The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Max Parry Archive
30 Years After Tiananmen Square, the U.S. Is Still Trying to Destabilize China
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Last month marked three decades since the conclusion of the 1989 Tiananmen Square demonstrations in China. The anniversary is opportune for Washington and its Western partners to ramp-up their Sinophobic smear campaign while recycling the hoax they have propagated ever since the June Fourth incident occurred. Coverage of the commemoration has been wedded with the ongoing propaganda and wild accusation that the People’s Republic has currently detained up to 1 million Turkic Uyghur Muslims from the autonomous Xinjiang province in “concentration camps.” Simultaneously, opposition marches have erupted in the former British colony of Hong Kong with the financial backing of astro-turfing NGOs against a controversial extradition bill with the mainland. Like Tiananmen Square thirty years ago, the “pro-democracy” gatherings in the self-governing territory have become increasingly violent as rioters have stormed legislative buildings while hoisting the colonial-era dragon and lion flag as their emblem. The adoption of the Union Jack is reminiscent of the Syrian opposition’s appropriation of the French Mandate-era flag as its ensign — and we all know how “peaceful” those protests turned out to be.

In August of last year, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) performed a routine analysis of China’s accordance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The only member to include the charge of Uyghur ‘internment camps’ was the committee’s American vice-chair, Gay McDougall, who did so based on allegations made by a shadowy opposition group located in Washington, D.C., known as the Network of Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD). In other words, the UN did not officially make this determination but was only the interpretation of one American representative based on the conjecture of a dubious and biased “human rights” organization. Nevertheless, Western corporate media reported this unquestioningly second-hand under the assumption that the CERD committee consisted of UN internal sources when it is actually comprised of “independent experts” like McDougall.

Unsurprisingly, CHRD is directly tied to the highly politicized Human Rights Watch (HRW) NGO, which despite its name could not be more at odds with its declared vocation given its shared personnel and history of policies in lock-step with the world’s greatest violator of human rights, especially against Muslim countries, in the United States government. A Turkish scholar recently claimed that as many as 12.5 million Muslims have died in wars in the past 25 years, the vast majority a result of American foreign policy. Not to mention the fact that the U.S. still operates a very real concentration camp for Muslims in its naval base on the coast of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, which President Donald Trump has signed an executive order to keep open indefinitely. For seventeen years, GITMO prisoners have been held and tortured without trial in total violation of international law. At the end of the day, “human rights” is a weapon to manipulate credulous liberals into supporting hawkish foreign policy whereby minority groups like China’s Tibetans and Uyghurs become pawns on the geopolitical chess board to undermine Washington’s adversaries.

An investigation showed that CHRD gets most of its sums from government grants which is safe to assume comes from the U.S.-government bankrolled National Endowment for Democracy (NED) NGO that is also subsidizing the Hong Kong protests. The paradoxically named CIA slush fund was created in 1983 as a front for the intelligence service to conceal its operations after the agency’s standing was disgraced following the revelations of illicit crimes in the prior decades sabotaging democracies around the world to install U.S. puppet regimes. Founded by Ronald Reagan, the NED has poured money into programs related to Xinjiang such as the World Uyghur Congress. In March, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo met with four Uyghur representatives, though it turned out that at least one of those he convened with was a reporter for the U.S. government-owned Radio Free Asia which is the equivalent of the CIA’s Radio Free Europe in the continent. Just two months later, Pompeo would make a clean breast of his previous tenure as CIA director in a speech at Texas A&M University:

“Having said that, not all tough places are the same. They each present a different set of challenges. I — it reminds me, you would know this as — it’s a bit of an aside. But in terms of how you think about problem sets, I — when I was a cadet, what’s the first — what’s the cadet motto at West Point? You will not lie, cheat, or steal, or tolerate those who do. I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole.It’s — it was like — we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment.”

The fact that Pompeo admitted spinning the CIA’s yarn just a short time after meeting with the Uyghurs hasn’t prevented many on the left from lining up behind mainstream media in spreading the West’s disinformation without verification of the camps existence. The Intercept, a popular progressive news publication known for its coverage of leaks by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, published an article calling for “global outrage” in response. The piece was written by Mehdi Hasan, a journalist who also works for Al-Jazeera, the state news network of Qatar’s ruling emirs whose government co-sponsors much of the Islamic terrorism plaguing Xinjiang that has been the basis for China’s policies regarding its Uyghur question. The Intercept is also owned by First Look Media, established by eBay co-founder Pierre Omidyar, whose investment firm financed many of the NGOs in Ukraine which organized the Euromaidan protests which ousted Kiev’s democratically-elected government in 2014. It is possible the billionaire has a similar conflict of interest in China.

A Reuters journalist who gained rare access to the facilities was interviewed and his on the ground observations were rather banal in comparison to such sensationalized vicarious reporting. The Chinese government acknowledges that what does exist in the energy-rich Northwestern province are re-education centers training and rehabilitating individuals with links to Turkic separatism, Uyghur nationalism and ISIS/Daesh to combat the spread of jihadism into the Uyghur community by U.S. ally Saudi Arabia. For fifty years, the Gulf State kingdom has propagated an intolerant and ultra-conservative strain of Islam while evading any consequences as the source of international terrorism. This long believed association was confirmed in a leaked Hillary Clinton email from 2014 published by WikiLeaks:

“While this military/para-military operation is moving forward, we need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region.”

The embattled Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman admitted that the previously obscure and fundamentalist Wahhabi sect of Islam was deliberately exported at the West’s encouragement during the Cold War to undermine Soviet influence in Muslim countries. ​Today, Saudi-trained imams around the world are preaching the supremacy of Sharia law and waging jihad, from Kosovo to the Philippines. The Turkic-speaking Sunni minority concentrated in Xinjiang have not avoided this contamination as the region has been infested with terrorism since the 1990s with violence committed overwhelmingly by radicalized Uyghurs, from suicide bombings to knife attacks. It is notable that China’s dozens of other Muslim ethnoreligious groups such as the Hui people are relatively well assimilated into Chinese society and have been immune to such ills, casting doubt on the West’s characterization of China as anti-Islam.

Meanwhile, the Uyghur extremism problem is so abundant that many were recruited in Syria to fight alongside al-Qaeda in the U.S.-Saudi proxy army rebranded as “moderate rebels” that unsuccessfully sought to overthrow the secular government of Bashar al-Assad. As only American exceptionalism permits, Washington is now simulating outrage at the PRC’s crackdown on the very religious fanaticism its allies have instigated, in the hopes that a separatist uprising could balkanize Xinjiang and halt China’s development of its new silk road, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), through the region connecting its trade routes with Africa and Europe. The feigned outcry of the West toward any unsubstantiated human rights abuses rings hollow given that which is taking place in GITMO and numerous U.S. black sites around the world.

The American “human rights expert” who made the assertion, Gay McDougall, is an advisory board member of the Open Society Foundation NGO founded by the controversial international financier George Soros. It is ironic that Soros has become so hated on the political right in the West when it was his “philanthropic” agencies that were instrumental in the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and attempted the same in China. During the 1980s, his nonprofits partnered with other CIA soft-power intermediaries to destabilize the Eastern bloc and foment “pro-democracy” movements behind the Iron Curtain, from Poland’s Solidarity to Czechoslovakia’s Velvet Revolution. Later, Soros would invest heavily in Serbia’s Otpor! movement which ousted the last bastion of semi-socialism in Eurasia in the government of Slobodan Milosevic following the breakup of the former Yugoslavia after the end of the Cold War.

The success of Otpor! became the formulaic blueprint for the Western-engineered Color Revolutions in Eastern Europe against Moscow-backed states in the years to come, even after the reinstatement of the free market. Otpor! (“Resistance!”) became Georgia’s Kmara (“Enough!”) in the Rose Revolution, Kyrgystan’s KelKel (Pink or Tulip Revolution), Ukraine’s Pora (“It’s time”) in the Orange Revolution and many others which used the same protest tactics, slogans, and vexillography to transform peaceful protests into regime change operations. The anti-war movement should be deeply suspicious of Soros’ recent reported venture in an unlikely partnership with right-wing billionaire Charles Koch to establish a think tank whose aim is to “end America’s forever wars”, considering the Hungarian-born hedge fund tycoon has played an enormous role in US foreign policy for decades.

The methodology behind Color Revolutions takes inspiration from the writings of Gene Sharp, aka the “Machiavelli of non-violence”, a little known political scientist whose doctrine on strategies of non-violent resistance became useful to the Western establishment in training activists to incite unrest in order to topple governments in countries it seeks to dominate. Sharp’s work, From Dictatorship to Democracy, was used as a training manual in Otpor! and later became pivotal in the Arab Spring uprisings, another instance where what were presented as authentic, spontaneous protests quickly transformed into U.S.-friendly insurrections. Sharp’s theories became the modus operandi in depersonalizing political movements in order to manipulate them to suit the ends of regime change puppet masters in the Anglosphere.

What a coincidence that Gene Sharp himself was reportedly present in Tiananmen Square, aka the Gate of Heavenly Peace, back in 1989. Meanwhile, Soros was busy establishing the Fund for the Reform and Opening of China, aka the China Fund, which was shut down by the PRC after it suspected the foundation of connections with the CIA in the ensuing months that year. There is little doubt that the China Fund was attempting the same as what was done in Soros’s native Hungary, as well as Czechoslovakia and Poland. In hindsight, Tiananmen Square was one of the first attempts of what would become known as Color Revolutions, albeit a failed one. While Washington was successful in unseating communism in the Eastern Bloc it was unable to do in Beijing, though it was an enormous victory in the propaganda war of forever cementing the Chinese government as synonymous with authoritarianism in the impressionable minds of Westerners.

To this day the story according to the yellow press is that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) opened fire indiscriminately and massacred “thousands” of “non-violent” demonstrators when it finally cleared the city square after nearly 2 months of student-led protests. This was accepted as orthodoxy even on much of the left until this version of events was revealed to be contradicted by the U.S.’s own embassy cables published in 2011 by Wikileaks which divulged that the U.S. government had knowingly been allowing to the media to recount a fictitious narrative for decades. The confidential telegrams summarized the eyewitness account of Carlos Gallo, a Chilean diplomat, who was present during the June Fourth incident and told a very different story.

