The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPat Buchanan Archive
Is China the Country of the Future?
🔊 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

“Who Lost China?”

With the fall of the Nationalist government of Chiang Kai-shek, the defeat of his armies and the flight to Formosa, that was the question of the hour in 1949. And no one demanded to know more insistently than the anti-Communist Congressman John F. Kennedy:

“Whatever share of the responsibility was Roosevelt’s and whatever share was (General George) Marshall’s, the vital interest of the United States in the independent integrity of China was sacrificed, and the foundation was laid for the present tragic situation in the Far East.”

Tragic indeed was the situation. The most populous nation on earth, for which America had risked and fought a war with the Japanese Empire, had been lost to Stalin’s empire.

A year after Peking fell to Mao Zedong, Chinese armies stormed into Korea to drive the Americans back from the Yalu River and back across the 38th parallel, threatening to throw them off the Peninsula.

In the seven decades since October 1949, millions of Chinese have perished in ideological pogroms like the “Great Leap Forward” of the ’50s, and the “Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution” during which President Nixon came to China.

Yet in terms of national and state power over those 70 years, and especially in the last 30 when America threw open her markets to Chinese goods and Beijing ran up $4 trillion to $5 trillion in trade surpluses with the U.S., a new China arose. It was on display this week in Tiananmen Square.

The China of Xi Jinping boasts land- and submarine-based missiles and bombers that provide a strategic deterrent against the United States. Beijing’s conventional forces on land, sea, and in air and space rival any on earth.

Since Y2K, its economy has swept past that of Italy, France, Britain, Germany and Japan to become the world’s second largest. China is now the world’s premier manufacturing power.

Yet, under Xi Jinping, the mask of benign giant has slipped and the menacing face of 21st-century China is being revealed, for its people, its neighbors, and the world to see.

The Uighurs of west China are being forced into re-education camps to be cured of their tribalist, nationalist and Islamic beliefs. Christians are being persecuted. Tibetans are being replaced in their homeland by Han Chinese. The Communist Party’s role and rule as the font of ideological, political and moral truth is being elevated and imposed.

The Chinese still hold land seized from India 50 years ago. China now claims as sovereign territory virtually all of a South China Sea, which encompasses territorial waters of six nations. It has begun building air, naval and military bases on rocks and reefs belonging to Manila.

China has warned foreign warships to stay out of the Taiwan Strait and has built up its force on the mainland opposite the island, warning that any move by Taiwan to declare independence would be regarded as an act of war. It claims the Japanese-held Senkaku Islands.

In its Belt and Road projects to tie China to Central and South Asia and Europe, China has lent billions to build ports, only to take possession of the facilities when local regimes default on their loans.

But not all is going well for the regime on its 70th birthday.

The people of Hong Kong, who are surely being cheered by many on the mainland of China, have been protesting for months, demanding the liberty and independence for which American patriots fought in our Revolution, not Mao’s revolution.

ORDER IT NOW

Nor are the newly prosperous Chinese people fools. They relish the rising power of China and the respect their country commands in the world, but they know it was not Marx, Lenin or Mao who produced their prosperity. It was capitalism. They cannot but be uneasy seeing the freedoms and benefits they enjoy being dissipated in a trade war with the Americans and the new repression issuing from Beijing.

Among the epochal blunders America has committed since the end of the Cold War, three stand out.

The first was our disastrous plunge into the Middle East to create regimes oriented to the West. The second was the expansion of NATO to the front porch of Russia, driving the largest nation on earth, and one of its most formidable nuclear powers, into the arms of China.

The third was to throw open America’s markets to Chinese goods on favorable terms, which led to the enrichment and empowerment of a regime whose long-term threat to U.S. interests and American values is as great as was that of the Soviet Union in the Cold War.

The question for America’s statesmen is how to cope with the rising challenge of China while avoiding a war that would be a calamity for all mankind. Patience, prudence and perseverance commend themselves.

But the first necessity is to toss out the ideological liberalism which proclaims that David Ricardo’s free trade dogmatism is truth for all nations at all times and that John Locke’s ideas apply to all cultures and countries.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

Copyright 2019 Creators.com.

 
Hide 170 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. peterAUS says:

    Is China the Country of the Future?

    Don’t think so.

    Some combination of India, China and South Africa is another matter altogether.

    At least that’s what “1 %” want. We’ll see.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    , @pyrrhus
  2. d dan says:

    All the idiotic anti-China bombast, slanders and historical distortions asides, the author suggests tossing away the free trade arrangement that lifted the standard of living for millions of Americans, just so that it can soothe his own perverted fear of China.

    Good luck with that. Most Americans have more common sense than the typical anti-China clowns. Trump will certainly lose the stupid trade war and gain nothing significant from China – 100% guarantee.

    • Agree: follyofwar, BlackDragon
    • Disagree: Colin Wright
    • Troll: dvorak
  3. C’mon Pat, the Hong Kong riots are funded by Oligarchs and Western NGO’s, in yet another Color Revolution, with the young rioters risking their lives but pawns in what the late Brzezinski called “The Grand Chessboard.” With the economy of their city ruined, and tourism all dried up, I’ll bet the vast majority just wish the violence would stop and things could go back to normal. With the Hong Kong cops being beaten daily with bats and steel clubs, it is amazing that only one rioter has been shot thus far (and he lived). There is no chance that cops in the US would show such restraint. If the situation continues, at some point the mainlanders will have finally had enough, and they will crush these rioters with extreme prejudice. Then the US will blame the commies for using excessive force, and Trump will sanctimoniously put on more sanctions.

    • Agree: Escher, RoatanBill
  4. I’m not sure where Mr. Buchanan was going with all this worry about the Uighurs, Tibetans and even Chinese Christians. We really have enough problems of our own, where all that should not be our concern. Hey, American Christians don’t have it so good either. They aren’t being persecuted yet, but that’s only because our Commies haven’t gotten to that stage yet. Perhaps we should concentrate on this

    Additionally and more importantly, wouldn’t you think that China should be able to have influence in their neck of the woods. The South China Sea and Taiwan Straits are like the Gulf of Mexico and Great Lakes for America. Mr. Buchanan has been getting schizoid on his Libertarianism – are we to quit invading the world or not, Pat?

    Nor are the newly prosperous Chinese people fools. They relish the rising power of China and the respect their country commands in the world, but they know it was not Marx, Lenin or Mao who produced their prosperity. It was capitalism.

    True, though it helped that we gave them one hell of a one-sided deal in trade also.

    They cannot but be uneasy seeing the freedoms and benefits they enjoy being dissipated in a trade war with the Americans and the new repression issuing from Beijing.

    What’s the point here? It’s been an unfair deal for Americans – it’s long past time to change that. As for the repression, not our problem.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Colin Wright
    , @Anon
  5. On those 3 epochal blunders, all of the could be reversed, pretty much by the Executive Branch of our government alone, cough, cough, Trump, cough…

    If the President weren’t either under threat by the Deep State, or a converted Neocon believer, he could keep his campaign promises and:

    1) Extract American soldiers/sailors/airmen and equipment from the Middle East.
    2) Get us out of NATO, or just have it disbanded.
    3) Raise tariffs to amount that make our trade with China a fair deal.

    He has so far only come through, and partially, on number 3. China could be dealt with very easily, if we don’t freak out about her. It’s the mindset of the last 50 years where the US could, and had to, run everything going on around the world that keeps this author worried about what exactly China is doing.* We are way too broke for this sort of thing now.

    .

    * Let them exploit Africa, for example – maybe they can take the political heat for that continent’s problems for a century like the West has.

    • Agree: Digital Samizdat
    • Replies: @d dan
    , @Realist
  6. … a regime whose long-term threat to U.S. interests and American values is as great as was that of the Soviet Union in the Cold War.

    I just don’t get how one can see it that way. The Chinese regime is Communist in name, but the economy is not run that way. The threat from the USSR, especially after the Reds took China in 1947, was of America and Western Europe being encircled by hard-core Communism. Your example of Korea (and later it was Vietnam) showed that this was a real possibility. That is not at all the situation with Chinese power.

    China is out for resources to keep their economy booming and place for Chinese people to live overseas to spread the culture. That culture is not Communist – it is about as capitalist as you can get. That’s not saying we need to keep importing Chinese people by the millions either. Let America be American (if that’s not a lost cause) and let China be Chinese.

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @Rurik
  7. Smith says:

    Free trade has always been bad. Mercantilism, as it turns out, is the superior system.

    China does not employ free trade, they want the buyer-countries to not have tariffs so they can sell as much as possible, while they tariff the hell out of goods inside their country or even ban them to drive domestic consumption, and they only whine about free trade when they cannot profit from “free trade”.

    Selling jobs to China does not lift up americans, european, vietnamese or anyone else, it only lifts up China, and China knows this.

    As soon as the jobs go, China goes.

    • Replies: @foolisholdman
  8. d dan says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    “Raise tariffs to amount that make our trade with China a fair deal…. China could be dealt with very easily,… ”

    Really? So you still believe Trump when he said “Trade war is easy to win”?

    What about Trump’s sermon that “tariffs are paid by China”?

    LOL. Some people just never learn.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  9. @d dan

    And the US would lose the war too, if it ever came to that. How many good soldiers are left who are blindly patriotic enough to want to go halfway around the world to fight yet another war so that the 1% can get ever richer? They see their brothers-in-arms coming home with broken bodies and broken minds, suffering from PTSD, many homeless and unemployable, with 22 dying by their own hand each day. The US can’t even beat the Taliban after 19 years, yet it is supposed to be able to beat the Chinese and Iranians at the same time, while holding the Russians at bay?

    Our so-called Greatest Generation, filled with insufferable hubris after bombing the ‘Japs’ into submission, committed the US to too many impossible treaties, enacted to defend the world from the threat of communism, which didn’t exist in the first place. Washington didn’t learn the lesson from its loss in Vietnam, whose peasant army refused to give up, and kept coming even after millions had died. I suspect the Chinese military is equally motivated. The American Century is over, and it’s high time our delusional leaders got their heads out of their asses and returned to reality. But they won’t. One way or the other, Bad Karma, from years of imperial overreach, will soon bite the country – and it will be good and hard.

    • Agree: Rurik, El Dato
    • Replies: @Realist
  10. Jerome says:

    “The Uighurs of west China are being forced into re-education camps to be cured of their tribalist, nationalist and Islamic beliefs.”

    – Facts: 21 white and western countries lambasted China for this. However, 50 countries, many of them Muslim, defended China. It’s foolish to stand with the accusers in this case.

    “Christians are being persecuted.”

    – Emperor Yongzheng (1678 – 1735) wrote to Dominique Parennin, a Jesuit missionary.

