Re: China steps up investment in Congo as war in east continues

First of all, the Russians arctually *deindustrialized* sections of
Eastern Europe during the aftermath of the war but before the
"People's Democracies" were set up. Then they started to industrialize
those countries as *part of Comecon* where the process developed where
4 of the Comecon countries had *higher* standard of living than the
average Russian did. Totally not imperialist from the point of view of
political economy.

Secondly, these were no finance-capital investments and it's finance
capital that is the height of imperialist, less we forget. There was
no finance capital in Russia.

Thirdly, Chinese investments are done like *capitalist* ones often
with...finance capital leading the way out of the privatized and semi-
state/private banks from s. China. Chinese companies, unlike Russian
projects when Russia was still socialist, are run like capitalist
ones. That African workers are paid less for these Chinese projects
*exactly* like Imperialist investments should come as no surprise.

But here is the doosey we all expect from Vn:
"The Chinese will deal with Africa a lot more fairly than the Euro-
Americans."

Not! How about the SAME. Chinese are *notorious* for being as bad or
worse...as one might expect from an up and coming national-capitalist
country.

Then:
"David assumes that Russian investment to for instance Bulgaria after
WW2 was also ...imperialist."

Dispenses with above.

"Hence he is against it."

Not then since itwasn't capitalist investment as explained above. But
I'm all for Bulgaria *nationalizing* Russian assets NOW. How about
you?

"The use of Chinese labour in Africa where africans could be used is
reprehensible... "

Reprehensible? OK. Stupid, maybe. I actually heard about this but
don't know it's impact or how big it is. Any info on this would be
appreciated. In many cases, I know, Chinese are paid LESS than some
African workers. But again, this is only hearsay.