“8. GALLO EVENTUALLY ENDED UP AT THE RED CROSS STATION, AGAIN HOPING THAT TROOPS WOULD NOT FIRE ON THE MEDICAL PERSONNEL THERE. HE WATCHED THE MILITARY ENTER THE SQUARE AND DID NOT OBSERVE ANY MASS FIRING OF WEAPONS INTO THE CROWDS, ALTHOUGH SPORADIC GUNFIRE WAS HEARD. HE SAID THAT MOST OF THE TROOPS WHICH ENTERED THE SQUARE WERE ACTUALLY ARMED ONLY WITH ANTI-RIOT GEAR — TRUNCHEONS AND WOODEN CLUBS; THEY WERE BACKED UP BY ARMED SOLDIERS. AS THE MILITARY CONSOLIDATED ITS CONTROL OF THE SQUARE’S PERIMETER, STUDENTS AND CIVILIANS GATHERED AROUND THE MONUMENT TO THE PEOPLE’S HEROES. GALLO SAID WOUNDED, INCLUDING SOME SOLDIERS, CONTINUED TO BE BROUGHT TO THE RED CROSS STATION.”

“10. ALTHOUGH GUNFIRE COULD BE HEARD, GALLO SAID THAT APART FROM SOME BEATING OF STUDENTS, THERE WAS NO MASS FIRING INTO THE CROWD OF STUDENTS AT THE MONUMENT. WHEN POLOFF MENTIONED SOME REPORTEDLY EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS OF MASSACRES AT THE MONUMENT WITH AUTOMATIC WEAPONS, GALLO SAID THAT THERE WAS NO SUCH SLAUGHTER. ONCE AGREEMENT WAS REACHED FOR THE STUDENTS TO WITHDRAW, LINKING HANDS TO FORM A COLUMN, THE STUDENTS LEFT THE SQUARE THROUGH THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. ESSENTIALLY EVERYONE, INCLUDING GALLO, LEFT. THE FEW THAT ATTEMPTED TO REMAIN BEHIND WERE BEATEN AND DRIVEN TO JOIN THE END OF THE DEPARTING PROCESSION. ONCE OUTSIDE THE SQUARE, THE STUDENTS HEADED WEST ON QIANMEN DAJIE WHILE GALLO HEADED EAST TO HIS CAR. THEREFORE, HE COULD NOT COMMENT ON REPORTS THAT STUDENTS WERE AMBUSHED AND SLAUGHTERED IN THE ALLEY JUST WEST OF THE SQUARE NEAR THE BEIJING CONCERT HALL.”

The communique corroborates the account of the Chinese government that the injured and deceased included many unarmed soldiers and police. While there is no evidence or footage of the “thousands” of alleged corpses of CIA-trained student demonstrators, there is ample documentation of the armed thug participants setting fire to and even lynching PLA troops from buses during the confrontation. It was only on the final day that some police and soldiers were equipped with weapons as during the weeks prior the government had unsuccessfully attempted to put down the gatherings sending in defenseless PLA troops who were then attacked by the mobs. Not only were the riots brought under control mostly without lethal force, Gallo’s testimony upheld much of the PRC’s side of the story. The truth seems to be much closer to the Chinese government figures of around a few hundred fatalities, not thousands, during what were violent clashes and not any one-sided massacre.

It’s no wonder the anonymous ‘tank man’ in the internationally circulated iconic footage isn’t surrounded by the “thousands” of presumed corpses in the streets of what was then the largest public space in the world. Then again, the infamous stand-off between the unidentified protester and the tanks didn’t actually occur until June 5th, the following day after the protests concluded, a significant detail that has been curiously suppressed. That is to say, the image associated by most people around the world with the events — and one of the most universally recognizable of the 20th century — did not even occur during it. Not to mention that the unknown man was actually preventing the tanks from leaving, not entering, the city square. Nevertheless, the mysterious incident became the perfect extract for Western propaganda to put its spin on the crisis. If only the tanks had not exercised such restraint and run him over like the Israeli Defense Forces when they crushed the body of activist Rachel Corrie with a Caterpillar bulldozer in the Gaza Strip — then China would be considered a ‘democracy.’

Recently, former President Jimmy Carter reportedly phoned Trump to discuss China about their mutual concern that it will soon exceed the U.S. as a superpower on the world stage. While Trump nixed the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal which excluded China and could have kickstarted WWIII, he has launched a protectionist trade war with tariffs on Chinese imports in an ill-fated attempt at stimulating domestic manufacturing and industry. Carter noted that while the U.S. is spending hundreds of billions on defense instead of redeveloping its crumbling infrastructure, China is using its productive power to help its people and leading the way in constructing high-speed railroads. He contrasted the wasteful Pentagon budget with the PRC “which has not wasted a penny on war” which he attributed to his own credit in “normalizing diplomatic relations with China in 1979.”

While these days Carter seems to lean towards social democracy, his critique is ironic considering a path can be traced from today’s obscene military budget back to his administration’s decision in 1979 to arm the mujahideen in Afghanistan to undermine the Soviet Union and divide Eurasia at the direction of his National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski. So too can the Uyghurs falling prey to the spread of Wahhabism during the 1980s when China relaxed its policies and radical Islamist groups from neighboring Central Asia and Pakistan infiltrated the region. Meanwhile, the breakup of the Soviet Union resulting in the independence of former Soviet and Muslim-majority Central Asian republics like Kazakhstan bordering Xinjiang only increased the resurgence of Uyghur separatism. While the PRC may not be squandering on endless war, an enormous portion of the U.S. defense budget in recent years has been in the Pacific with the deployment of naval and missile systems in close proximity to China which was part of the Obama administration’s ‘Pivot to Asia’ foreign policy shift, a regional strategy akin to Imperial Japan’s encirclement of the mainland in the lead-up to WWII.

The strategy of the empire’s information warfare is to invert reality and depict China as a regional tyrant and surveillance state persecuting its religious minorities while seeking colonial dominance and polluting the environment. It’s hard to imagine a clearer case of imperial projection, where the U.S.’s own signature wrongdoings are being displaced onto its chief rival. Leaving aside the obvious in regards to American hegemony militarily, within its own borders the U.S. has more people incarcerated despite the fact that China has a population three times as large. Even more startling, China has less people living in poverty despite its exponentially bigger populace. Then there is the hysteria over Apple’s tech rival Huawei and the completely baseless espionage allegations by the CIA against its 5G technology. The irony that Washington is trying to bully Germany for installing the cellular network when it was the U.S intelligence services that were caught red-handed tapping the personal phone of Chancellor Angela Merkel. It is is clear that the U.S. is in pathological denial of its own sins while attributing them to China.

The demonization of China has been so successful that it has become commonplace on the Western ‘left’ which characterizes Beijing and Washington as an ‘inter-imperial rivalry’ of equal footing. Yet China’s development and aid in the continents like Africa is regarded by their leaders as one of mutual benefit, not plunder like its debt crisis manufactured by Western financial institutions. Unfortunately, this hasn’t stopped much of the left from agreeing with the likes of John Bolton in characterizing China’s assistance as ‘neocolonial.’ Liberalism is supplanting internationalism and anti-imperialism in many ‘leftist’ circles and it is especially disappointing to observe many who may be innately skeptical of corporate media narratives of a crisis in the Middle East or Latin America suddenly abandon their suspicions to rely on the very same sources as dependable in their coverage of China.

This failure shows the residual effects of post-WWII reinterpretations of Marxism in the West that is institutionalized in the academic canon, such as the Frankfurt School hybrid that prioritizes using Marxism only as a theoretical lens in their corresponding disciplines of examining culture and critiquing the arts. While there is no denying that ‘socialism’ is ascendant since the 2008 financial crisis which a recent Gallup poll shows that 40% of Americans support in some form, the version budding leftists are encountering is a variety that strongly demonizes all previous historical attempts at putting Marx’s theories into practice whereby the first requisite is to denounce all existing revolutions and achievements by socialism in the last century as totalitarian failures. For this reason, China is dismissed as a “state capitalist” or ‘Stalinist’ deformation. Michael Parenti warned of this in Blackshirts & Reds:

“[R]eal socialism, it is argued, would be controlled by the workers themselves through direct participation instead of being run by Leninists, Stalinists, Castroites, or other ill-willed, power-hungry, bureaucratic, cabals of evil men who betray revolutions. Unfortunately, this ‘pure socialism’ view is ahistorical and nonfalsifiable; it cannot be tested against the actualities of history. It compares an ideal against an imperfect reality, and the reality comes off a poor second. It imagines what socialism would be like in a world far better than this one, where no strong state structure or security force is required, where none of the value produced by workers needs to be expropriated to rebuild society and defend it from invasion and internal sabotage.”

The hesitancy to defend China can also be ascribed to the widespread misconception that because of its market-oriented reforms, the People’s Republic is no longer socialist. The truth is much more complicated. The Tiananmen Square protests occurred at a time when China was undergoing economic liberalization not unlike glasnost and perestroika in the USSR under Mikhail Gorbachev. The demonstrations themselves even consisted of many Maoists who opposed the reforms under Deng Xiaoping such as the privatization of agribusiness and the social safety net, as the participants were not all united under the same demands or political tendencies. Still, Deng was no Gorbachev as he oversaw the ratification of the most recent constitution which maintained much of the socialist system. Through all its many significant faults, the People’s Republic has lifted nearly a billon people out of poverty since 1949 and while it is true there are still tens of millions who are poor, the Communist Party continues to organize the economy to eventually raise those remaining to a higher standard of living under the guide of its self-professed ‘socialism with Chinese characteristics.’

Despite its market economy and the adoption of some outward capitalist features, its public and state-owned enterprises are of much greater prevalence. The state sector has a bigger share in everything from transit to energy while virtually all land and property is still owned by collectivities or the state. There is not a single private bank in China which includes the world’s largest that is state-controlled, as are virtually all major media outlets from television to newspapers. Fundamentally, its advances on the world stage are more attributable to a planned economy than the free market. That Beijing is increasingly in the crosshairs of imperialism is only a further sign of the inevitable decline of the American empire. As for the fact that China is not only producing more cars than the West but many of the world’s billionaires is indeed an internal contradiction — but only an inherent one to those who have been duped into believing that socialism is about making everyone equally poor. If you believe that, there is a proverbial bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

Max Parry is an independent journalist and geopolitical analyst. His work has appeared in Counterpunch, Global Research, Dissident Voice, Greanville Post, OffGuardian, and more. Max may be reached at [email protected]

 
Hide 105 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. peterAUS says:

    Ah..another one.
    O.K.

    Maybe (say….5 % chance…) somebody (not the usual resident…ahm… experts on the topic) could provide some info I’ve been looking for. Even tentative answers to the questions below would be much appreciated.
    1. What happened to the firearms taken away from the undercover security personnel? Some, for the time, quite nice pieces then and there. Hint: silenced AK version among them.
    2. Who was manning that APC that got firebombed at the square? I think it was 3 “cocktails” at the least. Unit, rank etc.
    3. Where and how, exactly, the first shooting started? It was one of the advancing columns. So..what unit? Who fired the first shot there and why? Just….the….very…first…shot.