    “You say that your law is not a false law (非左道), and We believe you. If We thought that it was false what would have held Us back from razing your churches and expelling you from the empire? False laws are those which, on the pretext of teaching virtue, fan the spirit of revolt, as is the case with the White Lotus[2] Teaching.

    What would you say if We were to dispatch a group of monks and lamas to your country to preach their doctrines? How would they be received? Your Matteo Ricci came to China in the 1572 when you Christians were few in number and did not have your people and churches in every province. It was only under the reign of my father that you began to build churches everywhere and that your doctrines started spreading rapidly. We observed this, but we said nothing.

    You may have known how to deceive Our Father, but don’t think you can deceive Us in the same way. You wish to make all Chinese Christians, as your law demands. We know this very well. But in that case what would become of Us? Should We not soon become merely the subjects of your kings? The converts you have made already recognize nobody but you and, in troubled times, they would listen to no other voice than yours. We know that at present We have nothing to fear but, when foreign ships start coming in their thousands and tens of thousands perhaps then serious disorders will arise.”

    [1] ‘Yongzheng’s Conundrum. The Emperor on Christianity, Religions, and Heterodoxy’, Menegon. An Emperor Confronts Christianity and the Heterodox, Part II: Eugenio Menegon.
    [2] White Lotus is the name of a revolutionary secret society founded in the 14th century.

    Sixty years later, foreign ships came in their tens of thousands. The Christians, whose loyalty was to God and not the Qing dynasty, rebelled to establish a Christian country (Read Taiping rebellion). The rebellion killed 30 million people (5.4% of the population) and severely damaged the foundation of the empire.

    Who should have taken responsibility for those deaths? Do you not think that China should preempt this from happening again?

    “The Chinese still hold land seized from India 50 years ago.”

    – China fought a short war, conquered territories close to New Delhi, and after this punitive strike voluntarily withdrew to pre-war lines. The McMahon line was drawn without China’s participation nor agreement but nevertheless, China used it as a basis for negotiation. The McMahon line was unjust because huge swath of historically Tibetan areas were given to India (Read Tawang).

    “China now claims as sovereign territory virtually all of a South China Sea, which encompasses territorial waters of six nations. It has begun building air, naval and military bases on rocks and reefs belonging to Manila.”

    If only the US had honoured the treaties it struck with China…

    – US State Dept Chief of Spatial Geography and Boundary Analysis, Daniel Dzurek, who works as a professional geographer with distinction on this exact subject; from his book “The Spratly Islands dispute: Who’s on First”:

    “Because the Allies, in particular the United Kingdom and the United States, could not agree on which government represented China, no Chinese delegation participated in the 1951 San Francisco Peace Conference. Therefore the Republic of China (Taiwan) negotiated a separate peace treaty with Japan, signed on 28 April 1952. Article 2 of the text included a reference to the San Francisco treaty: “It is recognized that under Article 2 of the Treaty of Peace with Japan signed in the city of San Francisco in the United States of American on September 8 1951, Japan has renounced all right, title and claim to Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores) as well as the Spratly Islands and Paracel Islands”. Republic of China has argued that the explicit reference to the Spratly and Paracel islands in the text of this bilateral treaty implies Japanese recognition of Chinese sovereignty. Samuels and Lu have observed that, unlike the 1951 treaty, the Sino-Japanese text mentions the Spratly and Paracel islands in the same sentence as Taiwan and the Pescadores islands. The latter are generally recognized as Chinese territories. Moreover, according to the negotiating record Japan insisted that the renunciation article deal only with Chinese territory. This shows that the ROC and Japan viewed the islands of Taiwan, the Pescadores, the Spratlys, and the Paracels as having a similar status – that is, belonging to China”

    US State Dept South China Sea expert Ambassador Chas Freeman who served for decades in the region, regarding China’s claim to the SCS:

    “In 1945, in accordance with the Cairo and Potsdam Declarations and with American help, the armed forces of the Republic of China government at Nanjing accepted the surrender of the Japanese garrisons in Taiwan, including the Paracel and Spratly Islands. Nanjing then declared both archipelagoes to be part of Guangdong Province. In 1946 it established garrisons on both Woody (now Yongxing) Island in the Paracels and Taiping Island in the Spratlys.”

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
  11. @d dan

    The point is not to “win” the trade war. The point is to make trade fair. I’ve been to China many times. It’s not a fair deal for American exporters vs. Chinese exporters, not by a long shot. I don’t know about the tariffs, per commenter Smith above, but purposeful bureaucracy can stop an American manufacturer from selling goods there before he goes bankrupt trying. In the 1990’s the MFN status gave China a hell of a deal.

    I don’t listen to Trump’s blabbermouthing, but when gets a few good things done, I give him credit.

    • Replies: @Biff
    , @d dan
  12. Biff says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I’ve been to China many times.

    You’re lying, and I don’t believe you.

    purposeful bureaucracy can stop an American manufacturer from selling goods there before he goes bankrupt trying.

    You have never ran a business in your life.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  13. d dan says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    “The point is not to “win” the trade war. The point is to make trade fair. ”

    Playing victim card does not help this country to compete. If China does not play fairly, please explain why many high tech, high-waged economies like Germany, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and several EU countries have trade surpluses or trade balance with China?

    Why does China ONLY treat US exporters unfairly? Why do they ONLY steal IP’s from US companies?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  14. Smith says:

    So no argument and let’s cut to the crying, they would be the ones crying hell when it’s China’s economy who suffers from outsourcing jobs to other nations.

    Anyway, about the Paracel and Spratly islands issue, the Nguyen Dynasty of Vietnam has already claimed it since the 16th century:
    https://www.quora.com/Are-Vietnam%E2%80%99s-bases-to-claim-islands-in-South-China-Sea-reliable

    No thanks to US, China, Japan or whoever come up with the “South China Sea” name.

  15. Escher says:

    IMHO it is too late to put the Chinese genie back in his bottle. Sure, US tariffs will hurt in the short term, but if China sticks it out, it knows it can cultivate other markets to make up for the lost share in America.

    • Replies: @Smith
  16. Pat makes numerous errors here, some are outright errors, others are debatable.
    Pat implies that the US “risked & fought a war” against the Japanese basically for China’s sake. This is exaggeration. China was an element in the US’s complex sense of its own self interest.
    Pat’s probably wrong re – China having the 2nd largest economy. Using PPP, (purchasing power parity) China is likely #1.
    Yes, the Urghurs are being forced into “reeducation camps”. With which I do not agree. However, the Urghurs, having committed a number of terrorist incidents, supported ideologically & financially by such as the NED have been tricked & left to rot. Imagine if China had funded a US minority to commit terrorist acts on US soil?
    And, yes, America threw open it’s markets” to China. This is one of the classic China misrepresentions.
    US Oligarchs grabbed at the opportunity to exploit China’s low cost labour & wide open markets. Not fair? Sure, but neither US oligarchs or the Chinese ones give a shit about US Labour. Nor were US consumers at all patriotic when snapping up Chinese/Walmart bargains.
    Pat thinks it’s plain vanilla Capitalism is the reason China has advanced so far. Which is funny, because the advertised reason for the trade war with China is that it’s NOT sufficiently “capitalist”. So —
    China is a socialist country which employs “free markets” for its own benefit. In short, it’s a “mixed economy”.
    But Pat scores a touch down when he suggests that Richardo & Locke are not to be taken for some kind of universal prophets of Capitalism,

    • Agree: mark green
    • Replies: @DB Cooper
  17. Realist says:
    @d dan

    Most Americans have more common sense than the typical anti-China clowns.

    One should always be cautious when praising the intelligence or common sense of most Americans.
    We are in the mess we’re in because of most Americans common sense.

    • Replies: @d dan
  18. Realist says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    * Let them exploit Africa, for example – maybe they can take the political heat for that continent’s problems for a century like the West has.

    Hopefully the Chinese will be smart enough to trade with Africa, but not let blacks become citizens.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  19. Realist says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Let America be American (if that’s not a lost cause) and let China be Chinese.

    Americans are of many races…China is of one.

  20. Realist says:
    @follyofwar

    How many good soldiers are left who are blindly patriotic enough to want to go halfway around the world to fight yet another war so that the 1% can get ever richer? They see their brothers-in-arms coming home with broken bodies and broken minds, suffering from PTSD, many homeless and unemployable, with 22 dying by their own hand each day.

    It has been this way for decades…so I would say plenty.

  21. Pat rose to prominence as a propagandist and this article is a compendium of propaganda that has served America well for 70 years. Alas, it’s all bullshit.

    millions of Chinese have perished in ideological pogroms like the “Great Leap Forward” of the ’50s, and the “Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution” Twaddle. China doesn’t do pogroms. The Great Leap was thwarted by an El Nino event that devastated New England and cut Canada’s prairie what crop in half but nonetheless build most of the country’s dams. And, btw, nobody starved to death despite America’s grain embargo. http://www.unz.com/article/mao-reconsidered-part-two-whose-famine/

    The Cultural Revolution gave literacy, self-respect and the vote to 400,000,000 peasants and put some elite noses out of joint. http://www.unz.com/article/the-great-proletarian-cultural-revolution/

    under Xi Jinping, the mask of benign giant has slipped and the menacing face of 21st-century China is being revealed, for its people, its neighbors, and the world to see. Eeek! Who did Xi insult, injure, or kill? Nobody.

    The Uighurs of west China are being forced into re-education camps to be cured of their tribalist, nationalist and Islamic beliefs. Christians are being persecuted. After American and KSA-trained Muslim terrorists murdered 11,000 Chinese civilians, the ringleaders were tried and the rest are being taught to read and write. Big deal.

    Tibetans are being replaced in their homeland by Han Chinese. Rubbish. Few Han entrepreneurs have been able to compete with Tibetans on their home ground. Tibet today is 96% ethnic Tibetans and flourishing as never before.

    The Communist Party’s role and rule as the font of ideological, political and moral truth is being elevated and imposed. Unlike our beloved Capitalist Party, it doesn’t have to be ‘imposed.’ It saved China and made it great again and everyone’s cool with that. It’s also the most trusted government on Planet Earth.https://i.imgur.com/tCEAFz5.jpg

    The Chinese still hold land seized from India 50 years ago. Nope. Even India’s High Command account of the fracas, the Henderson Brooks Report, says the land was always China’s.

    China has lent billions to build ports, only to take possession of the facilities when local regimes default on their loans. Horseshit.

