>influence beyond their home nation's borders. And so long as a nation is able to keep the corporate interests aligned with their own - or at least more aligned than they are with anyone else - its probably a win for the corporation, the government and the people.
Often this "win" is a huge loss for the foreign groups involved. So still a losing situation in my eyes.
Sure, I agree in a sense. But nobody actually knows how to generate a true win, where we all live globally together in harmony and understanding - its all a big mess, and no one has the magic formula. At best, we only know how to slow our competitors down. Its like a chess game, but one where nobody knows what a checkmate really is.
If we knock the American tech giants down several pegs, as a hypothetical example, it might be beneficial in some ways. But we're also helping to clear the path for companies like Huawei to fill the void. That in turn, helps China project influence around the globe. Every nation-state in the world wants to position its resources (like corporations) as advantageously as possible, and they'll seize on any and every opportunity to do so.
We might not like wars for oil - we might like the alternatives even less.
> But nobody actually knows how to generate a true win, where we all live globally together in harmony and understanding - its all a big mess, and no one has the magic formula. At best, we only know how to slow our competitors down
Slowing down fellow people is also a loss, and I don't buy that our "best" purposefully takes us further from the goal.
>We might not like wars for oil - we might like the alternatives even less.
Do you think I'm arguing that the US should stop engaging in wars for oil but other countries should go for it? Everyone should find these wars to be despicable and avoided at all costs. Yes, this is difficult. It's impossible if you think that they're necessary to prevent others from doing it.
Often this "win" is a huge loss for the foreign groups involved. So still a losing situation in my eyes.