  2. Ron Unz says:

    What’s really quite interesting about the so-called “Tiananmen Square Massacre” is that back in 1998, the former Beijing Bureau Chief of The Washington Post, who was actually there at the time, admitted in the pages of the ultra-respectable Columbia Journalism Review, that the whole thing never actually happened and the story was a mixture of false rumors, lazy journalism, and dishonest American propaganda:

    https://archives.cjr.org/behind_the_news/the_myth_of_tiananmen.php

    So as far as he knows, the statements of the Chinese government at the time were 100% correct, and the Wikileaks disclosures also tend to support this. Offhand, I can’t think of any reason the WashPost Bureau Chief would be lying in the CJR, so I’d probably believe him.

    Thus, the continuing effort by almost all our MSM organs to heavily promote this bit of “Fake News” is utterly, totally ridiculous, and just one more reason why we can’t trust a single word they say about absolutely anything…

    • Agree: Alfred
    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    , @CAL2
    , @Realist
  3. Paul says:

    The U.S. runs huge trade deficits with China year after year. If this is destabilization, what would help propping up the Chinese dictatorship look like? 😉

    • Replies: @last straw
  4. @Ron Unz

    MSM organs to heavily promote this bit of “Fake News” is utterly, totally ridiculous, and just one more reason why we can’t trust a single word they say about absolutely anything…

    Aren’t you here going too far Mr. Unz? I mean, your platform is very important and does make a big difference indeed, that’s true for sure. But why discredit everybody else completely?

  5. neutral says:

    Very simply put, democracy is the enemy of people everywhere. If China became a democracy it would mean that it will be ruled by foreigners. This being the case the mob that are protesting for democracy must be seen as nothing else but traitors, crushing them with tanks is a valid response, the alternative is the end of China.

    • Agree: dfordoom, Parfois1
    • Replies: @Realist
    , @cassandra
  6. Yee says:

    Western media is a full spectrum dominance propaganda machine. It has to be if the ruling class don’t want “election democracy” to get out of hand. Because media controls public opinions. Without the media to tell them, the general public would not have an opinion on any topic, because individuals generally don’t know enough, or care enough to form their own opinion.

    Once they have total dominance, they can push anything they want to very effectively, because conformity applies to journalists too. It’s pretty frightening to be infidel in a monotheism culture.

    I think this total dominance is achieved after WW2, after President Harry Truman realized it’s “essential for the United States to maintain information activities…”

  7. @Paul

    The U.S. runs huge trade deficits with China year after year. If this is destabilization, what would help propping up the Chinese dictatorship look like?

    The U.S. multinationals set up shop in China and then import the products back to America to enrich themselves. “Helping China” is just an afterthought at best.

    • Replies: @Paul
    , @Paul
  8. Ron Unz says:
    @Dieter Kief

    Aren’t you here going too far Mr. Unz? I mean, your platform is very important and does make a big difference indeed, that’s true for sure. But why discredit everybody else completely?

    Sure, I was just speaking rhetorically. But don’t you find it really ridiculous that America’s most elite journalistic sources such as the WashPost and the CJR declared the “Tiananmen Square Massacre” a hoax over twenty(!) years ago, yet our newspapers still report it as fact, including a column in this morning’s WSJ? Surely, the vast majority of MSM journalists writing about Chinese matters must be aware of the truth, along with their editors, but they still endlessly repeat their lies.

    Personally, I think the early reports in 1989 were probably based on honest mistakes, and that continued for some time afterward. But for the last couple of decades it must clearly be deliberate lying in most cases, and stupid lying since it totally undermines their credibility on all other matters.

    • Replies: @kauchai
    , @JohnnyWalker123
  9. fnn says:

    The Western capitalists who brought the New China into being have a lot to answer for:
    https://www.livescience.com/27862-china-environmental-problems.html

    [MORE]

    Thousands of dead, bloated pigs floating down the river that supplies Shanghai with its drinking water. Air pollution in Beijing so impenetrable the U.S. Embassy’s air quality measuring station can only call it “beyond index.” Industrial towns where rates of cancer are so high they’re known as “cancer villages.”

    More than half of China’s surface water is so polluted it cannot be treated to make it drinkable, the Economist reports, and one-quarter of it is so dangerous it can’t even be used for industrial purposes.

    Groundwater isn’t any safer: About 40 percent of China’s farmland relies on underground water for irrigation, and an estimated 90 percent is polluted, Reuters reports. About 60 percent of the groundwater beneath Chinese cities is described as “severely polluted” by the Economist.

    China’s issues with species loss extend far beyond its borders: The slaughter of elephants for ivory, the killing of rhinos for their horns, and the culling of tigers for their bones (as medicine) and penises (as aphrodisiacs) have one primary source: the Chinese market.

    Sharks are endangered worldwide, largely because of shark finning — the removal of dorsal fins from still-living sharks — for the Chinese delicacy known as shark fin soup.

    …the Chinese — who once enjoyed a relatively healthy diet and low rates of cancer — now dine on twice as much meat as Americans, consuming one-quarter of the world’s supply, according to the Telegraph.

  10. The state sector has a bigger share in everything from transit to energy while virtually all land and property is still owned by collectivities or the state. There is not a single private bank in China which includes the world’s largest that is state-controlled,…

    So what? Where are the stone tablets that declare everything must be privately owned? Different countries develop in different ways. In the US, governments chose to subsidize private industry in certain segments, and how has that worked out? The State Bank of North Dakota is state owned, and has done wonders for that state and its citizens. How has the Fed been working out for you?
    The Canadian Government owns the Bank of Canada. Prior to joining the Bank of International Settlements, thereby effectively giving up control of the BofC, the government borrowed interest free from the Bank, and had virtually no debt. More than 80% of government debt today is attributable to the loss of that ability. Many countries have/had government owned telecoms, because private industry wasn’t prepared to service low population areas, as there was little or no profit to be had. The same can be said for railways.
    Private ownership is no more a panacea than state ownership. Depending on the place and context, one is better than the other, or in some cases, it may make no difference.

  11. While I agree with the author’s premise that the US and its use of colour revolutions and similar tactics have been the puppet masters of much of the world’s divisions, I do take exception to the author making a direct link to the huge revolutionary story of the Hong Kong protests.

    To quote the author:

    An investigation showed that CHRD gets most of its sums from government grants which is safe to assume comes from the U.S.-government bankrolled National Endowment for Democracy (NED) NGO that is also subsidizing the Hong Kong protests.

    The link- and only proof- that Mr.Perry offers to prove allegations of US meddling in Hong Kong is “An investigation showed” which, when accessing the link provided is from Aug 23, 2018 ( 10 month’s before) and showed nothing of the kind. Yes, the article does bolster the author’s many contentions, but it does not provide a link to recent events in Hong Kong.

    This an unfortunate error since what is currently taking place in Hong Kong may devolve into a very serious incident soon and false and inaccurate links to US meddling are the LAST thing needed at this time. An assertion this bold deserves far better factual support.

    I enjoyed the article and only bring up this important issue due to the gravity of the situation in Hong Kong. Cheers!

    • Replies: @Max Parry
  12. Jason Liu says:

    The American deep set is just upset that countries can succeed without being a liberal democracy, since this proves that their system is not necessary and can be questioned. Insecurity over “muh liberal world order” will end in conflict unless the west steps back, and rethink their so-called univeralism.

    Instead of the extradition law, Beijing should just crack down on NGOs, many of which operate out of HK.

  13. Yee says:

    Brett Redmayne-Titley,

    “what is currently taking place in Hong Kong may devolve into a very serious incident soon and false and inaccurate links to US meddling are the LAST thing needed at this time. An assertion this bold deserves far better factual support.”

    It’s not secret the opposition leaders are back by US government. They have always done it openly, met with Pence, Pompeo recently, Wolfowitz in the past. What factual support do you need? A detailed game plan from the US state department?

    You should understand that in the non-White world, “side with the West” is something to be proud of… See Venezuela. Do the opposition need to keep US backing secret?

  14. kauchai says:
    @Ron Unz

    “…and stupid lying since it totally undermines their credibility on all other matters.”

    No, Ron, let them carry on. I’d love to see these “presstitutes” buried in their own crap. The day is not too far off. Most people who read your blog don’t even bother with the MSM anymore.

  15. jim jones says:

    I have plenty of Chinese students at my Uni here in London and they are all astounded when they see actual footage of the Tiananmen Square massacre:

    • Replies: @Bill
  16. nsa says:

    The greatest source of friction is China’s exclusion of foreign financial services i.e. not cutting the jew in on a slice of every Chinaman’s action. This rankles JUSA no end. For example, it is well known that there is more money to be had financing vehicle sales than manufacturing vehicles. In 2018 the Chinese bought close to 30 millions vehicles, of which only about 1/3 were financed. Allow in western style financial services (the jew) and every Wong and Wang household could obtain a vehicle with minimum down and 72 easy monthly payments…..or maybe one of those sleazy lease to own arrangements. The profits would be immense…..possibly 50 million vehicles per annum with most of them financed or leased. Likewise insurance, payday loans, mutual funds, etc……just give the westerners (the jew) with their advanced financial products a clean shot at seducing those 1,400 million Chinese consumers and the friction would melt away. No westerner actually gives a rat’s ass about the form of government or the lack of religion or dearth of a first amendment or anything else….just the exclusion from plundering a vast consumer market. Afterall, have seen studies where the percent of GDP in the actual private sector is 50% in China, but only 43% in the USA. Half of Boeing’s gross is government contracting, the farmers all get subsidized heavily, half the adult population gets steady government checks, etc, etc ad nauseum. Forget that silly Century of Humiliation or the Opium Wars, and allow the financial jew in to loot and plunder…..and all will be well.

  17. Paul says:
    @last straw

    It is certainly not destabilization.

  18. Paul says:
    @last straw

    “The U.S. multinationals set up shop in China and then import the products back to America to enrich themselves.”

    Those are not the only Chinese exports.

  19. CAL2 says:
    @Ron Unz

    From the article:

    There was a massacre that morning. Journalists have to be precise about where it happened and who were its victims, or readers and viewers will never be able to understand what it meant.

    He never said there wasn’t a massacre. His claim is it happened outside of the square. He also states that he wasn’t there. The reporters who were looking from their hotel didn’t have a good view either. And he discards the reports of any reporter in the square with the wave of the hand. He’s basing his claim that they are myths on one book. Maybe those authors are correct. Maybe they aren’t. The article though does not exonerate the Chinese gov’t from killing a lot of people during the protests.

  20. @Max Parry

    Mr. Parry.. the new link you know offer as further evidence of your assertion that the US is behind the Hong Kong rebellion is as flawed as the first one you similarly provide.

