this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2026
173 points (98.9% liked)

Europe

11072 readers
433 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Quittenbrot@feddit.org 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Good luck persuading the ruling class, who control the state, to accept a drop in productivity in return for improved working conditions.

It's either that or being driven out of business altogether. They'll happily accept - and it already is reality, as can be seen by the plans of the EU. The only ones complaining here are China and you.

one of the common pro-capitalist arguments are that competition benefits consumers - but here’s a case where competition is being impeded by the state to protect the interests of capital owners.

This here is not a case of competition, it is a case of skewed competition through fundamental Chinese state subsidies. This reaction actually re-enables competition again by levelling the playing field.

It wouldn’t. Again, I am not arguing for, or against, any of these protectionist policies. All I’m doing is trying to help people here gain class consciousness

Sorry, but you can't have it both ways. You claim to want the abolition of worker exploitation, but then complain that protectionist policies will raise consumer prices. Why are those Chinese goods so cheap to begin with? Because of the very labour exploitation you say you oppose. You are demanding the perks of globalised capitalism (cheap goods) while claiming to be an anti-capitalist.

Furthermore, you are misidentifying the 'contradiction' here. China isn't engaging in fair free-market competition; they are using massive state subsidies to intentionally bankrupt foreign industries. The EU pushing back isn't a betrayal of capitalist ideals; it's a defence against state-sponsored monopolies.

Retreating to 'I'm just trying to build class consciousness' doesn't work when the economic logic you are using to build it contradicts your own stated goals. You can't claim "the moral high ground" of protecting workers while advocating for a system that relies on dumping state-subsidised, unethically sourced goods into domestic markets.

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I think you're just fundamentally misunderstanding my entire argument, and it's apparent to me that you just want to argue to prove me wrong, rather than discuss things with an mind open to potentially changing your views - that's okay, but I'm not going to waste my time, so at this point I'll wish you all the best, have a great day - solidarity forever.

[–] Quittenbrot@feddit.org 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Indeed, I don't understand your entire argument. That's why I kept asking questions on things you said. If you don't actually want that, fine by me!

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That’s why I kept asking questions on things you said.

And yet, there's not a single question in your previous comment, just a lot of weak arguments and claims that I hold positions I specifically stated I do not hold.

You don't want to actually discuss and understand my position, you want to debate a pro-China strawman. You don't need me to win an argument in your head. Take care.

[–] Quittenbrot@feddit.org 2 points 6 days ago

Yea... no.

This was your opening statement here:

"capitalists: competition is so good, it encourages innovation and ensures the best value for consumers!

china: competes

capitalists: 😡😡😡"

Various people here explained to you why this is not "competition", but skewing competition.

Then you said:

"My point is, if the labor prices are so low, why should western capitalists benefit from them, through outsourcing, rather than us consumers and Chinese companies splitting the difference with cheaper Chinese goods?"

..which sounds(!) like an argument for "hey consumers, why should you not simply benefit from the cheap Chinese goods built on exploitation of workers?". On top of that: no-one made an argument for outsourcing here, as specifically, this is an article about something aimed at achieving the opposite - and Chinas sour reaction to it.

Then you moved on to:

"I believe that we should dismantle capitalism and abolish profit and exploitation. I am just pointing out the contradictions in pro-capitalist rhetoric and meeting people where they are and trying to help them to the next rung on the ladder of class consciousness."

What contradictions in pro-capitalist rhetoric are you referring to? Because the fallacy in your opening statement (concerning "competition" has already been pointed out.

Then you say:

"Good luck persuading the ruling class, who control the state, to accept a drop in productivity in return for improved working conditions.", to which I pointed out it is either that or being out of business completely. Somehow, I haven't heard an answer from you on that.

If your position is more than trying to make some "gotchas" on "capitalism", which in this case doesn't work properly, I'd love to hear it, but looking at the journey from your initial comment to your last, it is a bit hard to follow what exactly you want your point to be. So, instead of cheap personal attacks, let's rather exchange thoughts.