    The only ports China ‘controls’ are in China. Outside that, it has agreements to operate ports for other countries because it’s good at operating ports. But it has no control over them whatever, and is a minnow compared to other operators like Dubai Ports and Singapore’s PSA International.Here are some of the ports that PSA International’controls’:

    [MORE]

    Singapore
    Singapore

    Thailand
    Laem Chabang

    China (gasp!!!!)
    Dalian
    Fuzhou
    Guangzhou
    Tianjin
    Dongguan
    Lianyungang
    Qinzhou

    Vietnam
    Vung Tau

    Indonesia
    Jakarta

    India
    Tuticorin
    Chennai
    Navi Mumbai
    Kolkata
    Kakinada

    Saudi Arabia
    Dammam

    Korea
    Incheon
    Busan

    Japan
    Kitakyushu

    Belgium
    Antwerp
    Zeebrugge

    Italy
    Genoa
    Venice

    Portugal
    Sines

    Turkey
    Mersin

    Argentina
    Buenos Aries

    Panama
    Rousseau

    Colombia
    Buenaventura

    The people of Hong Kong, who are surely being cheered by many on the mainland of China, have been protesting for months, demanding the liberty and independence for which American patriots fought in our Revolution, not Mao’s revolution. Nonsense. The Cato Institute, based in Washington, publishes the Human Freedom Index.The index ranks 162 countries and autonomous regions based on 79 measures of personal and economic freedom.

    Hong Kong is ranked #3, behind New Zealand and Switzerland.

    The US is ranked 17 as measured by the same indicators.

    It seems that Hongkongers don’t appreciate how well off they are.

    And, btw, Beijing has not interfered with Hong Kong since the takeover. Perhaps it should.

    the young protesters who marched to the British governor’s office in 1967. Fifty-one people were killed in the riots, including 10 police officers, according to an official history of the Hong Kong police. More than 800 people were injured.

    • Agree: Ber
    • Disagree: Hail
    • Replies: @El Dato
  22. @Biff

    You’re lying, and I don’t believe you.

    This is the internet. You’ve gotta believe me.

    You have never ran a business in your life.

    Yes, but it was not related to China. My knowledge there was from observation.

    My favorite story is about a whole container of goods that was held up on the docks of Shenzhen by customs bureaucrats, just to make it hard to receive these imports, However, the joke was somewhat on them, as these were not imports, but goods that were rejected for poor quality and shipped back across the ocean. They were supposed to be re-sold, to a Mexican company, I think, but they were being held up.

    “Like rain, on your wedding day …”
    Isn’t that ironic?”

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
  23. Corvinus says:
    @peterAUS

    “Some combination of India, China and South Africa is another matter altogether. At least that’s what “1 %” want.”

    According to Who/Whom?

  24. By every criterion I value Taiwan (AKA, Nationalist China) has a better government than Communist China. If the Nationalist Chinese government had adopted on the mainland reforms it later on adopted on Formosa, the Communists would not have come to power. Unfortunately, this did not happen.

    Chiang Kai Shek lost China. Sending American troops to intervene on his behalf in the Chinese Civil War would have been a more costly mistake than American intervention in Vietnam.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  25. Smith says:
    @Escher

    The tariff war is more of a wakeup call for the USA than China.

    USA needs to get its manufacturing back if it seriously wants to compete in the world stage.

  26. Rurik says:
    @d dan

    the free trade arrangement that lifted the standard of living for millions of Americans

    WTF?!

    Are you out of your mind?

    I suppose NAFTA also ‘lifted the standard of living for millions of Americans’ too, huh?

    And ‘outsourcing is our greatest strength!

    But hey, those unemployed Americans can buy their plastic junk at Wal-Mart for a few pennies less, because their former jobs are now performed by Chinese slave labor.

    A win/win, huh?

  27. @d dan

    Because the elite of the biggest economy in the world by FAR (mid 1990s) thought it could just do anything it wanted, screw the working/middle class of America, for a pittance for the guys like Clinton/Bush, and lots of money for the Big-Biz honchos. Do you know what the “Most Favored Nation” trade status entailed, Dan?

    Tell me what kind of agreements and tariffs Germany, Japan, S. Korea, and Taiwan have with China. As far as IP goes, it probably has a lot to do with our lax customs service, not to mention an immigration policy that lets so many Chinese in to work at universities and national labs, that your gonna get your share of both industrial and military spies. Read about “UCLA Professor” Yi-Chi Shih or “LA Woman”* Si Chen.

    I don’t have anything personal against Chinese people – far from it. Still when you let in millions of people (both legally and illegally) from a big economically-competing power, you’re gonna that sort of thing, occasionally, maybe a few thousand or 10 thousand only …

    Most of the rest of the world’s government’s are not quite as stupid as ours, Dan. You write like you have no knowledge of even recent history. We’re only going back a couple of decades. Were you alive then?

    .

    * Not exactly the girl in the Hollywood bungalow.

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
    , @d dan
  28. @Rurik

    Holy shit, I missed that piece of hard-core stupidity. Thank you, Rurik.

  29. @Realist

    They won’t, Realist. You don’t even have to be that smart. You just can’t be massively stupid.

    It won’t just be trading, because, “what for?” They will re-develop infrastructure for the extraction of valuable resources. Africa is a big, big place and has a lot of good stuff under the ground.

    • Replies: @Realist
  30. Rurik says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I’m not sure where Mr. Buchanan was going with all this worry about the Uighurs, Tibetans and even Chinese Christians.

    The point, I suspect, is that the Chinese regime is increasingly harsh to those under its oppressive rule, and is a growing imperial threat to the region, and all of that is a direct consequence of the stupidity and short-sightedness of the US government, beginning with the elements that thwarted Chiang Kai-shek, and foisted Mao, and also Nixon’s – for sucking up to Mao, for increased trade – to sate our corporations infinite greed.

    Or something like that.

    When I think of China, I think of Bill Clinton selling military technology for campaign cash, but since that’s so ho-hum in DC today, it doesn’t even raise eyebrows.

    uneasy seeing the freedoms and benefits they enjoy being dissipated in a trade war with the Americans

    What’s the point here? It’s been an unfair deal for Americans – it’s long past time to change that.

    Agree!

    There’s another aspect to the China syndrome that’s perhaps worth mentioning, and that’s The Data Wars. The tech giants (and their government stooges) demand to collect all data on everyone and everything. But the Chinese are somewhat recalcitrant with their cooperation. They think that they deserve to collect all the data on everyone and everything. So in a way it’s rather interesting to watch these two leviathans of demented, Orwellian power-lust, demanding that *they* are the ones who deserve to rule us all.

    This is the rift behind the whole Huawei affair. Huawei thinks they don’t have to provide the West’s Orwellian surveillance scum with a backdoor to their data. They think they’re entitled to shut out the West, and use the data for their own nefarious ends, whereas the West demand total capitulation across the spectrum.

    In a way, it’s sort of fun to watch the behemoths of greed and power-lust fight it out.

    Kind of like watching the war between the AMA and the Bar fight over tort reform. Two Goliaths of greed- on a Biblical scale, engaged in a battle that for once isn’t being waged on the Davids of society, their perpetual victims.

    • Replies: @d dan
  31. @John_Engelman

    I’m not sure if you’re missing some history, John. That civil war had been going on way back. It had to be interrupted to fight the Japs. That’s when the Americans DID help the Chinese, as the Japs would have come up from the south (they’d taken Hong Kong and were coming up through Burma). Read about the AVG/Flying Tigers and America’s flying of materiel to Chiang’s army’s in China over “the hump” from India. (The Japanese had already taken over Manchuria and come on down to Nanjing.)

    General Stilwell, though his job was to help the Nationalist Chinese, hated Chiang Kai Shek and some thought this relationship, or both of the 2 men, lost China to the Commies. So, we were involved in the civil war to some degree, but the goal at the beginning was just to prevent the Japanese from taking the whole place.

    Yes, by the time Chiang’s army was retreating to Formosa*, intervening (some more) would have meant a bigger version of Vietnam.

    .

    and THANK YOU for using the old English term, John.

  32. Rurik says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    … a regime whose long-term threat to U.S. interests and American values

    “U.S. interests”? “American values”?

    What are those?

    Besides Eternal Wars for Israel, Total surveillance’ here at home, Diversity is our Strength!, and Celebrate Multiculturalism!

    – what’s left, besides ‘gay weddings” and Bake the Cake!

    What are these elusive “American values”?

    I suppose there is ‘outsourcing’. That seems to be a very popular American value.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  33. Smith says:

    >China not taking control of African port
    Straight from an African president mouth:

    ” Tanzania President John Pombe Magufuli has lifted the lid on some of the strange conditions given to African leaders by investors while negotiating development projects.

    The no-nonsense leader spoke while addressing stakeholders in Dar es Salaam. He said that some of these conditions could only appeal to a “madman”.

    He cited an example where some lobbyists recently tried to convince him to approve a contract to expand the Port at Dar es Salaam.

    “Some of the conditions set by these investors could only be agreed upon by mtu wa kichaa (a madman),” he explained.

    “Imagine someone telling you that I will build you a port but on a condition you will not be allowed to construct or develop any other port in the country for a specified period.”

    That’s not all, the president added.

    “That investor also demands you will also not be allowed to collect revenue (at the port they have constructed), not even TRA (Tanzania Revenue Authority) will be allowed within the premises of that investment,” he explained.

    “Further, you will have to guarantee them they will manage that port for 35 years. You will also have to separately settle for a lease agreement, which is different from the laws of the land for 99-years. You should also give them the mandate to transform that place as if it is their own land. While all this is happening, you need to be compensating them for the work they did to build that port. I am revealing some of these strange conditions because people have been coming here and taking advantage of Tanzania and Tanzanians. We are supposed to change.””
    Keep saying fake news so I can expose them, Mr. Godfree.

    I don’t like africans but I will support them against the chinks.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  34. KenH says:
    @d dan

    the author suggests tossing away the free trade arrangement that lifted the standard of living for millions of Americans,

    NAFTA, GATT, and and admitting China to the WTO hasn’t lifted the standard of living for millions of Americans. Millions of manufacturing jobs and countless small businesses have been lost with legions of working class people now joining the ranks of the working poor because all of those “dirty fingernail jobs” went to Mexico and China. Towns have been destroyed.

    American free trade ponzi schemes have created far more losers among the American working and middle class than winners.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  35. @Jerome

    Facts always spoil the narrative.

  36. TGD says:

    But the first necessity is to toss out the ideological liberalism which proclaims that David Ricardo’s free trade dogmatism is truth for all nations at all times…

    Adam Smith, David Hume, David Ricardo et al assumed that trade would be kept in balance by the exchange of gold- see David Hume’s “price specie flow mechanism.”

    In 1971, Pat’s heartthrob “Tricky Dick” Nixon abolished the convertibility of $US into gold by foreign central banks. It wasn’t long before the USA began running massive trade deficits.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  37. @Achmed E. Newman

    an immigration policy that lets so many Chinese in to work at universities and national labs, that your gonna get your share of both industrial and military spies.

