Why are the Chinese and Japanese in a dispute over an uninhabited group of islands? Nationalism makes people irrational

whoever owns those islands gets to fish around those islands, they also get the resources that happen to be on and around those islands it has nothing to do with nationalism its all economics bud.

Attached: Canada.jpg (638x490, 31K)

Fuck the Chinese, they'd claim that America is rightfully Chinese because a 7th century Chinese warlord wrote in his memoirs that he set foot on an island across the Pacific.

>cuckcap calling anybody cuck

>Anyone who respects nationhood is a poo poo head
Sucks to be you.

Have you ever studied international economics, retard? Politicians don't base their policies on actual economic theory. If you want to improve their well-being of your country, you practice free trade with the entire world and buy the resources you need in the international market. We've known this since Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations.

Control of the island guarantees more direct control of resources. What about that don't you understand? It's the same thing as several businesses fighting over a prime location.

I'm sympathetic to ancap and monarchist philosophy but you must be trolling to not understand why the islands control is contentious.

*minarchist got autocorrected as I'm a degenerate phone poster

>Countries never wanted to increase territorial waters
Why would you want to pay the chinese for the extra fish when you can claim ownership of said islands and get the fish free of charge?

>Control of an important section of the sea
>Disputing someone else's claim over it makes to irrational

>Yeah just demilitarize guis cumon. I swear we wont invade your ass.
>t.china
Lung some zyklon faggot.

It's control of the trade routes surrounding those international Islands. China moves to seize claim over the Island chain, so as to control the body of waters surrounding it. It's an intense power move to bully the smaller Pacific nations into paying tax or declaration to China for use of their shipping lanes. If you don't see the problem in that, then you're obviously far too ignorant to coach on the subject. Read up a bit and come back.

>Control of the island guarantees more direct control of resources.

Who gives a shit about control of resources? If you need resources, buy them in the international market. What is it about capitalism and free trade you don't understand?

Why does it matter to you if the person from whom you're buying the fish is Chinese or Japanese? Nationalism makes you retarded.

>Nationalism
China and Japan have had disputes for 100s of years before nationalism was a thing.
Stupid fuckhead.

>Why don't homeless people just buy houses?
They don't want the resources, nigger. They want the value the resources hold on the market.

Attached: 1533262853706.jpg (265x298, 19K)

>Why are the Chinese and Japanese in a dispute over an uninhabited group of islands?
>studied international economics
If you have studied international economics, the question of why nation states are interested in gaining more territory is Non Sequitur, hence everyone pointing out what an imbecile you are for posing it.

Because the money is either staying in Japan or going out to China why wouldn't a country want to keep the money and industry(jobs) in its own country? dear god you truly are retarded.

You sound like a retard who has never studied economics.

You're not making sense. Have you ever studied international economics? This behavior doesn't have any basis in economic theory. Nation-states don't behave in a way that maximizes the well-being of their populations.

Your the one that thinks you can buy everything off the market without supplying the market with anything in return, you need to sell goods to make money you need resources to make goods to sell. kill yourself.

You're trolling at this point. Governments don't engage in the free market and control of the islands directly means more money and goods in kind. That's direct value the controller of the island could profit from.

Giving up the island means Japan would lose money. China getting the island means they'd have more money. Nobody wants to lose on this deal. I remember my first epiphany that taxation was theft the same way I remember my first beer.

Japanese and Chinese governments are looking out for their own interests here. Period.

Hur dur I don undastand why anione wood wanna contwoll reasources or get a millitary tactical advantage. DEEEEERRRR

STOP BUMPING THIS FAGGOT YOU MORONS! holy shit

I don't own any oil. I earn a decent salary working as a software developer. I can buy all sorts of goods and services with this income - including oil. Amazing, right?

HURRR DURR I'm a retard who thinks government actually provide anything of value of to their citizens even though economic theory says the exact opposite.

Islands => Sea territory => Enemy warships are futher away at a more comfy distance

Islands => Sea territory => rights for extraction of oil under sea
That's also why China is making artificial islands west of the Phillipines

Attached: please reconsider.png (824x720, 430K)

I’m not going to argue with a literal retard who can not grasp the concept of protection.

You just bumped his thread from page 5 to page 1 though.

You need to learn how to sage, it's a useful trick to bury undesirable threads.

Governments exist to rob and exploit you, you cuck. The greatest threat to you is your own government.

>My job doesn't need direct resources so no job does
Retard.

If your job involves transforming natural resources, you buy resources from the free market. You're legitimately retarded.

But without your local government, some other government will exploit you and rape you even harder.

At least your local government is in theory closer related to your tribe.

What if my job involves harvesting resources retard?

>DERRR
>Da gweatest threat to you is da one protecting yu DURRERRR

Then you buy the rights to harvest resources, dumbfuck. If you understood economic theory, you'd understand the initial endowment of resources doesn't matter. Given any initial endowment of resources, the free market will lead to a welfare maximizing pareto-efficient condition.

You're a brainwashed commie.

It would be easier to buy the rights from my own country then China you fucking retard.

Let's say you don't have a government.

Who do you buy rights from? The enemy government who wants you dead?
Let's imagine you get those rights, the enemy government can still backstab you and destroy you.

>DEEEEER guberment iz baaaaaaad no madder wat

nations exist because we know from practice that some ideas are bad and need to be contained, and some ideas are good and need ground to flourish.

if you dont have nation states, you just have anarchic fighting and warring between small tribes of people

>if you dont have nation states, you just have anarchic fighting and warring between small tribes of people
Or even small tribes who eventually gets destroyed by a larger nation from elsewhere.

Our Anarcho friend over there is (((designed))) to weaken his own tribe, and let another even stronger nation rape his tribe.

Ive seen the same argument 6gorillion times from liberals - "if everyone is perfect and things are done perfectly, it will work"

yeah well we arent and it wont. thats why systems are built to contain probable negative human behavior.

^Ouch, you forgot the sage there. But anyway I agree. I'm out.