I’ve already provided sources you have freely ignored, I have pointed to them and provided summaries from myself and in other sources. I am aware that China is in the IMF, and I offered sources on how its fundamentally different, and explained why that’s the case, through showing the different economic goals needed to best support each economy.
Moreover, my point isn’t that Finland has a larger impact individually than China, but that the impact Finland has is negative and extractionist while China’s is positive.
If you want to do your own research and find loan specifics, which are often discrete, compile them all into a large dataset, and compare and contrast each unique clause and condition, be my guest. I have offered more than enough sources going over the how and why.
The thing is, even if I found exactly what you wanted, you still would invent a reason not to read through it just like you have with the other sources (minis the Yanis one, which I will admit not knowing the video was removed).
If your sources have specifically talked about Finland then I’ve managed to miss those parts. It seems more general talk about “the West” and that’s not very helpful.
the impact Finland has is negative and extractionist while China’s is positive.
I was hoping something directly showing this.
The thing is, even if I found exactly what you wanted, you still would invent a reason not to read through it
You could quote it here and then link to it. That’s usually what I do.
E: Wow this reached “max comment depth”. All in all, I don’t think there ever was anything directly about Finland, just “Western countries” this or that. Western countries have done bad things, Finland is a Western country, so Finland bad. It seems all very simplistic.
Finland is no different from the general Western strategy, it’s a beneficiary of using the IMF to economically dominate and underdevelop the Global South for cheap imports. China doesn’t want cheap imports, they want customers to export to and raw materials in countries they trade with to make those exports, so they necessarily must take a separate strategy.
The backings for both are in the sources I have listed. I have linked short overviews, and long, in-depth books like Super-Imperialism that paint a clearer picture. There’s no single quote directly comparing Finland to China that I can find, but a wealth of literature on the differences between how China interacts with the Global South vs the Western countries, including the special role the Nordics in general play.
So yes, I provided many sources directly showing how Finland participates in predatory extraction and how China focuses on multilateralism, not out of charity, but out of having a different economic model with different requirements for success.
I’ve already provided sources you have freely ignored, I have pointed to them and provided summaries from myself and in other sources. I am aware that China is in the IMF, and I offered sources on how its fundamentally different, and explained why that’s the case, through showing the different economic goals needed to best support each economy.
Moreover, my point isn’t that Finland has a larger impact individually than China, but that the impact Finland has is negative and extractionist while China’s is positive.
If you want to do your own research and find loan specifics, which are often discrete, compile them all into a large dataset, and compare and contrast each unique clause and condition, be my guest. I have offered more than enough sources going over the how and why.
The thing is, even if I found exactly what you wanted, you still would invent a reason not to read through it just like you have with the other sources (minis the Yanis one, which I will admit not knowing the video was removed).
If your sources have specifically talked about Finland then I’ve managed to miss those parts. It seems more general talk about “the West” and that’s not very helpful.
I was hoping something directly showing this.
You could quote it here and then link to it. That’s usually what I do.
E: Wow this reached “max comment depth”. All in all, I don’t think there ever was anything directly about Finland, just “Western countries” this or that. Western countries have done bad things, Finland is a Western country, so Finland bad. It seems all very simplistic.
Finland is no different from the general Western strategy, it’s a beneficiary of using the IMF to economically dominate and underdevelop the Global South for cheap imports. China doesn’t want cheap imports, they want customers to export to and raw materials in countries they trade with to make those exports, so they necessarily must take a separate strategy.
The backings for both are in the sources I have listed. I have linked short overviews, and long, in-depth books like Super-Imperialism that paint a clearer picture. There’s no single quote directly comparing Finland to China that I can find, but a wealth of literature on the differences between how China interacts with the Global South vs the Western countries, including the special role the Nordics in general play.
So yes, I provided many sources directly showing how Finland participates in predatory extraction and how China focuses on multilateralism, not out of charity, but out of having a different economic model with different requirements for success.