In this interview with Global Times, Sara Flounders – a contributing editor to Workers World and a member of our advisory group – shares her analysis of the escalating New Cold War and the US’s global hegemonic project. Comparing the West’s approach of war, sanctions, coercion and destabilisation with China’s vision of a human community with a shared future, Sara observes:
The very concept of shared future and cooperation has a profound impact. It’s not threatening to other countries, and it has the win-win idea, meaning if your economy is growing and our economy is growing, that’s better for both of us. That’s the basis of building further and deeper trust.
Sara points out that the differing approaches to international and domestic politics taken by the US and China can ultimately be explained by their differing social systems. In socialist China, the government operates in the interests of working people, whereas “the political parties in the US operate in the interests of the top corporations and banks.”
The interview concludes with a note of caution: with US hegemony in decline, the US ruling class is hitting out in all directions in a bid to prevent that decline. “It’s a very dangerous juncture, because this is very threatening to US imperialism and we have to be prepared what they will do to try to preserve their role.” The situation calls for maximum unity of the global working class and oppressed nations, to defend our collective interests and press ahead to a multipolar future free from imperialism.
GT: The Russia-Ukraine conflict has dragged on for more than a year. What lessons can the world draw from this conflict?
Flounders: Hopefully, they will draw the conclusion not to go along with US provocations, intentional disruptions, and efforts to create crisis.
Now, out of this war in the past year, Russia has not only survived economically, its currency and its trade with the Global South have been reinforced and are stronger today. However, for the EU, they’re in a much weaker position. We shouldn’t forget that even though they are US allies, they are also competitors. The euro is now weaker than the dollar, the war has benefited the US and yet has been very harmful for all of the EU countries that went along with the war.
I think countries around the world will draw their conclusions. Do they want to be roped into this? Especially in Asia, who can US imperialism rope in in terms of their own sovereignty? Who can resist the US pressure?
GT: Taiwan regional leader Tsai Ing-wen was in California and met US House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. While the US contains Russia through the Ukraine war in Europe, does it also want to provoke a war in the Taiwan Strait to contain China?
Flounders: This meeting was a direct and intentional violation of signed agreements that the US has made with China. China is one. Taiwan is a province of China. This is agreed to by the world, by the United Nations, by the US and by Taiwan’s “constitution.” For Kevin McCarthy to line up other congressional members and meet with Tsai Ing-wen is a direct violation of past agreements.
In the same way that Nancy Pelosi’s trip to Taiwan last year was a direct and deliberate violation of the agreement. There’s no reason to do this, except to attempt to create provocations, to create further disruption of what had been an orderly process of reconciliation and of Taiwan becoming part of China, which is the wish for great majority of the people, even in Taiwan.
China’s approach is to continue to use diplomacy to not be baited into an intentional provocation. However, it is becoming a difficult situation because one offense after another, one arms shipment after another. And US aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, destroyers, sail into the Taiwan Straits. These are all intended provocations, and any one of them could be a dangerous jumping-off point.
GT: The US pursues hegemony by provoking conflicts. China promotes a human community with a shared future. What do the two differing governance concepts bring to the world?
Flounders: The very concept of shared future and cooperation has a profound impact. It’s not threatening to other countries, and it has the win-win idea, meaning if your economy is growing and our economy is growing, that’s better for both of us. That’s the basis of building further and deeper trust.
The US way of operating, from its very founding, has been ruthless competition. The US is built on the African slave trade, the genocide of indigenous people, the exploitation of workers and constant expansion. It must, as an economic system and thoroughly capitalist system, expand or die.
That is how they see it.
Corporate CEOs see now they’re not expanding. That to them is death and dangerous because they can more easily literally envision the end of the world than the end of their own power, and they will risk a great deal. These are very ruthless people. The US and China have two systems. In China, the Communist Party of China is operating in the interests of the working people of China. It’s why China was able to solve its own problems and develop its economy.The political parties in the US operate on the interests of the top corporations and banks. And the top corporations are military industries who pay the lobbyists and run the politicians. That’s where the loyalty is. You can’t even have anti-war politicians. They’re elected into office and they will vote again and again for the military budget and go along with the wars, even if they’ve promised that they wouldn’t when they were running.
GT: What role does Global South play in rejecting US imperialism? What does this trend mean for the changing global geopolitics?
Flounders: It’s really quite incredible to see the refusal of all the countries of the Global South to go along with US sanctions on Russia and they more actively sought to pursue trade in many different forms. It’s even clearer today. You can see it with the BRICS. You can see it with the agreement of Saudi Arabia and Iran.
US policy has always been to set countries, particularly these two countries in the Middle East, against each other. And instead, they found this is a danger to both of them. They try to normalize relations and not go along. Dedollarization has become a fact. That’s a huge change, because the US dollar has been the basis of all trade for decades. These changes are coming so quickly and it’s hard to even put them all together. In the past to meet with the IMF for the World Bank, it was a surrender of sovereignty for many countries. You have to prove what industries you would lay at the feet of the US, what would be privatized, what you’re turning over to them. Entirely different agreements are being reached now.
So I think the term is being increasingly used by so many – the emergence of a multipolar world. That is a reality. Will the world operate in the interests of a tiny handful of multibillionaires? Or will there be new forms of trade, exchange, and development that benefit the world and its billions of people? That is respectful of the many differences that do still exist.US hegemony is declining. It’s a very dangerous juncture, because this is very threatening to US imperialism and we have to be prepared what they will do to try to preserve their role. Our interests are one with people in the world for peace, for development, for reconciliation, and not for corporate profit.
6 thoughts on “Interview: China is governed in the interests of working people, the US in the interests of capital”
Two hundred million workers are compelled by the market for labor power to leave their families and migrate in search of work in construction, Foxconn and other super-sweatshops, and gig delivery work. The Gini index of income inequality in China is close to that of the U.S. Raising a child to prospects for a good adult life is so expensive that the birth rate is among the lowest in the world. So much for “the interests of working people.”
What makes the great power struggle between an American led unipolar world order and China led multipolar world order more challenging and different from any previous great power struggle, is the massive gap between their respective political systems ie; the gap between a Capitalist led neo-Liberalism and a Communist led neo-Socialism. The increasingly positive response of developing countries to China’s foreign policy in general and its BRI in particular is as good an indicator as any as to which form of governance has the brightest future. Another strong indicator is a comparison of the relatively high level of trust and confidence that the citizens of China have in the CPC; especially when compared to that of American people’s trust and confidence in their liberal, capitalist duopoly.
“American led unipolar world order and China led multipolar world order” False contrast – the U.S. relation to Germany seems no less multipolar than the PRC relation to Russia.
I am from Vancouver,Canada and i wanted to say that Sara Flounders is from the USA so she knows the condition of the working class there.
She has traveled to China, Cuba and other Socialist countries and know the difference between Socialist and Capitalist countries. This is a good article since it shows the difference between living in a Socialist country and a Capitalist country.
Any normal working class person would know from reading this article that a Socialist country is far better than a Capitalist country. Looking at the world today countries that want to get help from China and Russia know that Socialism is better than Capitalism. These countries know what Capitalism is like and they don’t want it anymore.The world is changing from a Uni-Polar world to a Multi-Polar world and the majority of countries in the world want it like that.