion?

The one we live in, where they brutally cracked down on Hong Kong when they did not abide by the 50 year one country two systems deal, not even making it half of the way through the agreed period?

The one we live in, where there is constant threat to Taiwan?

It may have been a lazy post you're responding to, but anyone that is paying attention to this topic enough to talk about it is going to either say 'Of course China is imperialist, the same as every other global power' or take some sort of tankie approach to justify it.

[sinuhe69]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_Wars

[MiSeRyDeee]

I'm well informed on all of these but no, if we compare to other global power like US or Russia, or historically British, France, Spain, etc, China is 100% not an imperialist or colonialist, not by a large margin. Those issues are largely exaggerated by media and anyone had a decent exposure to history and international politics wouldn't say they are the same.

[asciii]

I disagree on China. What would you call China's behavior[1] in the South China Sea with regards to fishing vessels and other non-military boats?

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzZrcqf826E

[MiSeRyDeee]

Sure China has some disputes with neighboring country in South China Sea, the worst conflict they had is fishing boats running into each other. 0 death toll last time I checked. Meanwhile US killed at least 126 people with alleged drug strike in the Caribbean Sea since last year, WITHOUT trial. Anyone believing these're equivalent imperialism activity is hypocrite at best.

[1] https://apnews.com/article/boat-strikes-military-death-toll-...

[jmyeet]

What China is doing in the South China Sea? The South China Sea.

Let's just compare to the Monroe Doctrine [1]. What this actually means has gone through several iterations by since I think Teddy Roosevelt's time, it's that the United States views the Americas (being North and South America) to be the sole domain of the United States.

This was a convenient excuse for any number of regime changes in Central and South America since 1945. The US almost started World War Three over Cuba in 1962 after the USSR retaliated to the US putting nuclear MRBMs in Turkey. We've starved Cuba for 60+ years for having the audacity to overthrow our puppet government and nationalize some mob casinos. Recently, we kidnapped the head of state of Venezuela because reasons.

But sure, let's focus on China militarizing its territorial waters.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroe_Doctrine

[maxglute]

Obviously self defense with nobel peace price worthy restraint.

Considering it's PRC claimed territory. Literally 100% of PRC claims are inherited from ROC, i.e. PRC has expanded no claims, and actively settled 12/14 land borders (most on earth) essentially all with 50%+ concessions, i.e. PRC ceded more land in negotiations. That OBJECTIVELY, makes PRC the most benevolent rising power in recorded history. Any gov losing land to so many border settlements is committing treason. Also note PCA ruling is not international law, so what PRC does in SCS is not even legally wrong (as in they legally can't be wrong since UNCLOS cannot rule on sovereignty). Or that PRC was last to militarize SCS islands (except Brunai who is good boi), and PRC conceded ROC/TW's original 11dash to 9dash, which even in SCS disputes makes PRC the only party to have made concessions.

PRC is objectively the LEAST imperialistic rising power, by actual non retarded definitions, i.e. expanding on territories outside it's claims, that PRC didn't even make, but again inherited from ROC when UN recognition changed.

[mobilefriendly]

You forgot Tibet and the Uyghurs https://worldwithoutgenocide.org/genocides-and-conflicts/gen...

[cthalupa]

> where they have control over a wide swathe of land mass through imperialism and have actively resisted relinquishing it?

Was referring to Tibet.

The Uyghurs are also a major problem from a social perspective but not directly related to imperalism/expansionism/military industrial complex stuff.

[econ]

Yes but the guy at the end of the street beats his wife too!

[cwillu]

“One country two systems” is definitionally not imperialism, and given that “One China” is still an internationally recognized thing, neither is Taiwan. “Imperialism” is not a synonym for “morally repugnant government policy”.

[cthalupa]

I can see the argument for Hong Kong. I don't agree, really, but I can understand it. Under the strictest of definitions, perhaps it isn't.

But Taiwan is very obviously a totally separate country no matter what fictions anyone employs. If you are trying to talk about the thin veneer of everyone going "Uh huh, sure, China, yep Taiwan is totally part of you, wink wink, nudge nudge" as somehow making China not imperialist when Taiwan basically lives under the perpetual threat of a Chinese military invasion and having their own democratic form of government overthrown and replaced with the CCP, then... I don't really know what to say.

