[Fwd: Re: [A-List] A Chinese Marxism view: Problems ofint'l.strategyfortoday's China]

["Henry C.K. Liu" <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: [A-List] A Chinese Marxism view: Problems
ofint'l.strategyfortoday's China
Date: 	Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:40:33 -0500
From: 	Henry C.K. Liu <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: 	The A-List <a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: 	<43F5D982.6090209@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<BAY108-F1605DB3A5D37ECF0FE516CC3F80@xxxxxxx>
<55945.193.220.90.6.1140261338.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



The Chinese-Vietnam conflict (not quite a war)  in 1979 was a border
dispute between too socialist nations both of which have not totally
shed their imperialistic characteristics. China did not do well in that
conflaict and the left in China was opposed to it.  The Chinese-Soviet
border conflict was of the same nature. But in both cases, China was
disputing borders left over by Western imperialism thus in that sense
China was less imperialistic.

Henry C.K. Liu

bar@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> I dont see how a reply to a request by the Afghans to the USSR to help
> support their regime in the face of an assault by the US proxies can be
> construed as "imperialism." The evidence is clear the Afghan war drained
> the USSR and it did not benefit one whit from that war. Are you saying
> that any time a socialist country comes to aid of another and sends troops
> there that it is engaging in imperialism? Then what was the Chinese war
> agaisnt Vietnam in the mid 70's all about?
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> > What was the "imperialism" involved in Afghanistan?
> >
> > The Soviets neither exploited nor plundered resources. Nor did they
> > attempt
> > to control the government.
> >
> > On the other hand, take a look at what the United States is after there!
> >
> >
> >
> > > From: "Henry C.K. Liu" <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reply-To: The A-List <a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: The A-List <a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Subject: Re: [A-List] A Chinese Marxism view: Problems
> > > ofint'l.	strategyfortoday's China
> > > Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 09:11:14 -0500
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Charles Brown wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Henry:
> > > > The US was also less exploitative during the Cold War with its allies.
> > > >
> > > > ^^^^
> > > > CB: Well, yes, they were in a creative _destructive_ phase in their
> > > > relationship to their colonies.
> > > >
> > > > Soviets didn't seem to have to carry out big imperialist wars as the
> > > > U.S.
> > > > did. This is an indirect indicator of less exploitation.
> > > Yes, Charles.  That is because the Soviet imperilaist phase started late
> > > and came into full bloom in Afghanistan, which eventually brought down
> > > the
> > > USSR.
> > >
> > >
> > > Henry
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
> > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/