    Yeah, that’s dumb. Better to win a war and steal tons of patents like the US did to post WWII Germany, while bringing their scientists over to run the show inside the US.

  38. d dan says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    “Tell me what kind of agreements and tariffs Germany, Japan, S. Korea, and Taiwan have with China. ”
    Firstly, they are all in line with their WTO commitments and bilateral/multilateral agreements. Secondly, if you think the few percent difference in tariffs are the cause of the huge trade deficits US has with China, with Japan, with South Korea, or with many EU nations, please accept my commiseration to you for falling into yet another Trump’s idiotic lies.

    “Because the elite of the biggest economy in the world by FAR (mid 1990s) thought it could just do anything it wanted, screw the working/middle class of America, for a pittance for the guys like Clinton/Bush, and lots of money for the Big-Biz honchos. Do you know what the “Most Favored Nation” trade status entailed, Dan?”
    That still does not explain why these countries have trade surpluses or balance with China.

    “not to mention an immigration policy that lets so many Chinese in to work at universities and national labs…”
    Haha, as usual, more excuses. What about the millions of Chinese students in Japan, South Korea, Germany and other EU countries. Why didn’t they try to steal their technologies?

    “Most of the rest of the world’s government’s are not quite as stupid as ours,…”
    This one I agree with you. The problem is within US government and US system. It has nothing with the so-called China “unfair” practice that you original claim, or the Chinese students that you just claim. So, clean up the swamp, the special interests – not just in DC, but plenty in the main street too. Clean up the tax system, the over-financialization of the economy, the militarization of the tech sector, the political paralysis, the education system that does not educate, the healthcare system that does not care about health, the political correctness, ….

  39. @Curmudgeon

    They started ‘borrowing’ stuff from the British whom they quickly eclipsed with economies of scale. Déjà vu.

    The Spies Who Launched America’s Industrial Revolution
    https://www.history.com/news/industrial-revolution-spies-europe

  40. d dan says:
    @Rurik

    “Are you out of your mind?

    I suppose NAFTA also ‘lifted the standard of living for millions of Americans’ too, huh?

    And ‘outsourcing is our greatest strength!”

    You are talking as if there is no outsourcing, millions of Americans will be happily working in 3 shifts for 24 hours to make T-shirts, tennis shoes or even iPhones, and their standard of living will skyrocket.

    Sorry, I believe in economists (from both left and right) than politicians.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  41. Anonymous[167] • Disclaimer says:

    NAFTA, GATT, and and admitting China to the WTO hasn’t lifted the standard of living for millions of Americans. Millions of manufacturing jobs and countless small businesses have been lost with legions of working class people now joining the ranks of the working poor because all of those “dirty fingernail jobs” went to Mexico and China. Towns have been destroyed

    Those jobs would have been lost to automation if not outsourced. Can’t blame the trade agreements alone.

  42. @Achmed E. Newman

    ‘…Additionally and more importantly, wouldn’t you think that China should be able to have influence in their neck of the woods. The South China Sea and Taiwan Straits are like the Gulf of Mexico and Great Lakes for America…’

    Exactly. And you will find that we are not seizing islands off the coast of Mexico and building military bases on them.

  43. @d dan

    ‘Firstly, they are all in line with their WTO commitments and bilateral/multilateral agreements. Secondly, if you think the few percent difference in tariffs are the cause of the huge trade deficits US has with China, with Japan, with South Korea, or with many EU nations, please accept my commiseration to you for falling into yet another Trump’s idiotic lies…’

    One takes your claims, then one considers the hollowed-out wasteland of Middle America’s industries, of all those once-prosperous working class communities left to survive on minimum wage jobs at Walmart, etc.

    But hey, the inhabitants are all ‘deplorables’ anyway, right?

  44. @Rurik

    ‘A win/win, huh?’

    Possibly, it’s a win-win for ddan. And isn’t that what matters?

    • Agree: Rurik
  45. d dan says:
    @Rurik

    “This is the rift behind the whole Huawei affair. Huawei thinks they don’t have to provide the West’s Orwellian surveillance scum with a backdoor to their data. They think they’re entitled to shut out the West, and use the data for their own nefarious ends, whereas the West demand total capitulation across the spectrum.”

    We have plenty of proofs for the data collection of the tech giants of the west, but no evidence for Huawei’s data collection. So far, everything about Huawei is simply conjecture and projection (SilliconValley did that, so Huawei must be doing it too, blah, blah, blah).

    • Replies: @Rurik
  46. @Curmudgeon

    I suppose. I do know that Alex Graham Bell, Thomas Edison and that crowd preceded WWII by quite a while. The great American ingenuity of that era had a lot to do with the huge freedoms present in 19th century America (arguably well into the middle of the 20th).

    There’s a book called The Man who Loved China. In it the story is about another Englishman who spent years investigating all the inventions/discoveries/what-have-you of the Chinese over the centuries.

    The man wrote 17 volumes about it. One thing the English Communist (subject of the book) never did get is that the Chinese never had the property rights, rule-of-law, due process, and all that to help an ingenious Chinaman take an idea to fruition without it getting stolen by others. Why bother, right? Maybe something can be learned from this. If you’re not careful, even YOU may learn something, though I would hesitate to put any money on that.

  47. @d dan

    Dan, there are not the millions of Chinese people in these other countries as there are in America. The other countries you mention don’t have governments THAT stupid to let them work willy-nilly at national labs and take over whole graduate departments in engineering all over the country. I don’t mean a few bright guys here and there. I mean that you will hardly see a white face in these places. That is the situation here.

    On the trade with China, they don’t need tariffs if they make it hard to export products there. I don’t say that makes for the entire trade deficit. Our manufacturing was eviscerated by the elites that made the Chinese exports grow to give us these huge deficits. It’s time to give American manufacturing a chance again, and making trade fair again is a good start.

    Your last paragraph has some good points.

  48. @TGD

    AGREED, TGD, and I LOLed at that “Pat’s heartthrob” line!

  49. d dan says:
    @Realist

    “One should always be cautious when praising the intelligence or common sense of most Americans.
    We are in the mess we’re in because of most Americans common sense.”

    I agree with your last statement. But on the very narrow issue of trade, most Americans support free trade. It is also out of their self-interest: voluntary trade is a win-win deal – contrary to what most of the protectionists claim.

    • Replies: @Realist
  50. Rurik says:
    @d dan

    You are talking as if there is no outsourcing, millions of Americans will be happily working in 3 shifts for 24 hours to make T-shirts, tennis shoes or even iPhones, and their standard of living will skyrocket.

    All across America there are ghost towns, entire swaths of the nation are referred to a ‘rust belts’.

    Not to worry, just inject enough opioids, and the problem will solve itself, huh?

    Their standard of living might not “skyrocket’, but it would improve. [horrors!]

    Sorry, I believe in economists

    Like “debt is good” Kruggy?

    the Nobel prize winner?

    Just like his buddy; The One!

    • Replies: @d dan
  51. Rurik says:
    @d dan

    So far, everything about Huawei is simply conjecture and projection (SilliconValley did that, so Huawei must be doing it too, blah, blah, blah).

    The communist Chinese would NEVER! violate the Chinese people’s individual civil or privacy rights!!!

    https://www.businessinsider.com/china-social-credit-system-punishments-and-rewards-explained-2018-4#3-banning-you-or-your-kids-from-the-best-schools-3

    The very suggestion! that China would ever! violate its citizen’s privacy rights, really does make one wonder at the freedoms people are allowed to abuse on the Internet.

    Just saying such a thing really should be subject to certain scrutiny. When people are allowed willy-nilly to make outrageous claims about the freedom-loving Chinese government without consequence, where is that kind of irresponsibility going to lead?!

    • Replies: @d dan
    , @Godfree Roberts
  52. Whatever happened to non-interventionism? Heed your own advice Pat, and stay out of foreign country’s affairs. What happens in China is none of our freaking business. We can’t even run our own damn country but we want to tell others how to run theirs?

    Furthermore, Pat’s concept of China is completely outdated. He thinks these people are still “communist” when they are communist IN NAME ONLY. China today is a country full of greedy unscrupulous capitalist pigs who think nothing of ripping off their countrymen then escape to greener pastures at the first opportunity.

    The US would do well to stop these greedy capitalist pigs from coming over here and taking over the country, along with the effing Indian scam artists under the guise of “best and brightest”, “highly skilled”. We already make enough greedy selfish unscrupulous pleasure seeking treasonous rats of our own, we don’t need to import more.

  53. Realist says:
    @d dan

    I agree, but I did not address free trade in my comment.

  54. Yee says:

    “China has lent billions to build ports, only to take possession of the facilities when local regimes default on their loans.”

    Why are Americans and sub-con Indians so obsessed with a port in some dirt poor country?

    Actually, most of the ports China “take possession of” don’t need China to lend billions to build. They’ve already been built, you can just lease them.

    China is operating ports or terminals in Greece, Spain, Italy, Holland, France, Belgium, Turkey, Abu Dhabi, Singapore, Australia, Israel etc., and 1 or 2 in the USA too, if I remember correctly.

    It’s disgusting the US trying to screw up development in poor countries with propaganda bullshit.

  55. Realist says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    It won’t just be trading, because, “what for?” They will re-develop infrastructure for the extraction of valuable resources. Africa is a big, big place and has a lot of good stuff under the ground.

    Yes, I should have said develop resources…it will pretty much be a one way deal.

  56. Yee says:

    Rurik,

    The Chinese government doesn’t need Huawei back doors to get information, they can simply ask the telecomm providers to submit any information they need. It’s not a secret practice, it’s a law.

    And China has no use for personal information in foreign countries, because unlike the USA, China doesn’t run a global intelligence network. What’s the point of getting Huawei to install a back door?

    • Replies: @Rurik
  57. Oh, it was capitalism that got China where it is? No, it was central planning in a mixed economy, with over half of production done by state-owned enterprises (socialism!) and virtually all banks owned by the govt. If capitalism in itself is so great, why aren’t we growing 10 times faster than China and producing 10 times as much, instead of the reverse? China is run for the most part for the Chinese people, but the US kleptocracy is run for the most part for the rich. I’ll be glad to see the Chinese way, minus a few totalitarian aspects, prevail.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  58. d dan says:
    @Rurik

    “Like “debt is good” Kruggy? the Nobel prize winner?”

    I don’t believe in Krugman in general, but he is right on the free trade issue. And it is not just economists on the left who advocate free trade, there are those in the right, left, middle, libertarian, … of all shapes and sizes… I also don’t need economists to believe in freedom of choice and freedom to trade.

    This, of course, is in contrast to opinions of people like Trump, Warren, Sanders, Schumer, Soros, Bannon, and many other guys in the swamp who never agree on anything other than the need to launch this idiotic trade war to show their “toughness” on China.

