[stego-tech]

I mean, they're just cribbing what America did, and what the British Empire did before that.

It's a disgusting playbook, but it's also an effective one if you're a state trying to exert control over important players or entities.

[catgary]

I think you need to give some concrete examples, considering the US happily let its companies offshore a lot of work to China over the years, and Chinese funds own large chunks of American companies.

[pleurotus]

? The united states have blocked exports by a Dutch company to China, and somehow got away with it.

[stego-tech]

Okay!

* The US and UK propped up the Iranian Shah to help western oil interests: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état

* US Export Controls basically handcuff anyone of import involved in creating anything of value to the state: https://www.investopedia.com/u-s-export-restrictions-6753407

* We continue to embargo Cuba instead of letting it succeed or fail on its own merits - while also controlling their own land for a Black Ops prison and having attempted repeatedly to assassinate their leaders or create coups: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargo_against_...

* Our centralization of global finance and status as a reserve currency lets us dictate global policy on everything from Intellectual Property to National Defense, meaning companies generally have to "play ball" or the host country will incur penalties

* That time we overthrew the democratically-elected government of Guatemala because they imposed radical ideas like a minimum wage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_Guatemalan_coup_d%27état

* And that time we overthrew the democratically-elected socialist government in Chile to prop up exploitative labor practices and resource extraction: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d%27état

I can go on, but really, Wikipedia is right there. If you're looking for a specific analogue to "we kidnapped CEOs and demanded a foreign company unwind their merger", I don't think I can provide that right away; however, if instead you're looking for examples of "country used threats and force to foment an outcome favorable to its domestic policies", well then, boy howdy are there tons and tons of examples out there just a cursory search away.

[JPKab]

You basically just parroted a bunch of Howard Zinn agitprop and didn't cite a single example that was remotely similar to this specific incident, because you literally can't. What exactly is your motivation here, because it's certainly not truth-seeking.

[selectively]

Howard Zinn was a hero.

[ozgrakkurt]

Also you can add middle east for last 20-30 years.

Complete disregard for human life for profit.

[HDThoreaun]

None of this is similar to what is happening here

[jujube3]

Since you think Cuba and China are such nice places, perhaps try living there. You'll quickly find out about their "merits" (such as the fact that they execute dissidents).

[ebbi]

True, America just kills outside its borders (~37 million people since the 50s), so it's a lot safer!

[some_random]

Not even getting into the more dubious part of this claim, just because the British or Americans did it doesn't mean it's right or acceptable. If you disagree with that, you're implicitly pro slavery, pro penal expeditions, etc.

[pishpash]

There is this thing called implicit acceptability. If you really find it unacceptable you might want to start close to your circle of concern. Otherwise, pretty sure you find it acceptable by action.

Many, even most people are pro-slavery and pro-whatever as we speak, even paying to see it happen. They only mouth some useless moralizing words.

[stego-tech]

Oh, no, it's incredibly reprehensible what China's doing.

Just like it was reprehensible that America propped up the Iranian shah to ensure western oil interests were served. And reprehensible that the British Empire got the Chinese addicted to Opium to force more favorable trade agreements. Also reprehensible is the Cuban blockade imposed by America, which has prohibited the country from thriving or failing on its own merits and forced suffering onto its people.

It's all reprehensible, and it should all be held up lest folks get this notion that America is this infallible savior who can do no wrong. It's bad, and it should never happen, but it does and it will so long as people keep buying into Nationalist narratives like these.

[some_random]

You find it reprehensible but can't _just_ say that, you have to justify it with "and also the Americans and British did it". Yeah right.

[owebmaster]

Why does that bother you tho? Not having the moral ground changes the argument?

[BobbyJo]

It just makes it weird. When the US does something bad and people go "but CHINA!" it's also weird.

[some_random]

Because it's very obvious whataboutism.

[owebmaster]

Sure and what's the problem with that?

If you can't explain why country A doing X is bad but country B doing similar thing isn't it probably means you don't have a good argument.

[dublinstats]

[flagged]

[godelski]

I'm really unfamiliar with this playbook and how America has used it. Do you have any examples? I can't seem to find any