    You refer to a Mint press article which says, in part:

    Some of the groups involved receive significant funding from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a CIA soft-power cutout that has played a critical role in innumerable U.S. regime-change operations.

    Like your previous link this conjecture comes without facts or proof to back it up. Not one factual reference. So why should any objective reader believe this claim?

    Within the Mint Press article that you called to my attention I did see a comment which I think is solid food for thought on what is really happening in Hong Kong and these types of articles:

    This assessment doesn’t do Hong Kong justice for two reasons: firstly, it portrays Hong Kongers’ grievances at the status quo as fictional and illegitimate, when they are in fact real, and it treats the protesters as pawns, when many in fact are taking to the streets of their own accord. Secondly, by treating the US as the sole independent actor in the movement and focusing entirely on analyzing and criticizing its actions in other countries, it only strengthens a United States-centred worldview that the mainstream media likewise seeks to disseminate.

    Let’s hope Mint Press doesn’t make this mistake.

    I believe your article and the two links you use to bolster your assertion has indeed made this mistake. Although I do agree that subsequent to the protests beginning US NGOs are likely to attempt to perform their usual tricks, which you very well document, these protests are organic and were not spawned by NGOs, rather the social conditions imposed by the Chinese.

    As the quote points out, your article and the ones you reference minimize and delegitimize the sincere efforts of the protesters. This too is my concern in first commenting on an otherwise good article. Cheers!

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  21. Sean says:

    More like 30 years too late, the U.S. has began trying to destabilize China.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanjing_anti-African_protests

    Tiananmen Square protests
    The Nanjing protests were groundbreaking dissidence for China and went from solely expressing concern about alleged improprieties by African men to increasingly calling for democracy or human rights.[2] They were paralleled by burgeoning demonstrations in other cities during the period between the Nanjing and the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, with some elements of the original protests that started in Nanjing still evident in Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, such as banners proclaiming “Stop Taking Advantage of Chinese Women” even though the vast majority of African students had left the country by that point.[3][4][5]

    Revolutions are contagious 1848, 1968, 1989. By 2011 it was understood that youth bulges (actually excess young men competing for girls) had much to do with it and the Arabs spring revolutions were actually predicted by many sociologists on the basis of the age structure in those countries and the excess of second sons.

    Carter noted that while the U.S. is spending hundreds of billions on defense instead of redeveloping its crumbling infrastructure, China is using its productive power to help its people and leading the way in constructing high-speed railroads. He contrasted the wasteful Pentagon budget with the PRC “which has not wasted a penny on war” which he attributed to his own credit in “normalizing diplomatic relations with China in 1979.”

    Carter actually signed an order directing US officials to facilitate Chinese economic growth. Whether this is to be regarded as normanisation is dubious, especially in view of Korea and Vietnam, which were clear defeats of America by China. Vietnam totally destabilized US and the Cinese were behind it but the US misidentified the more dangerous enemy.

    I suppose it was because the USSR was considered the greater threat but the problem was the policy outlived its original purpose because the entry of hundreds of millions of Chinese onto the global workforce enabled vast profits for the ruling class and let them halt the rise in wages in the West. To get access to the Chinese market companies like Boing Apple and Google have to build facilities in China, which is notorious for industrial espionage among businessmen who go there with throw away phones and laptops.

    It has become clear that in a fair economic contest China will triumph and the Western elites will be incentivised (ie paid off) to deal with their own increasingly redundant working class. Chinese people are the hardest working in the world, so they will dominate us if we play fair.

  22. My professor in collage was a student there at the TAM plaza during the time. She don’t tell much about that experience. She feel sorry that she joined, regret born being that generation that got her taking part in that event, otherwise she would have done better than become a collage professor in the top ten University in China. Feels like it’s some youth stupidity and burning blood being manipulated by different adult politics.
    How valuable a young collage student was for China in 1989! People outside China can’t image that.
    I never believe any rumor that they were shoot and tanked, maltreated by the government like enemy, though media sensor in China made no formal information available during my youth about this event so all I can got is the misleading report from China haters with their propaganda and photos.
    CCP Government get their wrong doings at the time before the student were guided to walk out for demonstration, for sure, the party have internal conflict and argument inside the party about what and how socialism and communism means to the party, about whether the party was doing the right thing, you don’t come up with new ideas and new policies that all your team members agree with so easily, you yourself can’t be very sure about it especially when the new stuff lead the whole country, that’s why the party keep silent about the TAM event. Even nowadays people in China is still not very sure about what exactly is socialism, communism, what exact ideology China is going after. We are not sure about it anymore, so we just simply talk about national rejuvenation, which is good enough.
    But we are sure that the wrong doings is not about how the party solved the event and how they treated the students.
    You can’t beat China, except it’s about ideology debate. Well luckily we Chinese people don’t care that much about ideology any more, and our language is in no position to debate with you.
    You can keep on fool your people with all the ideology about democracy, human right, capitalism, communism, free speech and media, blah blah blah…
    The longer you fool them, the bigger you lie to them, the worse your people will suffer as payback.
    Fuck all the ideology.
    Being different with you, if we fail, we are the evil demon.
    Being different with you, if we succeed, we are the hope of human being, we are the salvation of this evil world.
    That’s the only logic you can process with, we got it.

  23. Leave the chinks alone and let them kill each other in peace.

  24. @fnn

    The bit about Chinese meat consumption, in particular, is ludicrous. And in any case the Chinese Government intends reducing meat consumption by 25, primarily for its health benefits.

  25. @Jason Liu

    The Western opposition to China is primarily because it is a ‘non-Caucasian’ society, as one US ideologue admitted recently.

  26. Free trader and New Democrat Bill Clinton granted Most Favored Nation trade status to China the same year as Tiananmen Square. Correct me if I am wrong about the date.

    The basis of American strength and prosperity, manufacturing, was outsourced to China making her the super power she is today.

    So now China is our big bad enemy?

    The enemy of the American people is the swamp. The District of Corruption.

  27. @Dieter Kief

    Parse his sentence: He doesn’t say “Everybody,” he says “MSM.” Given what you see and hear in the MSM, particularly in the US, can you really say Mr. Unz is wrong or is overstating things?

    I recently asked an American fund manager for his take on the BRI, and he dismissed it as going nowhere significant in the foreseeable future. He is either an idiot, or he has supreme faith that the forces of good will indeed prevail over those of evil, because that is what he is being spoon-fed via the MSM and the financial media.

  28. @Curmudgeon

    You could also mention state-sponsored media, like CBC and BBC.

  29. Half-Jap says:
    @fnn

    They eat quite a lot of fish, too, and here we japs are blaming and hunting the whales for eating too much fish, all the while continuing the irradiation ffs..

  30. onebornfree says: • Website

    Max Parry says: “Despite its market economy and the adoption of some outward capitalist features, its public and state-owned enterprises are of much greater prevalence. The state sector has a bigger share in everything from transit to energy while virtually all land and property is still owned by collectivities or the state.”

    In other words, its not a “market economy” at all, fer chrissakes!, it’s just yet another centrally run “boondoggle” economic system of “legal”extortion – which means that it will at some point [hopefully soon!] completely collapse, as all centralized systems must. Talk about hypocrisy! 🙂

    “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” George Santayana

    Max Parry says: “There is not a single private bank in China which includes the world’s largest that is state-controlled, as are virtually all major media outlets from television to newspapers.”

    This sentence is completely contradictory and makes no sense. Are Chinese banks , including “the world’s largest “, plus “all major media outlets from television to newspapers”, state run or fully private?

    I’m guessing they’re all state -run 🙂 . Which begs the question: if all “major media outlets from television to newspapers” are merely mouthpiece/bullhorns of the Chinese state, why in God’s name would anyone believe what they claim did/did not happened in Tiananmen Square, or about the claimed health of its economy, or about anything else, for that matter?

    “Taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class.” Albert J. Nock

    “If one understands that Socialism is not a ‘share the wealth’ program but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super rich men promoting Socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead it becomes logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism, or more accurately Socialism, is not a movement of the down-trodden masses but of the economic elite.” -Gary Allen

    Yet another Unz article promoting the “benefits” of communism and of having our lives run by a supposedly “legal” gang of crooks who really do “have everyone’s best interests” at heart.

    Yeah right! Total, frickin’, tripe!

    No regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @refl
  31. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Brett Redmayne-Titley

    your article and the ones you reference minimize and delegitimize the sincere efforts of the protesters

    Sometimes protesters are sincere. It’s rare but it happens. Sometimes they have agendas they don’t want you to know about. Mostly they’re being used by people with an agenda.

    In this instance I suspect it’s mostly the third case.

    Protests should always be viewed with a great deal of healthy scepticism.

  32. Parfois1 says:
    @Dieter Kief

    Aren’t you here going too far Mr. Unz? I mean, your platform is very important and does make a big difference indeed, that’s true for sure. But why discredit everybody else completely?

    Perhaps if you read and understood what Mr Unz stated, you wouldn’t need to make that question and look so foolish.

    You should praise the man who opens to all of us a window into the world without the heavy censorship of the MSM in bed with the state officialdom.

  33. Realist says:
    @Ron Unz

    Thus, the continuing effort by almost all our MSM organs to heavily promote this bit of “Fake News” is utterly, totally ridiculous, and just one more reason why we can’t trust a single word they say about absolutely anything…

    That is also true for most of the intelligence services.

  34. MLK says:

    30 Years After Tiananmen Square, the U.S. Is Still Trying to Destabilize China

    That’s very funny. CCP China won the post-Cold War quarter century hands down. It had a great deal of help from American Trade Patsies and Fifth Columnists.

  35. refl says:
    @Dieter Kief

    It is not only about distrusting MSM, but also about taking a critical look at any information you get. Just yesterday, I scrolled through epochtimes, only to find that on China, Iran and Venezuela they offered nothing better then any Mainstream site (correct me, if I missed something).
    The basical fact is that there is a geopolitical agenda, which has always been there and that one needs to grasp. Everything that happens around countries that dare act against the Western powers will be tested by these powers, if it can be used to further their agenda. The protests in Hongkong may very well have their local reasons, but the protesters will not be able to set a foot on the street without being coopted.
    Back in 1989, when Soviet Europe was still there, people in the West (myself certainly for being to young then) did not see this agenda clearly. However, since the unique chance of integrating Russia into the western community of states by offering it a fair deal, since indeed revealing that there never was that western community to begin with, apart from crass tyranny by the 0.1%, since then there is no excuse not to see the agenda anymore.
    So still believing in the tiananmen myth is anachronistic. The students were fooled by their Western handlers, the state prevailed. For anything else, I lack any possibility to get unbiased information.