    • Replies: @KenH
    , @Rurik
  59. d dan says:
    @Rurik

    “The communist Chinese would NEVER! violate the Chinese people’s individual civil or privacy rights!!! …. The very suggestion! that China would ever! violate its citizen’s privacy rights, really does make one wonder at the freedoms people are allowed to abuse on the Internet.”

    LOL. I never claim Chinese government never violate individual civil or privacy rights. You certainly extrapolate a lot from my opinion – just like I predicted in my previous post – there are lots of conjecture and projection.

  60. Cyrano says:

    I love the smell of propaganda in the morning (more than napalm actually). Take this Chiang Kai-shek character for example. He was a leader of the Nationalist forces in the civil war in China.

    The communists were non “nationalist”. They were planing to give China away as soon as they won the civil war. Because they didn’t care about the nation. Only the “nationalist” Chiang Kai-shek did.

    Maybe that’s what prompted US to move its entire manufacturing sector to China. Because the Chinese government is non “Nationalist”. They don’t’ care about their people. They are open to exploitation from the smarter capitalists. Or maybe because capitalism became so advanced, that manufacturing was considered no longer essential, it was passé. Their economy supposedly was so advanced, that it became “knowledge” based economy.

    Knowledge of what exactly? The weather patterns on Mars? Yeah, I bet you can become very rich with that kind of knowledge. I wonder why US was so against any non “nationalist” governments around the world. Why didn’t they thought of that before. To try to exploit the non “nationalist” countries.

    Maybe because they are non “nationalist’ themselves. Not because they are communist – God forbid – but because they are not entirely clear on what the definition of a nation exactly is. That’s why they are strengthening themselves through diversity, in case the definition of nation changes and becomes also a knowledge based definition of a nation.

  61. China the Country of the Future that Ron Unz is going to work in and/or for.

  62. Rurik says:
    @Yee

    And China has no use for personal information in foreign countries, because unlike the USA, China doesn’t run a global intelligence network.

    I suspect you’re a tad naive on this. If they could, they’d have a detailed file on every single person, global-wide, but especially all ‘movers and shakers’.

    At this point in the game, they’d be foolish not to.

    What’s the point of getting Huawei to install a back door?

    Because the ‘Glob* demands to know everything about everyone. And that includes Huawei’s customers as well.

    *Deepstate/Globohomo/Rothschild and all ((his)) CIA/NSA/FBI/MI6/Five Eyes – minions.

  63. KenH says:
    @d dan

    If you’re a faith based free trader then that’s your prerogative but it has nothing to do with freedom of choice and everything to do with allowing American capitalists access to the cheap labor and slave labor markets of the third world so they could reap windfall profits on their products and the shareholders and executives can get richer.

    The late Ross Perot correctly noted that when companies move production offshore the price of the product(s) invariably stays the same even though labor costs are drastically reduced. A few years ago a Ralph Lauren polo shirt was selling for $80.00 and it was made in Pakistan which isn’t exactly a high wage nation.

    I guess those darn displaced and lazy Americans need to learn to code or become biophysicists or go bankrupt getting a degree in wokeness from State U.

    Free trade sounds really good in theory and in libertarian journals and treatises. In theory everyone wins and the initial losers can become “winners” again in a new economy, but in reality it almost never works out that way. Usually the people who support it have never worked in industry of any kind and/or are professional college students or professors.

    • Agree: Rurik
    • Replies: @d dan
  64. Rurik says:
    @d dan

    I don’t believe in Krugman in general, but he is right on the free trade issue. And it is not just economists on the left who advocate free trade, there are those in the right, left, middle, libertarian, … of all shapes and sizes…

    OK, this is very simple.

    The US is a First World nation. That means it has a relatively high standard of living, even for it’s working class.

    I just saw a meme somewhere about the ‘poor’ in the US checking their food stamp balances with $800.00 smartphones.

    Now contrast that with the billions of people on the planet that live in extreme poverty.

    The average person in India or China get by on a few thousand dollars a year. Less than two in India, less than ten in China. Most are very poor.

    So, with free trade, what the scumfucks of the world do, is take their manufacturing to these desperately poor places, like the barrios of Mexico, and offer them jobs at a tiny fraction of what it would cost them to hire a First World American, do you see?

    So over time, what this does, is it enriches the scumfucks, (think Wal-Mart executives), while simultaneously dragging down the wages of Americans and putting them out of work.

    Now this may be a good thing for the scumfucks, and it will help somewhat with the poor Chinese, but it’s a disaster for Bubba the American working class schmo.

    Now you may say, ‘fuck Bubba, why should I give a fuck about him?’

    But it doesn’t end there. It also means that China is going to be ascendant, while America slides down into the mire economically.

    Now, you may say ‘fuck America, why should I give a rip what happens to her?’, and you’d be in line with most corporate scumfucks who feel exactly the same way.

    So it’s all about perspective. Sure, if you’re the CEO of a ‘for-profit corporation, then it’s certainly understandable why you’d prefer the Chinese employee with no health benefits and a few dollars a week in pay. Your profits would skyrocket, and you could afford to insource a small army 0f Latino domestics to tend to your every whim. What’s not to like!

    But if you’re the government of the U.S. and you’re supposed to care about its citizens, and their well-being, and the economy, and its competitive edge economically and even militarily, then it would amount to treason to allow all the corporation to outsource the jobs. Or even to allow poor nations to flood your country with their cheap goods, made at slave-labor wages.

    To protect your jobs, and your people’s wellbeing, and your economy, and your manufacturing, (necessary for potential military conflicts), and the future of your prosperity, it would be the worst betrayal imaginable to allow a foreign nation to use their armies of impoverished and hungry masses, to drive down your people’s wages, for the profits of a few scumfucks, no matter how much lucre they hand you in kickbacks.

    Is that difficult to understand?

    Do I need a PHD in economics to comprehend these simple, common sense facts?

    No. It’s very easy to understand.

    When greedy CEOs (is there any other kind), move their manufacturing overseas for higher profits, then the only reasonable thing to do is tariff the fuck out of them, as punishment for their greed and lack of concern for their fellow Americans.

    They don’t care if their greed is going to reduce the living standards of your typical American to Third World levels, because by doing so, it will make themselves richer, and that’s all they care about.

    So, what an intelligent government then does to such scumfucks, is punish them with tariffs, and thereby makes it less profitable to fuck over Americans and take their jobs away.

    This is not rocket science, it’s very, very simple.

    But you have to have some kind of concern for the average lot of your typical working class American, to even begin to comprehend it.

    Sadly, a scumfuck like Kruggy, is motivated by an endemic hatred for your typical (white) American, and so someone like him loves outsourcing, and insourcing, and debt up the wazoo.

    It’s all good for his tribe, while at the same time fucking over your typical American.

    A win/win. Such a deal!

    • Replies: @d dan
  65. stevecel says:

    War with China cannot be stopped – Armageddon awaits us.

    Pat shows himself to be a neocon hack who only wishes it were his kind administering the same policies as Tel Aviv in the name of “capitalism” with this wishful drivel. You let your country down, Pat. Your children and their children will pay the price.

  66. d dan says:
    @KenH

    “A few years ago a Ralph Lauren polo shirt was selling for $80.00 and it was made in Pakistan which isn’t exactly a high wage nation.”

    This case is actually a vivid demonstration of why we need free trade. If for example in the ideal (though unlikely) case when Pakistan has free trade agreement, or is in a common market with US, someone would be able to import the same shirt from the same factory, stamped it with different label, sold it for $20, and still made a profit. But of course in real world, domestic textile industry will scream, and the government will compromise and only allows Ralph Lauren to import the “right amount” and sells it at $80, so as to protect the textile workers.

    “I guess those darn displaced and lazy Americans need to learn to code or become biophysicists or go bankrupt getting a degree in wokeness from State U.”

    Or if Trump does not launch this idiotic trade war, then the farmers can at least grow their soybean and manufacturers export their goods to China. If German, Japanese, South Korean or Taiwanese workers can do it without the need of trade war, why can’t American workers? As we speak, China is CUTTING tariffs for the world, but increase it for US. I am not sure they even want to buy the products of our coders or biophysicists eventually.

    • Replies: @KenH
  67. d dan says:
    @Rurik

    “OK, this is very simple.

    The US is a First World nation. That means it has a relatively high standard of living, even for it’s working class.”

    No, it is not simple. I know that is what politicians like you to believe. US is not the ONLY First world nation. Please check your “theory” against the situations with OTHER First world nations too. You will find plenty of holes or counter-arguments.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  68. pyrrhus says:
    @peterAUS

    South Africa? Not a chance….

  69. pyrrhus says:

    “The Uighurs of west China are being forced into re-education camps to be cured of their tribalist, nationalist and Islamic beliefs.”

    And the problem with that is….?

  70. pyrrhus says:

    The US was never so generally prosperous as when it had 30% tariffs on all foreign manufactured products, and those tariff and excise revenues financed the government…Free trade has impoverished every country that adopted it….e.g. the UK.

  71. @brumpfschmlog

    If capitalism in itself is so great, why aren’t we growing 10 times faster than China and producing 10 times as much, instead of the reverse?

    Because we’re NOT capitalist anymore, Brump, and the closest you’ll see is the flea market. The US has been crony capitalist (“fascist” is really the proper economic term but gets confused with certain specific governments in history) for quite some time. That is WHY it has been going downhill. The US in its closer-to-capitalism days did pretty damn well.

    China’s state-owned-enterprise suck … they suck the money out of the system made by the hard-working Chinese in the private enterprises.

    You should observe what ACTUALLY happens economically, not what governments SAY they are. There is a line from old Chairmen Deng, about “I don’t care what color the cat, so long as he catches mice.” This was in response to old liners calling his new policy of letting the Chinese keep the value of their labor bad words like “Capitalism”.

    The silly term they used to get around the accusations of Capitalism is that they have “Socialism with Chinese characteristics”. Well the “characteristics” they were talking about were free markets, as the Chinese didn’t want to keep on living like the rest of the poor bastards under Communism.

  72. Yee says:

    Rurik,

    “I suspect you’re a tad naive on this. If they could, they’d have a detailed file on every single person, global-wide, but especially all ‘movers and shakers’.
    At this point in the game, they’d be foolish not to.
    Because the ‘Glob* demands to know everything about everyone. And that includes Huawei’s customers as well.
    *Deepstate/Globohomo/Rothschild and all ((his)) CIA/NSA/FBI/MI6/Five Eyes – minions.”

    And I suspect you’re not a practical person, only ideological.

    Collecting information only worth the efforts if you have the means to exploit it, which China has close to zero in foreign countries. It controls no media, no judges, no academia, no military, no intelligence agencies etc. outside of China. So why bother? Only cost no gains.

