• crackajack@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    Because there isn’t a global regulatory body to handle workplace relations. Norway, Sweden and Denmark cannot exactly tell developing countries how they should treat their workers; no more than the US could tell Swedish unions to shut up and submit to Tesla’s low pay demands.

    We could have a global regulatory body… oh wait… most people around the world don’t want that because “'muh sovereignty.”

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      The actual reason is that the west colonized these countries in the most brutal fashion, murdered millions of people who opposed western imperialism, then put in despotic regimes in place that serve western interests. You’re evidently utterly ignorant of how the world actually works. Here’s a book you should read that explains the reality of things https://ia800309.us.archive.org/26/items/fp_Killing_Hope-US_Military_and_CIA_Interventions_Since_WWII-William_Blum/Killing_Hope-US_Military_and_CIA_Interventions_Since_WWII-William_Blum.pdf

      • crackajack@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Oh wow, India and South Korea are still to this day under somehow subservient of Western imperialism, despite their own government implementing neoliberal policies after the Cold War! Somehow BJP, the ruling right wing party of India that deregulated the country, is a CIA stooge despite rebuffing sanctions on Russia. Gee, I wonder why? Thank you for your most enlightening, educated take! I am now so woke and class conscious like yourself!

        Dude, this isn’t the 20th century. Your communist utopia did not work and will never work, old fart. Countries have their own agency. Have you met people in Asia and Africa and asked them if they will want communism? Just like you never asked any former gulag members, yes? Take your meds called… reality…old wanker.

        • Cowbee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          You do realize that the US has control of South Korea’s military during time of war, correct? It’s an explicit part of their structure. South Korea quite literally does not have complete agency, despite what you’re saying.

          • crackajack@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            And you do realise that South Koreans wanted that set up to begin with, because they get more out of this security structure more than the US does? Why do you think that is? Who is South Korea’s neighbour to the north, do you think? The peaceful West Korea? Both parties delayed handover of wartime control of ROK army numerous times, for reasons that should be obvious to those who are student of geopolitics. https://isdp.eu/publication/not-a-sovereignty-issue-understanding-the-transition-of-military-operational-control-between-the-united-states-and-south-korea/

            • Cowbee@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              11 months ago

              That’s actually ahistorical. There were numerous pro-democracy protests, and subsequent massacres by the ROK. Gwang-ju is perhaps the most famous example of the ROK slaughtering countless civilians protesting for democracy, but it happened during wartime as well. Korea’s modern history, North and South, is intensely complicated and messy, and to pretend it’s a simple matter of the US protecting the defenseless South Koreans from the big bad North Koreans is just as wrong as saying that North Korea is 100% good and just.

              There’s also the No Gun Ri Massacre, by which American soldiers murdered hundreds of South Korean men, women, and children.

              South Korea in particular has a history of military dictatorship, coups, and massacres of pro-democracy civilians, and even in recent years is still having trouble with fascism.

              • crackajack@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                You obviously did not read the article or at least skim read the earlier paragraphs.

                And unsurprisingly you revert to historical fallacy to post-Cold War decisions that has zero bearing to more recent events, namely North Korea keeps firing missiles every so often.

                • Cowbee@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Which part was the historical fallacy? The part where I gave explicit examples of both the ROK and US massacring civilians, or the part where I mentioned that South Korea has major issues with rising fascist movements, such as under current president Yoon? The same president who has targeted women and disabled people to rile up the increasingly conservative male voterbase, similar to how Trump rose to power in the US?

                  North Korea isn’t a good state, not in any meaningful capacity, but neither is South Korea. Additionally, the ROK was modeled by the Americans, the Korean intelligence agency is literally the KCIA. The ROK is essentially a US puppet state, they are allowed to govern themselves until what they do goes against the US.

                  • crackajack@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    The decision to delay the handover of wartime control of South Korean army to the SK government is made by both parties, as recent as 2015, in which both governments are no longer ruled by the same people as by those in 1950s and 1960s. Because decision-makers in 1950s are now dead and there are new leaders. You don’t need a PhD to figure that out.

                    So yes, historical fallacy is what you’re doing.