I suppose we could argue about imperialism being more of an economic thing - in which case this all still holds up - China's investments in Africa are effectively the same playbook the US has run out in developing nations for years. The US learned it from prior imperialist nations but belts and roads is nearly a carbon copy of what the US has done in other places.

But let's look at what the original poster was actually talking about - saying that China is safe because they don't have a military industrial complex because they're not imperialist. The proper word to use, if we want to get down to the semantics of it all, would be expansionist - but it's still not true. China has the 2nd largest military industrial complex in the world, and the gap is shrinking every day between them and the US. And if you were to look at wartime capacity, where China's dual-use shipyards could be swapped to naval production instead of commercial, a huge portion of that gap disappears immediately.

[soundworlds]

100% agree. Any AI org that is that tied to a single nation's interest can only be detrimental in the long run.

I know "open-source" AI has its own risks, but with e.g. DeepSeek, people in all countries benefit. Americans benefit from it equally.

[xeckr]

I think the part about China is just about projecting alignment with the USG in hopes that this will result in Anthropic being treated more favourably by the current administration.

[hackyhacky]

> China’s non-imperialist foreign policy

Really? Is China non-imperialist regarding Taiwan and Tibet?

[jmyeet]

Taiwan is a matter of perspective. From the Chinese perspective, there was a civil war and the KMT lost. That's also the official position of the US, the EU and most countries in the world. It's called the One China policy. And China seems happy to maintain the status quo and leave the situation unresolved. Is it really imperialism to say that ultimately there will be reunification?

Even if you accept Tibet as imperialist, which is debatable, it was in 1950. You want to compare that to US imperialism, particularly since WW2 [1]? And I say "debatable" here because Tibet had a system that is charitably called "serfdom" where 90% of people couldn't own land but they did have some rights. However, they were the property of their lords and could be gifted or traded, you know, like property. There's another word for that: slavery.

It is 100% factually accurate to say that the People's Republica of China is not imperialist.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r...

[8note]

the treatment of Tibet and Xinjiang are entirely Han imperialism and colonisation.

the one china policy is imperialism

[nutjob2]

> China’s non-imperialist foreign policy

This is the China that is not only threatening to invade Taiwan but doing live fire exercises around the island and threatening and attempting to coerce Japan for suggesting saying it will go to its defense.

Your comment is ridiculous. It reads like satire.

[cwillu]

It wasn't that long ago that Taiwan claimed to be the legitimate government of China; given that China still maintains the reverse claim, it's not outrageous that it would consider an outside country's defense to be interference in an internal matter.

Whether or not that claim is legitimate, it is consistent with the concept of china having a non-imperialist foreign policy, and claims regarding that need to look elsewhere for supporting evidence.

[nutjob2]

While that rhetoric makes sense in the context of the history and politics of China and Taiwan, they have been independently governed nations for quite a while and have very different political systems, their own armies, etc. They are de-facto separate nations if nothing else.

I also note China's aggressive and violent colonization and expansive claims of the South China Sea.

Taking any nation/land/sea by force is imperialist, by definition.

[8note]

that claim is really about not resuming a war.

taiwan saying otherwise would immediately trigger an attack from the PRC.

its still imperialism that china is dominating a neighbor to require it ro state a certain position, especially when its very far from the defacto reality on the ground, that taiwan is clearly separate

[jmyeet]

Your comment reads like propaganda.

You know who else considers Taiwan to be part of the People's Republic of China? The US, the EU and in fact most countries in the world. It's called the One China policy. There are I believe 12 countries that have diplomatic relations with Taiwan.

The position of the PRC is that Taiwan will ultimately be reunified. That doesn't necessarily mean by military force. It doesn't even necessarily mean soon. The PRC famously takes a very long term view.

And those islands you mention are in the South China Sea.

[8note]

that is still imperialism: taking control of a colony and forcing a certain culture on its inhabitants