  36. Realist says:
    @neutral

    If China became a democracy it would mean that it will be ruled by foreigners.

    If China became a democracy it would mean that it will be ruled by idiots.

    FIFY

    A case in point is the US. Any form of government that allows idiots to participate will fail.

    • Replies: @onebornfree
  37. Escher says:

    To the author and Mr. Unz:
    While not denying the fact that the west has and continues to meddle in China and wherever else it feels the need to do so, it’s not like the Chinese communists are saints.
    Are you saying the news below is all made up:

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-48825090

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/China_hidden_camps

  38. The zionists are behind antifa in the US and the color revolution in China and created AL CIADA aka ISIS in the mideast, the zionist agenda at work, wrecking , destroying nations around the globe, read the Protocols of Zion for a complete look at the zionist agenda.

  39. onebornfree says: • Website

    Max Parry says: “……GALLO HEADED EAST TO HIS CAR. THEREFORE, HE COULD NOT COMMENT ON REPORTS THAT STUDENTS WERE AMBUSHED AND SLAUGHTERED IN THE ALLEY JUST WEST OF THE SQUARE NEAR THE BEIJING CONCERT HALL.”

    So that somehow means that because Gallo didn’t see it, it didn’t even happen?

    Max Parry says: “The truth seems to be much closer to the Chinese government figures of around a few hundred fatalities,”

    Oh, so now it’s “only” a few hundred fatalities? Well, that makes it all perfectly OK then! 🙂

    Where do you find these clowns, Ron?

    No regards, onebornfree

  40. Realist says:
    @Jason Liu

    The American deep set is just upset that countries can succeed without being a liberal democracy, since this proves that their system is not necessary and can be questioned.

    Totally agree. Democracy: A form of government where idiots, elect idiots to govern them.

    • Replies: @onebornfree
  41. refl says:
    @onebornfree

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” George Santayana

    There is another quote by Santayana that I like even better: “History is nothing but a pack of lies about things that never happened, told by people who were not there.”
    Get over it: that whole capitalism/ communism dichotomy was never good for anything but to scare the shit out of us. A state that manages to care for a population in the billions is an achievement. The situation is simply different from the US, where small numbers of colonizers entered a space with chances for all (or how the myth goes).

    • Replies: @onebornfree
  42. Miggle says:

    The truth seems to be much closer to the Chinese government figures of around a few hundred fatalities, not thousands, during what were violent clashes and not any one-sided massacre.

    How does this compare with the Waco Massacre? Police with with wooden batons, without firearms, compared with …?

    • Agree: DESERT FOX
    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  43. onebornfree says: • Website
    @Realist

    Realist says: ” If China became a democracy it would mean that it will be ruled by idiots.”

    It’s already ruled by idiots. Therefor, why change? It don’t need no stinkin’ “democracy”! 🙂

    “We seem to be in the midst of what may be a dangerous return to the worst political ideas and policies of the 20th century. We must first understand that philosophically they all originate from a common root. The group, the tribe, the nation, the race, the social class are declared to be superior to and all-controlling over the individual members of society.

    The words “freedom” and “liberation” are widely used by all the proponents of these variations on the collectivist theme, but their use, in fact, has nothing to do with either freedom or liberation. They reflect instances of George Orwell’s “newspeak” in his famous anti-totalitarian novel 1984. The meanings of words are turned on their heads and are used in ways opposite to their original meanings. Hence, political control and manipulation means to have real personal freedom from tyranny; and complete intolerance and censorship of views and actions inconsistent with the “progressive” and democratic socialist views of the world means to have real intellectual and social liberation from oppression……”:

    From: “All Socialisms Are Antisocial” : http://econintersect.com/pages/opinion/opinion.php?post=201905150037

    Regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @Anounder
  44. What happened in Tiananmen Square is just one indication of a much larger problem that is behind it. Chinese values are not the same as ours, and their dominators believe in applying their values everywhere. One expectable outcome, of their actions now taking place, will be that –perhaps as little as 200 years– the Chinese will dominate the entire sub-Saharan area of the continent of Africa. They are there now, and no one on our side even openly recognizes this fact, much less is doing anything effective about it. Just making it publicly known among our own populations generally would have an important positive effect, but our dominators prefer stealth and dishonesty in dealing with such problems, when they do deal with them, which appears to be rarely. Stealth and dishonesty are very old games, and the Chinese have more experience at them than our people do. Add this fact to their lack of certain principles of humanitarian values and you can see that Africa will very likely be theirs within that relatively short period of time.

    • Replies: @Anounder
  45. onebornfree says: • Website
    @refl

    refl says: “A state that manages to care for a population in the billions is an achievement. “

    Your belief / faith in a states abilities is er, “admirable”. 🙁

    The only way a state can “care for” anyone, [let alone “billions”], is to first rob somebody else.

    When that state-wide systemic robbery [taxes] becomes too noticeable and obvious even to its slaves [as it must, over time- after all, even dimwits have their limits], the state must then resort to easier to hide[ initially] monetary debasement to devalue its currency and thereby continue the robbery of the slaves and hence spend itself into oblivion, at some point in the future. This is what the states “taking care of the population” means, in reality.

    But as the economist Keynes observed : “In the long run we’re all dead” 🙂 .

    Regards, onebornfree

  46. onebornfree says: • Website
    @Realist

    Realist says: “Democracy: A form of government where idiots, elect idiots to govern them”

    “Democracy is a sort of laughing gas. It will not cure anything, perhaps, but it unquestionably stops the pain.” H.L. Mencken

    “Liberty and democracy are eternal enemies, and every one knows it who has ever given any sober reflection to the matter. ” H.L. Mencken

    “Democracy is the worship of jackals by jackasses.” H.L. Mencken

    “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” H.L. Mencken

    “If x is the population of the United States and y is the degree of imbecility of the average American, then democracy is the theory that x times y is less than y.” H.L. Mencken

    “All of democracy’s axioms “resolve themselves into thundering paradoxes, many amounting to downright contradictions in terms. The mob is competent to rule the rest of us – but it must be rigorously policed itself. There is a government, not of men, but laws – but men are set upon benches to decide finally what the law is and may be.” H.L. Mencken

    regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @dfordoom
  47. Realist says:
    @onebornfree

    It’s already ruled by idiots. Therefor, why change? It don’t need no stinkin’ “democracy”! 🙂

    If only the US were led by ‘idiots’ like the Chinese are. Their advancements in everything of importance far exceeds the US. They are kicking our ass.

    • Replies: @onebornfree
  48. Realist says:
    @onebornfree

    Yes, H. L. Mencken was correct about democracy and many other things. I am surprised you quote him.

  49. Yee says:

    MLK,

    “That’s very funny. CCP China won the post-Cold War quarter century hands down. It had a great deal of help from American Trade Patsies and Fifth Columnists.”

    Well, haven’t you noticed the pattern in Latin America and Southeast Asia? You have to let the victim work up some wealth for plunder.

    Actually, in the post-cold war 90s, Southeast Asia grew much faster than China. They were called the Tiger Cub Economies then. The 1998 financial crisis strip them bare. In the 80s, it was Latin America.

    On Chinese Internet forums, it’s generally believed that China was the designated victim in 2008. There were the same western media campaign against China and unrest in Tibet and Xinjiang as today in HK. Whether by some twist of fate or clever maneuver, the US market collapsed first and China walked away.

    Now, everyone is waiting for the next round of financial crisis, media campaign and unrest in China appears again…

  50. onebornfree says: • Website
    @Realist

    Realist says: “If only the US were led by ‘idiots’ like the Chinese are. ”

    Well, surely, if its good there as you believe- why don’t you just move there?

    Or are you waiting for the Chinese to take over here perhaps?

    Regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @DESERT FOX
    , @Realist
    , @Anounder
  51. @onebornfree

    Everything technology wise and most of their industry has been given to them by the zio/US, in 1973 David Rockerfeller sent his wingman Kissinger over to China to open the slave labor to the US industrialists and now virtually every major US company has factories in China and so the so called China threat, was built in the zio/USA.

    • Replies: @foolisholdman
  52. Che Guava says:

    I spemt some time replying to Max’s article (both directions and Iknow he never reads any comments here, pointless,I will gsrant.,, but I was also making several re. China and perceptions of, because the site was behaving bizarrely ()like making the edit box for my comment one line), it is a complaint.

    My comment was not a preciour leaf, but witty and r.arefful, and well though out. That server-side fuckups dumped it, well, I will not try to reconstruct it, though it was eloquent. Almost two a.m. here, I have a hard day of work tomorrow, so this is just a complaint (and justifiable..

  53. onebornfree says: • Website

    DESERT FOX says: “Everything technology wise and most of their industry has been given to them by the zio/US, in 1973 David Rockerfeller sent his wingman Kissinger over to China to open the slave labor to the US industrialists and now virtually every major US company has factories in China and so the so called China threat, was built in the zio/USA.”

    Shhhhh… , don’t tell anyone!

    Regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @DESERT FOX
  54. @onebornfree

    This is what the zio/US did in WWII, if you get a chance , read the book The Crime and Punishment of I. G. Farben by Joseph Borkin and the book Trading With The Enemy by Charles Hingham.

  55. @Curmudgeon

    Free enterprise is always better than commie ownership.

    Of course, free enterprise means free enterprise: no crony capitalists, no central banks, no central planning, no industrial planning, no subsidies, no “American system” which was championed by Abe, no de jure monopolies, no licensing regimes, et al.

    Neither deplorable redneck nor nihilistic negro have a right to any subsidized product or service. In fact, its barbaric to suggest they do as in order to make it happen, A’s property must be forcibly taken from him by parasitic apparatchiks so that the aforementioned redneck and negro can receive ersatz products or services.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  56. Realist says:
    @onebornfree

    Well, surely, if its good there as you believe- why don’t you just move there?

    That dumbass idea is the reason unwanted migrants are flooding this country. People should stay in their country and make it better….instead of running away.

    I am in my mid 70’s and don’t speak mandarin. For most of my life this country wasn’t as screwed up as now.

  57. @fnn

    The Economist, Reuters, The Daily Telegraph. You rely on these as sources of information? Read them for a day or two and you will see obvious lies, every day. No doubt there are polluted waters and contaminated rivers and the air quality is very bad, but the Chinese government and their scientist are working on the problems and they will fix them.

    As to

    “The Western capitalists who brought the New China into being”

    Well! Who they?

  58. @Miggle

    LOL. The ATF whacked all those people at WACO without mercy just because one wacko wouldn’t pay his tax. I wonder if the Chinese people obsess as much about the injustices and brutality of the US government. And some think the US should be a role model for China or whoever.