    Sure, “Deepstate/Globohomo/Rothschild and all ((his)) CIA/NSA/FBI/MI6/Five Eyes – minions”, have the means to exploit information in most of the countries in the world, perhaps that’s why they target Huawei? Because Huawei not playing along?

    • Replies: @Rurik
  73. DB Cooper says:

    “The Chinese still hold land seized from India 50 years ago. ”

    I have said before. Whatever the pundits says about China, 99% of the time the reverse is true. I don’t know whether it is out of ignorance or dishonesty. Either way it is bad. It is India that is occupying land seized from China 50 years ago.

    Please read this link issued by the Republic of China (Taiwan) in 1987 when India make South Tibet a state and renamed it to the so called Arunachal Pradesh:
    https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/chinese-news-40862957

    Here is an excerpt (translated from Chinese):​​
    ​​
    “In regards to the issue of the Indian government illegal occupation of our country’s territory and establishes the so called ‘Arunachal Pradesh’ the foreign ministry of the Republic of China put out this announcement in midnight as follows:​​
    ​​
    India illegal occupation of our country’s territory, the government of the Republic of China has repeatedly stated that it will not recognize. Recently the congress of India unilaterally pass the establishment of the ‘Arunachal Pradesh’ on the south of the so called McMahon Line. India government also made it into a state, the government of the Republic of China once again solemnly proclaim: the government of India intend to legitimize its illegal occupation of the territory of China, the government of the Republic of China regards this as illegal, void and absolutely not recognized.”

    I know people are allergic to Communist China. But this statement is issued by Taiwan, US ally. In other words as far as Taiwan (aka Republic of China) is concerned India is occupying a piece of China (South Tibet) as we speak.

    Pat, can you be honest for once!?

    • Replies: @DB Cooper
  74. @Achmed E. Newman

    This is the internet. You’ve gotta believe me.

    Especially a guy named Achmed E Neuman

    • LOL: Achmed E. Newman
  75. DB Cooper says:
    @DB Cooper

    Here is some background info about the India land grab of China.

    It all starts with the British Raj, the bullying land grabbing expansionist in South Asia that eventually spawned India in 1947 when the British left the subcontinent. The thing is when India was created, the new government continues the land grabbing nonsense of its former master without missing a beat. As far as China is concerned it continues the British Raj’s border intrusion into South Tibet. In 1951, four years after the British Raj has already left, India finally treked up to historic Tawang and invaded and annexed the place. Tawang is the birthplace of the Sixth Dalai Lama and home to a four hundred years old Tibetan monastery. The majority of the populations are of Tibetan stock (Monpa, Lhoba (Tani)). In 1987 India renamed South Tibet and made it a state and renamed it to the so called Arunachal Pradesh. This is the trigger that prompts Taiwan issued that statement denoucing India’s land grab.

    And Pat twist the fact 180 degree in an article talking about how to avoid war with China? Isn’t this disgusting?

  76. Whoever said there is a future?

  77. DB Cooper says:

    “It claims the Japanese-held Senkaku Islands.”

    There is no such thing as Senkaku islands. It is called the Diaoyutai islands. The island has been under US trustee after WWII and it is fully expected to be returned to China (at that time it means Taiwan) after the US occupation of Japan. But when that happened in 1972, for whatever reason the US decided to turn it over to Japan. The then Nationalist government vehemently protested and the US promise it is only turning over the adminstratration of the islands, and its action does not affect the soveignty of the islands. During those times there were many huge protests in US cities and university campus with large Chinese (at that time it means Taiwan and Hong Kong) populations protesting US action. This is the so called ‘Protect the Diaoyutai movement’. Activists at that time are in their sixties and seventies now. A few years ago a joint expedition by activists from Hong Kong and Taiwan successfully landed in the Diaoyutai island to assert Chinese soveignty.

    That the Diaoyutai islands are Chinese is shared by people from mainland, Hong Kong and Taiwan.

    This is the reason mainland China should continue building up its military arsenal to deter would be warmonger like Pat et al. The US is constantly picking for a fight with other countries without a single clue of what is going on. The only logic I can discern is if you are a US ally, then you are in the right and your adversery is in the wrong. In case both are US ally then the US is confused and don’t take a stand. Like in the case of disputes between Japan and South Korea.

    • Replies: @DB Cooper
  78. Doubt very much the future belongs to any nation.

    The future belongs to corporations. After that, robots.

    Will there be anyone to stand up to them?

  79. DB Cooper says:
    @DB Cooper

    I might add one of the expeditions by joint Hong Kong and Taiwan activists in asserting Chinese sovereignty over the Diaoyutai islands resulted in the drowning of a Hong Kong activist some years ago.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  80. Money is the future,
    Till man engineers himself
    Out of existence,
    A pile of parts on the shelf.

  81. I am confused about something and hope the great minds on this site can help me understand. Did the Chinese Communist ideologues and village peasants wake up one day thirty years ago and decide they would become world-class manufacturers for the capitalist West? Western leaders act as if this is all a big surprise. Wow those Chinese communists and farmers had a hidden knack for industrial know-how! Really? Are we expected to believe that silly narrative? Clearly there was a decision by Western leaders and Western corporations to transfer industrial know how and capital to China to make China’s great transformation happen. And no this is not about individual investors pursuing profits but about an entire class of Westerners and their governments making a conscious decision to divest from their own people’s future and invest in China’s. Do you see what I’m getting at here? This massive transfer of technological know how and capital is no accident but part of a concerted plan. Now China is a growing mortal threat to the USA we are led to believe, like this outcome was not foreseeable. I am confused. Help me understand.

    • Replies: @gT
  82. @Smith

    He is welcome to shop for better conditions, of course, but those are standard conditions under the circumstances.

    Any greenfield builder of a port who is already risking billions in an undeveloped kleptocracy would impose them.

  83. @Rurik

    Business Insider is not a reliable witness to things Chinese. If you want a balanced view of Social Credit, which has 95% popular support, read http://www.unz.com/article/social-credit-datong-dreams/

    Harvard’s Gary King[1] says, “Contrary to much research and commentary, the purpose of the censorship program is not to suppress criticism of the State or the Communist Party. Indeed, despite widespread censorship of social critics, we find that when Chinese people write scathing criticisms of their government and its leaders the probability that their post will be censored does not increase. Instead, censored tweets were equally likely to be against the state, for the state, irrelevant, or factual reports about events. Negative, even vitriolic criticism of the state, its leaders and its policies are not more likely to be censored.”

    Maria Repnikova[2] finds critical journalism alive and well, too, (and one reporter just took down the Chief Justice of their Supreme Court).


    [1] “Reverse-Engineering Chinese Censorship”. Gary King
    Thursday, September 12, 2013
    [2] Media Politics in China: Improvising Power under Authoritarianism by Maria Repnikova, C.U.P., July 15, 2017.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  84. Jason Liu says:

    What exactly do you find threatening about China? I don’t foresee any kind of military attack on the west, ever, even if China had an overwhelming advantage. If what’s the threatened is the western moral vision of the world (the “liberal world order”), then sorry, it’s a horrible order and should be threatened by as many countries as possible, not just China.

    • Agree: dfordoom
  85. @DB Cooper

    What’d you do with the 200 large, man?

  86. gT says:
    @Chris in Cackalacky

    Everybody and his dog is confused as to why the West went to the concerted effort of building up China only to now see China as a threat. Here’s my 2 cents worth of speculation.

    The build up of China was to achieve 2 purposes. Firstly to sort out Russia since neither Napoleon nor Hitler could get it right. And secondly, to crash the West as the New World Order needs all sovereign states destroyed so that it can arise out of the ashes. And while the Western media is occupying everyones’ attention with the threat of China, and of Russia, and of Iran, and of whoever; the States is being flooded with Latinos and Europe with Muslims – bye bye West.

    So China was feted and fed so that its ready to explode when the scaffolds are pulled out underneath it. China is now being constrained globally economically and in the South China Sea and East China Sea physically so that when China explodes, there is only one direction that the blast can take, and that is northwards into Russia.

    But the West must only crash after China explodes into Russia, if the West crashes before China explodes then China can escape blowing up by expanding everywhere but northwards.

    • Replies: @gT
  87. DB Cooper says:
    @animalogic

    “Yes, the Urghurs are being forced into “reeducation camps”. With which I do not agree. ”

    I have been to one of these reeducation camps before years ago. Not in China but in the US. Granted the ones in China are more elaborated than the ones in US but they are pretty much the same thing as far as I can tell. At the time I resented it but in hindsight I am glad I was sent to those camps.

  88. Rurik says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    “Contrary to much research and commentary, the purpose of the censorship program is not to suppress criticism of the State or the Communist Party.

    Can I take that to mean that the total surveillance and police and domestic military operations in China are not and never would be used to bolster the power of the Chinese government- over its citizens, and its dissident citizens in particular?

    And that the Chinese government uses all that data for the purposes of protecting the individual freedoms of all those under the authority of the Chinese government? And especially the freedom to oppose that Chinese government in all non-violent ways? Up to and including their removal from power?

    I don’t know much about China, and I’ll be the first to say so. But I am a long-time student of human nature, and everything that I’ve glimmered in my short decades on this rock, tells me that when humans get power, they’ll do ~ ANYTHING ~ in order to keep it. Torture, mass-murder, even the wanton slaughter of their own citizens and atrocities that stagger the imagination… all to stay in power.

    Are the Chinese somehow different in this regard, from say the ZUS government? Because when the ZUS government uses drones to assassinate US citizens- simply because those citizens have become inconvenient to the PTB- I don’t think they’re doing it to protect those US citizens (who’ve been splattered by the ZUS government).

    The ZUS government (or the French or British or so many others…) wouldn’t think twice about violating a citizens civil rights, (up to and including assassinating them), if doing so would bolster the power of such a government. Think British scientist Dr David Kelly, for instance. Or Michael Hastings, or Seth Rich, or God knows how many nameless and faceless patriots are either dead, or languishing in some cage somewhere (Assange), for the “crime” of having non-violently embarrassed their governments, (the PTB).

    Is the Chinese government fundamentally different in this regard, and have so much more respect for human rights and the inviolate sanctity of our God-given right to say whatever we want, to whom ever we want, that they’d sacrifice even their own hold on power, out of respect for free speech and civil rights?

    Maybe I need to move there. I wonder what my Social Credit score would be..

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
    , @Biff
    , @Erebus
  89. Rurik says:
    @Yee

    Collecting information only worth the efforts if you have the means to exploit it, which China has close to zero in foreign countries.

    Would you say that it’s safe to say that China spends no energy surveilling foreign government’s military or spy capabilities, because they have no “means to exploit it”?

