Let's have a much-needed discussion on this subject: what are the main distinctions of imperialism as done by the West (Europe, America, etc.) vs. imperialism as done by the East (China, India, the Gulf Arab states)?
Personally (and I'm channeling Zizek in this), I think the only rational kernel of Western imperialism is the West's Christian legacy: by dominating others, the West sublates indigenous and tribalist peoples into the universal ("there is no Jew or Greek"). Eastern imperialism OTOH seems to reinforce tribalisms as Dharmic cultures have zero interest in spreading their knowledge or way of life outside of their cultures.
I'd also be curious about a discussion on methods the West vs. the East use to dominate other nations.
Western imeprialism…Europe?! Europe is a not country, there's europeans countrie wh never owned colonies in their history. there's european countries who owned colonies but not anymore, there's europeans colonies which were in fact colonies of other euorpean countries. Read a fucking history book
Jace Reed
...
Easton Adams
Western imperialism rarely happens in its own backyard, but always far away. Western imperialism is pretty united. Eastern imperialism is more about regional power struggles against neighbouring countries.
Brandon Perez
...
Nolan Kelly
fpbp
Nolan Adams
shit thread, Zizek melts your brain
Blake Thompson
No difference.
Ayden Cruz
Is this really true though? The KSA and its other gulf allies went through great pains to spread wahhabism throughout the MENA to further their imperial ambitions, and the US seems to prefer to back theocrats to secular puppets in the middle east. Don't get me fucking started on Israel too, there is nothing "universalist" about their imperialism. They clearly see the goyim in their vicinity(which would be arabs largely in this case) to be exploited ruthlessly or exterminated outright. Certainly not to be subsumed into Israeli culture.