  59. @DESERT FOX

    You and many other commentators make it sound as though the entire rise of China as an industrial and economic power was the work of US capitalists. It wasn’t. That the input of US companies helped the Chinese develop is undeniable, but they did not enter into a China that was devoid of industry or a country with an uneducated workforce. Far from it! There were masses of relatively highly skilled workers, large numbers of educated technicians, engineers and scientists and a lot of heavy and light industry already in existence long before the “opening up”.
    Right from the declaration of the PRC in October 1949, there was a great push to produce an educated workforce. To cultivate and to attract back to China scientists and engineers who had studied and worked abroad, both to work in China as scientists and engineers and to teach in the established and increasingly in the newly founded universities.

    There was at the same time a huge effort to develop both heavy and light industry.

    • Replies: @DESERT FOX
    , @dfordoom
  60. @Realist

    Well, surely, if its good there as you believe- why don’t you just move there?

    Sure! If I think the French do something better than the English – I should go and live in France?
    If I think the Germans do some thing better than the English – I should go and live in Germany?

    This sort of remark has followed me around since I was a schoolboy. It is a lazy way of saying “Shut up! I don’t want to listen to you!”

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @Realist
  61. Realist says:
    @foolisholdman

    This sort of remark has followed me around since I was a schoolboy. It is a lazy way of saying “Shut up! I don’t want to listen to you!”

    That has been my experience also.

  62. Realist says:
    @foolisholdman

    I think you meant to reply to @onebornfree. I ‘boxed’ his quote to me.

  63. @foolisholdman

    I disagree, and stand by what I said and Mao’s great leap forward in the 50’s was a disaster that set China back and was only saved by US investment thanks to David Rockerfeller opening up Chinas slave labor to the US industrialists in 1973.

  64. Zionist mouthpiece Breitbart has an article almost daily about China’s “oppression” of the Uighurs. The funny thing is, with each article, 99% of the commenters who are usually anti-China are supportive of China in this case: “The Chinese are a lot smarter”, “China knows what they’re doing”, “If we have any sense we’d do the same” etc.

    Not just the msm but even The American Conservative have joined in on the blame, and National Review. All crying their crocodile tears. America crying over the mistreatment of Muslims is the ultimate hypocrisy. Our elites on both sides make me sick.

    • Replies: @Jason Liu
  65. red china is a menace to the entire world.

    Only a reptile or insect would eat dogs and cats, and chingchong is both.

  66. Even if China is “re-educating” Muslims, so what?

    Who gives a flying fig about China?

    And who gives a flying fig about Muslims?

    Let me guess, Jews? Yep.

    Must. Rule. The World.

    • Replies: @Anounder
  67. Anounder says:
    @onebornfree

    The Chinese are more Yellow than America is White. They breed more too.

  68. Anounder says:
    @onebornfree

    Tell us more on how a Jewish Libertarian should give advice on how to build a non-degenerate society. And also that men are born as socially atomized with no obligations to their parents, ancestors, race, etc.

    Then, again you’re alienated so…

  69. Anounder says:
    @Robert H. Burt

    The Chinese actually give a damn about preserving their heritage, letting it shimmer. Hence them having higher births than Europoors and Amerifats.

  70. Anounder says:
    @Tired of Not Winning

    The PRC state leaves the Hui well alone since they aren’t hostile. The Uyghurs have been obviously infested with Wahhabism and are serving as an arm of Globohomo to chimpout against China.

  71. Henry Ford said in his book The International Jew, published 100 years ago in 1920, that finance is not national but international, and that it was a well coordinated system run by Jews. Ford said that throughout history Jews have excelled in usury, but not by loaning money to individuals, they had much bigger plans. They excelled in loaning money to nations, specifically kings and nobles, then exploited national prejudices and animosities and talked them into wars. With each war, more gentiles died and more money was owed to the Jews, a win-win.

    A hundred years later, not much has changed.

    Jews are keen on toppling the Chinese government because they know China is a gold mine, with an economy that will soon overtake that of the US. Yet the Chinese financial system remains a closed system. Last July, after much pressure from the US, the Shanghai stock exchange finally allowed some 62 foreign countries to buy A shares in China (traded in Yuan, B shares are traded in foreign currencies). And last October, they finally allowed foreign banks to set up wholly owned banks and branches in China. Yet as long as the Chinese government is not elected by “free and fair” elections, the Jews will have a hard time gaining influence on who runs that country.

  72. onebornfree says: • Website
    @Realist

    Realist says: “People should stay in their country and make it better….instead of running away”.

    Well, I would have hoped that at your somewhat advanced age [congratulations on getting there BTW] , you’d have realized that people almost never do what you, or I think they “should” do.

    The fact that you haven’t realized this yet means that, like many here and elsewhere, you are guaranteed to live the rest of your life with a certain amount of misery, anger and resentment merely because you have chosen to ignore a simple, plain as day, fact of life, that is: people as a whole almost never do/think as you think they “should”. You’re just setting yourself up for more misery, as far as I can see. Good luck with that .

    [ Sorry, and I’m not trying to offend, but I don’t think your moniker here, “Realist” is even close – “Fantasist” would be much closer, unfortunately . 🙂 ]

    Regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @redmudhooch
  73. Jim S says:

    Mr Unz,
    Yours is a powerful voice and I greatly admire your dedication to the pursuit of truth. Please be wary of mistakenly endorsing one form of tyranny as you seek to indict another. For all our learning, knowledge and technology there is no shortage of tyrants and would-be tyrants in the world today.

    I’ve been reflecting on the nature of truth, and it seems to me that one of our greatest errors in the post-industrial age is to take the concept of truth for granted. I took it for granted until relatively recently. We ought guard it jealously.

  74. Realist says:
    @onebornfree

    The fact that you haven’t realized this yet means that, like many here and elsewhere, you are guaranteed to live the rest of your life with a certain amount of misery, anger and resentment merely because you have chosen to ignore a simple, plain as day, fact of life, that is: people as a whole almost never do/think as you think they “should”.

    I don’t let other people’s decisions upset me.

    [ Sorry, and I’m not trying to offend, but I don’t think your moniker here, “Realist” is even close – “Fantasist” would be much closer, unfortunately .

    Oh sure you are trying to offend. I just don’t care about your opinion and your ‘worldly wisdom’

  75. Jason Liu says:
    @Tired of Not Winning

    Conservatives and even nationalists often turn into liberal democrats when it comes to foreign countries they consider hostile. I’m not sure if that hypocrisy is intentional, or they’re just dumb.

  76. Bill says:
    @jim jones

    Video cameras were cheap and ubiquitous by then. There were Western journalists present.
    So why is there no video of the massacre? It’s really weird.

  77. @onebornfree

    onebornfree is a commie, just too dumb to realize it

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withering_away_of_the_state

    “Withering away of the state” is a Marxist concept coined by Friedrich Engels referring to the idea that with realization of the ideals of socialism the social institution of a state will eventually become obsolete and disappear as the society will be able to govern itself without the state and its coercive enforcement of the law.

    The interference of the state power in social relations becomes superfluous in one sphere after another, and then ceases of itself. The government of persons is replaced by the administration of things and the direction of the processes of production. The state is not “abolished”, it withers away.

    Another related quote from Engels comes from Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State: The society which organizes production anew on the basis of free and equal association of the producers will put the whole state machinery where it will then belong—into the museum of antiquities, next to the spinning wheel and the bronze ax.

    Although Engels first introduced the idea of the withering away of the state, he attributed the underlying concept to Karl Marx, and other Marxist theorists—including Vladimir Lenin—would later expand on it. According to this concept of the withering away of the state, eventually a communist society will no longer require coercion to induce individuals to behave in a way that benefits the entire society. Such a society would occur after a temporary period of the
    dictatorship of the proletariat.

    It proceeds from the concept of the transformation of the state in the previous stage of society called socialism. Engels posits that—similar to the arguments made by Henri de Saint-Simon before him—in a socialist society public organization would become primarily concerned with technical issues such as the optimal allocation of resources and determination of production as opposed to drafting and enforcing laws and thus the traditional state functions would gradually become irrelevant and unnecessary for the functioning of society. Engels argued that the state transforms itself from a “government of people, but the administration of things” and thus would not be a state in the traditional sense of the term.

    This scenario depended on Marx’s view of coercive power as a tool of those who own the means of production, i.e. certain social classes (the bourgeoisie) and the capitalist state. In a communist society, the social classes would disappear and the means of production would have no single owner, hence such a stateless society will no longer require law and stateless communist society will develop.

    The concept of the withering away of the state differentiates traditional Marxism from state socialism (which accepted the retention of the institution of the state) and anti-statist anarchism (which demanded the immediate abolition of the state with no perceived need for any “temporary” post-revolutionary institution of the state).

    In the Soviet Marxism of the Soviet Union, Lenin supported the idea of the withering away of the state as seen in his The State and Revolution (1917). Joseph Stalin’s government mentioned it occasionally, but did not believe the world was yet in the advanced stage of development where the state could wither away. He believed that at least in the short term the state had to have enough power to strike back against those elements seeking to derail the ultimate victory of communism. Thus, the Stalin-era Soviet Union marginalized the notion of the withering of the state.

    • Replies: @Biff
  78. Good article, I wouldn’t call any of these CIA mouthpieces the “left” though. The liberals/Democrats are just the other side of the capitalist coin. They’re imperialists posing as the “left” and even as socialists.

    https://thegrayzone.com/2019/07/06/dsa-jacobin-iso-socialism-conference-us-funded-regime-change/

    It is ironic that Soros has become so hated on the political right in the West when it was his “philanthropic” agencies that were instrumental in the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and attempted the same in China.

    According to some geniuses here and other right wing websites Soros is a communist, a socialist, globalist and a marxist, at the same time being a Nazi and a fascist. LOL… Folks, he’s a capitalist.

    The feigned outcry of the West toward any unsubstantiated human rights abuses rings hollow given that which is taking place in GITMO and numerous U.S. black sites around the world.

    Yep.

    This long believed association was confirmed in a leaked Hillary Clinton email from 2014 published by WikiLeaks:

    “While this military/para-military operation is moving forward, we need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region.”

    Selling arms to Saudi Arabia is nothing short of selling arms to ISIS and Al Queda. That is where the weapons will end up, to be used to murder Christians and Muslims alike. This continues under Trump, nothing changed. When he talks of pulling out of Syria, he still wants US taxpayers to pay the British and French to keep troops in Syria, as well as private mercs from Blackwater and such, so again nothing changes.

    The strategy of the empire’s information warfare is to invert reality and depict China as a regional tyrant and surveillance state persecuting its religious minorities while seeking colonial dominance and polluting the environment. It’s hard to imagine a clearer case of imperial projection, where the U.S.’s own signature wrongdoings are being displaced onto its chief rival.