    They have no interest in discovering Western information technologies, and collecting data in non-Chinese governments, because they have no way to exploit such data?

    Because doing so would have no “practical” benefits?

    It controls no media, no judges, no academia, no military, no intelligence agencies etc. outside of China. So why bother? Only cost no gains.

    It’s been suggestion that China purchased US military secrets it coveted simply by handing Bill Clinton some cash. Why bother with all those ‘intelligence agencies’, when you can simply walk up to the White House, (like it’s a Wal-Mart), and buy what you want?

    That’s how the Senate and House work, after all. It’s obviously how he Clinton Foundation operated, after all. So what’s the point of a complicated espionage operation, when all you have to do is go to Washington DC with a few suitcases full of cash? And voila! All you desire will be laid at your feet.

    perhaps that’s why they target Huawei? Because Huawei not playing along?

    If I wanted to start a cell phone company in China, but told the Chinese authorities that they would have no back door to the tech, what are my chances, eh?

    It’s no different in the zio-west.

    https://www.cnet.com/news/the-uss-renewed-calls-for-backdoor-access-to-encryption-has-all-the-same-flaws/

  90. Rurik says:
    @d dan

    US is not the ONLY First world nation. Please check your “theory” against the situations with OTHER First world nations too. You will find plenty of holes or counter-arguments.

    it works across the spectrum

    If you’re a First World nation in Europe or wherever, and you allow your corporations to send your manufacturing jobs to Asia or Africa, then that is going to drag down the wages of your own citizens. Duh. And contribute to trade imbalances that are detrimental to your own nation and people.

    Just as inviting in millions of Third World peoples into your First World nations- is going to drive down the wages for your own citizens. (not to mention creating murderous strife).

    The only argument for free trade is by nations with similar standards of living, where wages are similar, and free trade is reciprocal.

    But by allowing U.S. corporations to offshore their corporate offices to avoid all domestic taxes, and hire at Third World wages, in nations that practice protectionism, but then demand that the U.S. have open borders to all imports sans tariffs, will result in the utter destruction of the U.S. economy.

    Which is something 99% of the planet’s people would love to see. Including most university graduates from the ZUS, who’re ‘woke’ and demand that everyone on the planet be equal!

    And that their college loans be paid off by increasing the payroll taxes on the deplorable working class.

    How many economics graduates from ZUS universities understand the simple principles I’ve (and others) have outlined here in a few short comments?

    It seems like the PHDs know even less than the BA graduates. “Debt is good!”

  91. Anonymous[755] • Disclaimer says:

    The question for America’s statesmen is how to cope with the rising challenge of China

    What statesmen? Who’s getting challenged? Are you talking about a carnival troupe of Western globalist traitors and their Tribal masters who are deindustrialising and even genociding their host nations? If so, I’m gladly joining any challenge to their existence.

    So you can really stop trying to sell this “us vs. them” garbage. I have more respect, and loyalty, for Xi and Putin than any of the “statesmen” you had in mind. I want them to win any challenge over “my” globalist traitors and parasites.

  92. Yee says:

    Rurik,

    “They have no interest in discovering Western information technologies, and collecting data in non-Chinese governments, because they have no way to exploit such data?”

    Spying is a completely different business than general information collecting we’re talking about. That business is very narrow and don’t rely on public telecomm service.

    Huawei has gone through all kind of testes for backdoor by different countries and found nothing. Why you choose to ignore a fact that actually make sense?

    “If I wanted to start a cell phone company in China, but told the Chinese authorities that they would have no back door to the tech, what are my chances, eh?”

    I’ve already told you that there’s a law requires you to submit information to the authorities when they ask. Since they can walk in from the front door, I don’t see why they want a back door. So, chances are they’d look at you like you’re stupid.

    Unlike you, I don’t worry about the authorities having my information, since important information about myself are registered in one government department or another, what’s the point of keeping the less important ones secret? What I worry about is PRIVATE entities getting my information.

    While you don’t trust the government, I don’t trust the capitalists. They will screw me over given half of a chance. The last thing I want is the capitalists more powerful than government. A weak government wouldn’t mean “power to the people”, it’d mean “power to the rich”. The rich are only responsible for their own interests, not for the naton, not for the people. I don’t want them the most powerful in my country.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Rurik
    , @dfordoom
  93. KenH says:
    @d dan

    This case is actually a vivid demonstration of why we need free trade……..But of course in real world, domestic textile industry will scream, and the government will compromise

    Actually it demonstrates the fallacy of free trade and proves the detractors of it correct in that it isn’t about providing Americans with the highest quality products at the cheapest prices. Rather, it’s about drastically lowering labor and operations costs by relocating to third world nations with slave wages and few, if any, environmental and safety regulations. This is all done to line the pockets of the executives, the major shareholders and Wall Street.

    Or if Trump does not launch this idiotic trade war, then the farmers can at least grow their soybean and manufacturers export their goods to China

    China has been taking us to the cleaners for by devaluing the yuan and enacting tariffs on U.S. products while theirs come to America duty free. In response to Trump’s tariffs (or threats of tariffs) they just devalued the yuan again. They undersell American industries then when they put them out of business they raise prices to above the levels charged by the now defunct American companies.

    When it comes to free trade libertarians and other free trade fundamentalists are reality averse. And like their economic determinist Marxist cousins always have a zippy and snappy retort as to why free trade in practice doesn’t work like it’s supposed to in theory.

    Libertarians do get some things right, but free trade isn’t one of them.

  94. Rurik says:
    @Yee

    I’ve already told you that there’s a law requires you to submit information to the authorities when they ask. Since they can walk in from the front door, I don’t see why they want a back door. So, chances are they’d look at you like you’re stupid

    What’s stupid is trusting your government.

    we in the West used to value our privacy- from governments, corporations, or nosey neighbors listening to our private conversations or creepy men looking in our windows at night.

    We used to find it creepy the idea of a microphone in our bedrooms, being monitored by creepy people. Now we seem to embrace it, if we can ask the microphone to change the music or turn off the lights.

    While you don’t trust the government, I don’t trust the capitalists. They will screw me over given half of a chance.

    I don’t trust either of them!

    The other day my girlfriend’s son was talking to his buddy on some Bluetooth thing, and I told him to never have one of those microphones on if I didn’t know about it.

    I don’t like to talk to anyone with their speaker phone on, unless I know about it and whom is in the room/car/whatever with them.

    I don’t like my words spoken in private, not being private.

    I consider it a violation of trust, even if it’s just a teenager and his buddy listening to me talk about what’s for dinner.

    Now move from that to a corporation or a government that is dedicated to my and my people’s destruction.

    The tech giants like Google and Facebook and Apple and Amazon… hate, with an unhinged, psychotic, megalomaniacal murderous fanaticism- unapologetic, straight, white American, gun-owning men. They call us irredeemable, because we don’t want to be gay or see our communities transformed into Third World shitholes.

    For this we are beyond deplorable.

    And so since both the (((government))) and tech corporations want to see me and mine utterly genocided off the face of the planet, for our intractable “racism” and “sexism” and ‘genderism’, and all the other deplorable and irredeemable ‘crimes’ we’re all ‘guilty’ of- every word that we say, will be used against us.

    Not for our deficiencies or vices, but specifically because of our virtues: love of family, patriotism, love of heritage and honor and verity. It is for the things that make us what we are, that they demand our ultimate and total destruction.

    So yea, I don’t give a fuck whether or not it’s the scumfuck corporations or scumfuck governments.

    They call all eat shit and die, and if they want my personal info, I’m leaving a cyber record of all my thoughts and opinions right here on Unz for them to ruminate over and plot and plan ways to silence and ultimately destroy me.

    Go for it scumfucks.

    And that goes for private corporate and government scumfucks. 😉

  95. Rurik says:
    @Yee

    The last thing I want is the capitalists more powerful than government. A weak government wouldn’t mean “power to the people”, it’d mean “power to the rich

    addendum

    You’re lucky in the sense that the Chinese government doesn’t hate the Chinese people, and demand that they be replaced with non-Chinese.

    So with that important distinction, I sort of understand your perspective.

    Also consider that if you live in the ZUSA, then the government taxes the working poor, so it can give subsidies to Big Oil and Goldman Sachs and Big Tobacco, and Jeff Bezos pays no taxes, while a housekeeper pays ten or fifteen percent or more of her hard earned wages, and that’s just to the federal gov.

    So at least in some ways I can perhaps appreciate the differences between a Chinese government, that at least doesn’t hate the Chinese people with a genocidal fervor.

    Perhaps if the Japanese had won the war, and the government of China was controlled by people that hated the Chinese people, and put some Chinese stooges in office to make it look like a Chinese government, then perhaps you’d feel differently about your government.

  96. @Smith

    Selling jobs to China does not lift up americans, european, vietnamese or anyone else, it only lifts up China, and China knows this.

    It also “lifts up” the sellers. I.e. the shareholders and the members of the boards.

    As soon as the jobs go, China goes.

    Joke. You think if the USA stops buying from China, that China will curl up and die? At the most (before Trump’s tariffs) 30% of China’s sales were to the USA. Their sales to the rest of the world are increasing. If they lost the sales to the USA that would make their goods cheaper.

    If the US stops buying altogether from China, US industry is going to have a lot of problems replacing things made in China, e.g. rare earths, tungsten and probably other things and do not forget that some big US companies are now selling more in China than in the USA.

  97. “Who Lost China?”

    Stupid Question! It was not the USA’s to lose. In case you forget, under the UN rules, (Agreed to just four years earlier.) it belonged to the Chinese.

    With the fall of the Nationalist government of Chiang Kai-shek, the defeat of his armies and the flight to Formosa, that was the question of the hour in 1949. And no one demanded to know more insistently than the anti-Communist Congressman John F. Kennedy:

    “Whatever share of the responsibility was Roosevelt’s and whatever share was (General George) Marshall’s, the vital interest of the United States in the independent integrity of China was sacrificed, and the foundation was laid for the present tragic situation in the Far East.”

    The interest of the great powers has never been in having another great power to compete with them. The help that the US gave Chiang Kai-shek was thought to be enough to enable him to defeat the Communists and then leave him dependent on the USA. It was a miscalculation. Shit happens.

    Tragic indeed was the situation. The most populous nation on earth, for which America had risked and fought a war with the Japanese Empire, had been lost to Stalin’s empire.

    “for which America had risked and fought a war with the Japanese Empire,” Oh! Come on! Out of the goodness of their hearts? Fat lot of help the Chinese got from the USA before Pearl Harbour! By the time that happened the Chinese had been fighting the Japanese for about ten years!