    Everything the empire claims someone is doing is projection. If they accuse someone of doing something nefarious or evil, you can bet your last dollar that they plan on or are currently doing it themselves. Bet on it.

  79. dfordoom says: • Website
    @onebornfree

    “Liberty and democracy are eternal enemies, and every one knows it who has ever given any sober reflection to the matter. ” H.L. Mencken

    That’s quite true. That’s why the Chinese would be wise to have nothing to do with democracy.

  80. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Liberty Mike

    Free enterprise is always better than commie ownership.

    Free enterprise sounds great in theory. In practice it doesn’t exist and can’t exist. It’s not a real world system.

  81. dfordoom says: • Website
    @foolisholdman

    Right from the declaration of the PRC in October 1949, there was a great push to produce an educated workforce. To cultivate and to attract back to China scientists and engineers who had studied and worked abroad, both to work in China as scientists and engineers and to teach in the established and increasingly in the newly founded universities.

    There was at the same time a huge effort to develop both heavy and light industry.

    Some people really hate the idea of admitting that the Chinese might be succeeding because they’ve worked hard for that success. Sinophobia is driven to a considerable extent by American jealousy of anyone else’s success.

    • Replies: @Wally
    , @DESERT FOX
    , @Anounder
  82. Wally says:

    Parry said:
    “While Trump ….. has launched a protectionist trade war with tariffs on Chinese imports in an ill-fated attempt at stimulating domestic manufacturing and industry. ”

    – Parry lied.
    Trump’s call for relatively small tariffs on Chinese goods are a reaction to the utterly massive Chinese tariffs on American goods. Not to mention China’s theft of US technology.
    i.e.:
    UCLA Professor Faces 200+ Year Sentence for Smuggling Tech to China: https://trulytimes.com/ucla-professor-faces-200-year-sentence-for-smuggling-tech-to-china.html
    UCLA Professor Stole Missile Secrets for China, Faces 219 Years in Prison: https://www.newsweek.com/ucla-professor-stole-missile-secrets-china-219-years-prison-espionage-1447286

    More on the predictably unreliable nature of Max Parry:
    http://www.unz.com/?s=parry&Action=Search&ptype=all&commentsearch=only&commenter=Wally

  83. Wally says:
    @dfordoom

    To an extent I agree, the Chinese are bright and do work very hard.

    However, we cannot ignore their wrongs.

  84. denk says:

    Swarming adolecents

    Using impressionable teens, still wet behind their ears as foot soldiers of regime change.
    PIoneered by Gene Sharp of the Einstein institute as a ‘non violent ‘ mean to topple ‘undemocratic regimes’,
    yet as TAM, Kosovo, HK clearly show, it often turned out to be anything but peaceful, with agent provocateurs going out its way to provoke a reaction from the govn, within min, the message ‘brutal crackdown on peaceful protest ‘ would be splashed across the TV screen all over the world.
    It a well worn routine since TAM,
    they’ve honed it into a science.

    YOu see hordes of swarming adolecents in the HK protests, gawd know how much they know about the extradition law ?
    I heard the churches play a big role behind the scene, what did the pastors tell their young charges in the weekly sermons, lemme guess ?
    ‘The CCP is anti christ, they torture
    our bro , sis over there, they’r your enemy.’

    No wonder the CCP is starting to clamp down on the underground churches in the mainland, its hard enough to monitor what kind of fishy biz is going on in the registered churches, can you imagine what kind’ of craps have been pumped into the mind of those adolecents all these years in the underground churches ?

    There was this bloody gweilo who tried to sneak in thousands of bibles into China, he’s caught and sent packing, the Guardian screamed ‘xtian persecution in China‘, apparently they had never heard of xtians being burned or chopped up in some of the ‘democratic’ countries in Asia ?

    perhaps its already too late, too little, I heard China is already on track to be the most xtianised country…

    OMFG!

  85. denk says:

    Swarming adolecents,

    ‘A detailed investigative report on how the Milosevic regime was brought down through a carefully-orchestrated campaign under the guidance of US-based “pro-democracy” organisations using Mahatma Gandhi’s techniques of massive non-violent civil disobedience was carried by the “Washington Post” on December 11,2000.

    About 70,000 Yugoslav students, intellectuals, miners and other workers were secretly taken to Budapest in Hungary and trained in special camps set up there on mass demonstration techniques.’

    Who’s Col Helvey….?

    He was an officer of the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) of the Pentagon, who had served in Vietnam and, subsequently, as the US Defence Attache in Yangon, Myanmar, (1983 to 85) during which he clandestinely organised the Myanmarese students to work behind Aung San Suu Kyi and in collaboration with Bo Mya’s Karen insurgent group. He was subsequently based in Thailand where he organised the training of the student and Karen supporters of Aung San Suu Kyi. In 1988-89, he also trained in Hong Kong the student leaders from Beijing in mass demonstration techniques which they were to subsequently use in the Tiananmen Square incident of June,1989. He is now believed to be acting as an adviser to the Falun Gong, the religious sect of China, in similar civil disobedience techniques, which the sect is using with increasing effectiveness against the Chinese authorities. He has ostensibly retired from the DIA in 1991.

    http://web.archive.org/web/20060718062748/http://www.iefd.org/articles/ned_an_update.php

    As is well known by now, the UsualSuspects, NED, NDI are up to their eyeballs in the 2014 failed umbrella rev’ and the current unrest in HK.

    • Replies: @denk
  86. @dfordoom

    Mao’s great leap forward killed some 50 million Chinese and set China back years and the only thing that brought China out of the communist terror of the great leap forward was David Rockerfeller opening Chinas slave labor to the predator zio/US industrialists.

    • Replies: @Anounder
  87. denk says:
    @denk

    In 1988-89, he also trained in Hong Kong the student leaders from Beijing in mass demonstration techniques which they were to subsequently use in the Tiananmen Square

    Let this sink in…
    HK has been the base for destabilisaton of China for decades, a gawd damn trojan on the Chinese doorstep.

    1997, UK ‘returned’ HK to China, but have ‘they’ ever left ?

    *Former spy chief reveals MI6 targets China
    https://www.scmp.com/article/52872/former-spy-chief-reveals-mi6-targets-china

    *E Snowden
    ‘Yeah. I could be rendered by the CIA, I could have people come after me, or any of their third party partners, you know. They work closely with a number of other nations. Or, you know, they could pay off the Triads, or any, any of their agents or assets. We’ve got a CIA station just up the road in the consulate here in Hong Kong, and I’m sure they’re going to be very busy for the next week.

    Ralph McGehee, ex CIA.
    *We can predict that as the time to turn over of Hong Kong to Chinese authority nears—there will be CIA-generated demonstrations—in Hong Kong and in the United States and probably a number of other countries. Many of these demonstrations will be manned by the Chinese dissidents who exited China via CIA Yellowbird assets. Disinformation and demonizing stories will permeate our media based on CIA-generated stories.

    http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/55/765.html

    Ralph McGehee, Philip Agee, JOhn Stockwell were pioneer CIA whistle blowers, the real deals,.

    In this era of fake news, how many of the current ‘whistle blowers’ are bona fide, or limited handout operatives , or down right double agents ?
    The intercept role as disinfo agent is so obvious, yet many still swear by that intel front outfit. !

  88. @nsa

    The Chinese call themselves “the Jews of Asia” and they possess a few characteristics that will make it difficult for “the Lord thy God to deliver them before the Children of Israel” for the slaughter and/or enslavement commanded.

    For one thing, the Chinese are every bit as nepotistic and in-group oriented as Jews are–probably more so as a Confucian society incorporates flat-out ancestor worship.

    Second, the Chinese are very blunt about the characteristics of different human groups.

    Third, the Chinese, with their centralized concentration of political power, have the defensive mechanisms available to them that our aristocracies once provided us–capable of foresight and taking tough measures for the long-term. Since “democracies only learn from experience”, we are essentially defenseless by comparison.

    Fourth, the Chinese control their own media.

    Fifth, China, like the rest of the world, has been able to sit back and watch as the big American carp was drained of blood and, still feebly trying to swim, slowly turns belly up. They will analyze the shit out of our death spiral. There will be a large number of Chinese who know way more about why it is happening than 85 percent of the American people–95 percent of New York Times readers.

    Just recently, I saw a very good example of this on a personal level. In the mid-90s, I taught English in China. I was there for two years–half that time in Beijing. The university I taught at in Beijing was the Foreign Affairs College. This is the university that produces China’s diplomatic corps and, therefore, it is one of the most selective universities–if not the most selective university–in China. In China’s test-your-way-to-the-top university system, it goes without saying, that every one of these students was highly intelligent. They were also fluent in English.

    Most of the other foreign teachers were Harvard doctoral students. They were all absolutely sensitive to the Chinese culture and flawlessly ethno-inclusive. At least when there were students around. Among us Americans, however, the subtle witticisms belied a contempt just beneath the surface, especially noticeable, I have to say, from the American Jews.

    I, on the other hand, had already lived a year out in the Chinese boondocks and took my cue from the Chinese. I was blunt in my observations. I once witnessed three separate fist fights on the street in Beijing in one day. Unlike my colleagues, who would have feared to offend, I brought this up in class. I can’t remember the last time I saw even one fist fight on the street in America, I said, and in Beijing I see three in one day? On the other hand, you are far more likely to be a victim of violence on the streets of New York than the streets of Beijing.

    My honest criticism meant my praise was honest, and my students took to that. For a teacher to receive a standing ovation from his or her students on the last day of class is as rare in China as it is in the United States. I received two of them. I’m not trying to pat myself on the back, but it’s necessary to know that to understand what happened to me recently.

    I received a letter from a former student of mine from the Foreign Affairs College. She is now with a film company in Shanghai and working on a documentary project on race relations in the United States. She will be coming with a film crew later this year to get footage. She wanted to touch base with her old teacher while here so she looked me up online to get my address. And that’s how she found out that I am the plaintiff in a $4.755 million defamation claim against the Southern Poverty Law Center, and race relations are at the center of the claim.

    The standard Chinese take on race relations in the United States is: they’re bad. When I lived there, anyway, it was routine for the Chinese evening newscast to rebroadcast copies of whatever US news stories had aired in the US the day before that made the US look bad. Thus, there was lots of stuff on race, and all of it portraying whites as evil, blacks…well, you know.

    A she came to understand my suit, her interest in it grew to the point she now wants to change the focus of the documentary to Nelsen v SPLC exclusively. The story can still show America in a negative light, so it passes the Chinese censors, but it will show a whole different side of US race relations that the Chinese will find utterly fascinating.

    They will be shocked that a US non-profit, tax exempt charity with a half-billion dollars in assets–half of it off-shore out of the reach of US laws–could publish an article on their Hatewatch blog attacking a white guy for trying to start a program to stem the suicide epidemic among white males in the US, and, even though the program was open to men of any race, link the white guy to “Nazi atrocities”. They will be shocked that it only required two short SPLC articles to derail the white guy’s effort. That the overwhelmingly white residents of Lexington, Missouri stopped a white guy from opening a legal business, for which there is an urgent need, solely on the grounds that the program would benefit white men and white families, will seem absolutely insane to the Chinese, as surely, it is.

    And the Chinese will not refrain from exploring the Jewishness of the organization, nor how, shortly after I asked the court to freeze their assets, all the top Jews in the organization resigned in the same week.

    https://craignelsen/nelsen_v_splc/

    • Replies: @nsa
  89. Anounder says:
    @dfordoom

    A mutt country resents countries that are both accomplished and not mutts.

  90. Anounder says:
    @DESERT FOX

    America was founded after, before, and during the Amerindian slaughter.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @Alden
  91. Alden says:
    @Anounder

    Took my family only 215 years to conquer 3,500 miles from Plymouth Mass 1619 to the Pacific Coast.

    We came we saw we conquered.

  92. Alden says:
    @Anounder

    Since there are now 2/3 more Indians in the United States than there were in 1600, it wasn’t a genocide. In fact, we European Whites increased the Indian population. Same thing the Spanish did in Latin America.

    • Replies: @Anounder
  93. TheLOOP says:

    A biased witnesse made a false story about the square massacre and china gov always denied it because it wasn’t true. But the us gov knew it wasn’t true but let the myth be spread for decades.

    ~

    Here’s the actual facts contrary to western biased media who publishes just any china critical testimonial as facts at face value.

    [MORE]

    ~

    This effort is impressive, especially considering the overwhelming evidence that there was no Tiananmen Square massacre. A recent book by Madrid’s ambassador to Beijing at the time, Eugenio Bregolat, notes that Spain’s TVE channel had a television crew in the square at the time, and if there had been a massacre, they would have been the first to see it and record it.

    He points out angrily that most of the reports of an alleged massacre were made by journalists hunkered down in the safe haven of the Beijing Hotel, some distance from the square.

    Then there is Graham Earnshaw, a down-to-earth Reuters correspondent who spent the night of June 3-4 at the alleged site of the massacre — at the center of Tiananmen Square — interviewing students in detail until the troops finally arrived in the early dawn. He too failed to see any massacre. As he writes in his memoirs, “I was probably the only foreigner who saw the clearing of the square from the square itself.”

    Earnshaw confirms that most of the students had left peacefully much earlier and that the remaining few hundred were persuaded by the troops to do likewise.

    His account is confirmed by Xiaoping Li, a former China dissident, now resident in Canada, writing recently in Asia Sentinel and quoting Taiwan-born Hou Dejian who had been on a hunger strike on the square to show solidarity with the students: “Some people said 200 died in the square and others claimed that as many as 2,000 died. There were also stories of tanks running over students who were trying to leave. I have to say I did not see any of that. I was in the square until 6:30 in the morning.”

    Source

    https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2008/07/21/commentary/birth-of-a-massacre-myth/#.XSn5b1OuaDZ

  94. TheLOOP says:

    @Alden Umm, sorry to burst your bubble but not really.

    According to wiki, Indigenous people north and south were displaced, died of disease, and were killed by christian Europeans through slavery, rape, and war. In 1491, about 145 million people lived in the western hemisphere. By 1691, the population of indigenous Americans had declined by 90-95 percent, or by around 130 million people.

    It was never a fair fight. Armed with guns and against s tribe with arrows.

    Today there are 5.2 million native americans in USA. A dwarfed fraction of its 1600s former population. Not an improvement at all. Even the african amerucans and asian americans outnumber the native anerican indians today

    ~

    And fyi, most south americans today are ethnically spanish european people who significantly outnumber the indigenous people.

  95. Today there are 5.2 million native americans in USA. A dwarfed fraction of its 1600s former population. Not an improvement at all.

    …which is 5.2 million more than the Native-native Americans–the ones that were here before the Native Americans–the ones the Native Americans completely exterminated. We European-Americans treated the Native Americans way better than the Native Americans treated the Native-native Americans.

  96. Anounder says:
    @Alden

    Since there are now 2/3 more Indians in the United States than there were in 1600, it wasn’t a genocide.

    Repeat After Me: Mongrels and LARPers like Lizzy Warren don’t count as Amerindians. Actual Injuns are by large wiped out in North America.

    Also, go take a look at what Thomas Jefferson had to say what’s to be done with Injuns. For all the supposed babble about how amazing he saw them as, he never advocated legit coexistence rather than forcefully expelling them from whatever Whitey wanted (if only to segregate them), breeding them away, making them act White. He even violated a treaty the Cherokee had with government to work a deal with Georgia.

  97. 30 Years After Tiananmen Square, the U.S. Is Still Trying to Destabilize China

    It’s much longer than thirty years! No great Power wants or has ever wanted, other great powers to exist. The USA has never wanted a strong Chinese government, not even a strong Chiang Kai-shek government. At the end of WW2, the USA gave Chiang what they thought would be enough weapons to defeat the Communists, but not so much that when he had done that, China would be an important military power in its own right.

    Ever since, with twists and turns, with sudden shows of friendship alternating with bans and sanctions and prohibitions and propaganda, lies, threats, false suggestions, subversion and sabotage and the suppression of truth, the US has tried to prevent the rise of China.

    True, that the lure of the Chinese market and the low-paid Chinese workforce, seduced many US capitalists into cooperating with China, and the idea that China could be an ally against the USSR/Russia has worked in the other direction, but the aim was ever to reduce China to a subservient client state.

    Unfortunately for the US Deep State, they were up against the CCP. In particular, at the most critical time, they were up against the CCP led by Mao (And not to forget – Chou En-lai.)

    The people who followed Mao and Chou, were not stupid either and they understood the USA (and China) far better than the Deep State understood China and/or the USA. The results are there for all to see. (Those that want to, that is!)

  98. cassandra says:
    @neutral

    Very simply put, democracy is the enemy of people everywhere.

    Good for you! The difference between democracies and dicatatorships (monarchy or oligarchy), is that it’s much more difficult to tell who’s pulling the strings in democracies. Democracies have technically passed power to the people with one hand, while obscuring elite machinations with the other.

    It makes me think that rotten boroughs were a good thing after all: at least the interests behind their operations were obvious.

    Weaknesses of mass politics used to be discussed a lot, especially by fascists, so you don’t find much of it since WWII, and only recently, in more nationalist eastern european countries. Discussion of this angle, like so many issues, has become another third rail which should be touched now and again just to see what color sparks fly off.

  99. @Ron Unz

    I asked you this question before. Given recent developments, I’ll ask it again.

    What do you think of the whole Epstein case?

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  100. Ron Unz says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    I asked you this question before. Given recent developments, I’ll ask it again.

    What do you think of the whole Epstein case?

    Well, I’ll admit I’ve been too busy with my own work to pay much attention to it, at least beyond reading some of the stories in my morning newspapers, and glancing a bit at some of the discussion here.

    Obviously, the whole case seems extremely suspicious, and I think it’s fairly plausible that he had some connection with Mossad or perhaps was blackmailing lots of those wealthy and powerful people on a free-lance basis.

    The whole thing really demonstrates how totally corrupt our society has become in so many different ways. Based on this morning’s NYT article, Epstein seems to have been an egomaniac, and bribed lots of people to make him seem like a great genius. Amusingly enough, he wrapped himself around Harvard University to a tremendous extent, so that people generally believed he’d been a top student there, and Harvard even put up a big article about him on their official website. But he actually had no connection with Harvard and had never even graduated college.

    He really just sounds like a psychopathic/sociopathic swindler type…

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
  101. @Ron Unz

    I also think he has some type of Mossad connection. There’s a lot of evidence.

    -He dated Ghislaine Maxwell (whose father Robert Maxwell was “outed” as a Mossad agent by Seymour Hersh). She helped entice all these girls into prostitution.
    -He has a very close relationship to Lexlie Wexner, who apparently gave him a Manhattan mansion for free.
    -Alan Dershowitz is his lawyer. Dershowitz very recently did an interview in which he admitted to have gotten a “massage” at Epstein’s home.
    -When Acosta was being vetted by the Whitehouse, he claimed that he was told to give Epstein a light sentence because Epstein was “intelligence.”
    -Today it was revealed that Epstein has a “fake” Saudi passport. One wonders from whom he got that item.
    -Netanyahu’s son keeps tweeting about how Ehud Barak and Epstein have a connection that needs to be looked into.

    The whole thing really demonstrates how totally corrupt our society has become in so many different ways.

    You once made the point that micro corruption is fairly rare in American society, but the level of macro corruption is absolutely appalling. I think this seems accurate.

    It’s stunning that a college dropout somehow taught at Dalton (where he apparently partied with students and walked around with a big gold chain around his neck). Then he worked at Bear Stearns and made partner in just a few years. Then he managed the assets of billionaire Lexlie Wexner. How does that happen in real life?

    It’s even more stunning how Epstein surrounded himself with such a large collection of prominent politicians, media personalities, socialites, royalty, entertainers/celebrities, intellectuals, and even scientists. Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Donald Trump, Katie Couric, Stephen Hawkings, Alec Baldwin, Prince Andrew, Chris Tucker, Kevin Spacey, Kenneth Starr, etc. It seems like everybody hung out with him.

    Despite constantly surrounding himself with extremely young girls in public places, Epstein was considered a perfectly normal guy. In most of the articles written about Epstein, usually either one of his friends or a journalist comments on Epstein’s intelligence/charm/suaveness/handsomeness. Even after his arrest for prostitution, he continued to maintain many of these relationships with important people.

    This tends to suggest 3 interesting things.

    1. Epstein’s shady history, sexual perversion, and prostitution arrest weren’t considered especially remarkable in elite circles. To them, that’s normal behavior, perhaps even common place.
    2. Epstein seemed to have an easy time bribing lots of powerful people, such as famous scientists and the good folks of Harvard University.
    3. A lot of Epstein’s friends (such as Bill Clinton) probably were taking part in his prostitution ring. That’s likely why Epstein, who had no accomplishments in life or any real fame or power, was able to endear himself to everybody. A lot of these people probably had no need for money, but they might’ve needed a pimp who could traffick girls to them.

  102. nsa says:
    @Craig Nelsen

    Good luck with your lawsuit.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Max Parry Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?