    ” lost to Stalin’s empire.” I Don’t think Stalin was all that pleased. China was an unwelcome rival “Centre of World Communism”. Of course they were pleased to have a friendly power there rather than another US satellite, but all along the help that Stalin gave the Chinese Communists was uneven and at times almost fatal (As for example the Comintern advisor insisting that relying on the peasants was wrong and they had to rely on the industrial proletariat, who were a very small minority.) Krushchov cut off the aid to them and withdrew all the technicians and all the blueprints and the manuals for the machinery that Stalin had sent.

  98. The Uighurs of west China are being forced into re-education camps to be cured of their tribalist, nationalist and Islamic beliefs. Christians are being persecuted. Tibetans are being replaced in their homeland by Han Chinese. The Communist Party’s role and rule as the font of ideological, political and moral truth is being elevated and imposed.

    “The Uighurs of west China are being forced into re-education camps to be cured of their tribalist, nationalist and Islamic beliefs.” Not according to the Council of Islamic Countries which sent a fact-finding mission to Xinjiang this year. They gave a favourable report on the Chinese efforts.

    ” Tibetans are being replaced in their homeland by Han Chinese. ”
    The Tibetans are thriving and the number of Tibetans in Tibet is increasing and many other Tibetans have moved to other parts of China. Some Han Chinese have moved to Tibet. Tibet is part of China and there is nothing to stop people moving from one part of the country to another and some do.

    The Chinese still hold land seized from India 50 years ago. China now claims as sovereign territory virtually all of a South China Sea, which encompasses territorial waters of six nations. It has begun building air, naval and military bases on rocks and reefs belonging to Manila.

    “The Chinese still hold land seized from India 50 years ago. ”
    The Indians still hold land seized from China 50 years ago. If you look at the end-covers of the first edition of Nehru’s autobiography, you will see a map showing the boundary between India and China. If you look at the same map in the third edition of the same book the boundary has moved some hundreds of miles North! The Indians are still occupying a part of Tibet. Chatham House, not a noted hotbed of CCP fans, published a book on the Sino-Indian Boundary Dispute which said that the Chinese were right in their claims and the Indians were wrong.

    The USA recognized all of the South China Sea as being Chinese territorial water until the Communists came to power.

  99. nsa says:

    “Who Lost China?”
    Wrong question. White people, excluding the jew termites, should be asking who lost the United States.

    • Replies: @SeekerofthePresence
  100. Chinaman says:

    The people of Hong Kong, who are surely being cheered by many on the mainland of China, have been protesting for months, demanding the liberty and independence for which American patriots fought in our Revolution, not Mao’s revolution

    .

    Rubbish. I can assure you 95% of mainland Chinese is against what is going in HK, simply out of nationalistic sentiments. Chinese citizens are getting harnessed and physically attacked in broad day light in HK. This is widely reported in Chinese media which is why no tourists is coming to HK.

    It is depraved to make these gross distortion of the facts, even as a you, a failed politician.

    Most Chinese will laid down their life before they allow Hong Kong to be independent. As a born and bred HKer, Independence will only happen over my dead body. So Dream on…

    True Patriots will fight for territorial integrity and stop the CIA from starting a colour revolution in HK. Remember What happened when the South try to secede during the Civil war ? You are a senile Dumbass.

    Btw, it is called the south CHINA sea, not south Philippine or Vietnam sea so yes, Chinese own all of it as America own the Great Lakes.

    • Replies: @Chinaman
  101. Chinaman says:
    @Chinaman

    “Who lost China? “

    What a quaint Colonial question! It assumes that US “owns” China to begin with.

    How ironic that it is China that own a lot of America’s debt…and thus America itself.

    pay up or we will foreclose America!

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  102. @nsa

    The Gramsciites lost Amurika.

    Communism infiltrated the schools, courts, entertainment, churches (more entertainment in many cases), government (bad entertainment), even the sciences (algebra is now a form of privilege).

    Communism is the death star to democracy, civilization, Christianity.

    Communism is history’s greatest approximation to the AntiChrist.

    Recently, class warfare has been made more virulent with the admixture of identity warfare. Lovers of freedom now fight on two fronts. One was hard enough.

    In Britain a doctor lost his job for adhering to pronouns for just two sexes. The State ruled the Bible was uncivil and impolite. Not only is Trump impeached, but God also.

    Like the Borg, the Gramsciites will seek to assimilate the whole world, so as to have a smoothly running concentration camp.

  103. China has been taking us to the cleaners for by devaluing the yuan and enacting tariffs on U.S. products while theirs come to America duty free. In response to Trump’s tariffs (or threats of tariffs) they just devalued the yuan again. They undersell American industries then when they put them out of business they raise prices to above the levels charged by the now defunct American companies.

    Those naughty Chinese, behaving just like capitalists. There ought to be a law against it!

  104. @Rurik

    Good questions, but culture-bound because, as you say, you don’t know much about China, whose Confucian attitudes to power are unlike our Roman ones.

    They say the only way to get and keep legitimate power–which they call ‘the mandate of heaven’–is by doing good for the people.

    Different dynasties have practiced that with varying degrees of success but, being fairly familiar with both their and our traditions, I’d say they have had more success than we have.

    The current dynasty, though still very young by Chinese standards, is an excellent example of the Confucian approach: starting seventy years ago with the largest, poorest nation on earth, they have earned 95% support of the people by doing good.

    By 2021 every Chinese will have a home, a job, plenty of food, education, safe streets, health insurance and old age care. 300,000,000 urban Chinese will have more net worth and disposable income than the average American, their mothers and infants will be less likely to die in childbirth, their children will graduate from high school three years ahead of American kids and live longer, healthier lives (and there will be more drug addicts, suicides and executions, more homeless, poor, hungry and imprisoned people in America than in China).

    They have been tested along the way, too. Their own mistakes have been compounded by endless outside interference, including violent terrorist attacks that have killed thousands, but the government’s response has been mild.

    The current US-sponsored terrorism in Hong Kong is a good example of what I mean by ‘mild.’ Look at what happens to Americans who attack police: https://twitter.com/Ozkok_A/status/1179855248757854216?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed&ref_url=safari-reader://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/10/links-10-5-19.html

    • Replies: @Chinaman
    , @Rurik
  105. I knew this post would start another word war.
    I agree with all the positive posts about China.
    Lets get it straight. Buchanan is way of mark about most..

    The WAR criminal Jiang Kai Ze (Western name Chiang Kai Chek). This asshole traitor to China wanted to LET the Japanese imperial army take over China, if it wasnt for Mao getting the common village people to help via guerilla warfare to stop the criminal Japanese war criminals that wanted to take over China.
    Historical fact: Mao made Jiang sign an agreement to fight the Japanese together.
    Several of Jiang’s generals who had seen through the monster idiot he was swapped sides to the Ba Lu (Mao’s civilian army 1930’s).
    Chiang Kai Chek was a traitor, Mao even saved his families graves!
    Total ignorance of Chinese history among Western politicians and even (Eurocentric) historians are common.
    Also Mao saved the Wests ass from the Japanese in WW2 by holding up the Japanese army so they had limited resources to occupy the rest of Asia, which was their intention.
    The Japanese were the most brutal of all the WW2 armies. Fact.

    • Replies: @El Dato
    , @DB Cooper
  106. Chinaman says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    Yes, the last thing any Chinese need is more newfangled utopian ideology or some amorphous concept of freedom. Having lived in the west, China is more free in many respect and It is ironic that people don’t realised Democracy becomes over-regulated totalitarian regimes where people pay upwards of 50% of their labour to . Tax is slavery.

    We are sick of being told what is good for us, especially when we are doing very well. White people should stop being jealous of Chinese growth and get their one house in order.

  107. Anon[134] • Disclaimer says:

    The current US-sponsored terrorism in Hong Kong is a good example of what I mean by ‘mild.’ Look at what happens to Americans who attack police: https://twitter.com/Ozkok_A/status/1179855248757854216?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed&ref_url=safari-reader://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/10/links-10-5-19.html

    Rioters throwing petrol bombs into Wan Chai Subway 29 Sep 2019

    Attacking the police


    Attacking a train

    from a different camera

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @El Dato
  108. @SeekerofthePresence

    AGREED, Seeker.

    I had to look up this Gransci, the Marxist, I’ll admit, but whatever name you give to the Communists, that’s a good answer to nsa’s question. America won the external Cold War, while losing the internal one.

    The modern form of Communist may have never heard of Karl Marx or Das Capital, but his sickness and methods are the same. History does rhyme, and a full century, later, the Commies are crawling out of the woodwork again. Note, it rhymes, not repeats, so we don’t who will come out unscathed this time around.

    • Agree: SeekerofthePresence
    • Replies: @SeekerofthePresence
  109. The question for America’s statesmen is how to cope with the rising challenge of China while avoiding a war that would be a calamity for all mankind. Patience, prudence and perseverance commend themselves.

    How about leaving the Asian Pacific and letting Asians sort it out?

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @El Dato
  110. @Chinaman

    I believe that the term, “who lost China” is being used in the context of who lost China as a friendly nation to cooperate and trade with? Not as a possession.

    China is being demonised by an elite minority in finance and media. The majority of Americans are not happy at all about the loss of manufacturing and decent jobs in America which has really been effected by just a small minority of corporate hogs and their mad ideologies.

  111. Anon[134] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    HK masked protesters attacked and killed an old man

  112. alexander says:

    Dear Pat,

    The question “Is China the country of the future”….should be replaced with these three questions :

    1) Has post 9-11 US policy of starting and perpetuating illegal wars of aggression, based wholly on Neocon fraud and war lies, exterminated so much of our nations sovereign wealth, it now (actually) threatens the continued legitimacy of the US dollar as the worlds reserve currency ?,

    2) Has the US policy of embracing “illegal” war of aggression , based wholly on Neocon fraud and war lies , created so much global enmity and mistrust , … the world will soon choose to abandon the US dollar, in favor of the Chinese yuan, as its reserve currency ?

    3) Do our Neocon oligarchs , who lied the American people into illegal war, stolen trillions of our tax dollars in illicit war graft, created untold suffering, chaos and strife around the world, and run up 23 trillion in heinous war debt , still deserve to be stewards of US policy …or …do they all deserve to be locked up,and have their assets seized, to pay down the debt their lies created ?

    • Agree: NoseytheDuke
  113. Biff says:
    @Rurik

    I wonder what my Social Credit score would be..

    What does your rap sheet say?

    Have you been arrested?
    Do you have a felony?
    Are you related to a politician?

    • Replies: @Rurik
  114. El Dato says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    > http://www.unz.com/article/mao-reconsidered-part-two-whose-famine/
    > http://www.unz.com/article/the-great-proletarian-cultural-revolution/

    Godfree Roberts likes to indulge in “Good Mao” revisionism but that doesn’t mean it’s particularly serious work or worth to be cited or used for anything other than wrapping fish.

    Especially as not many scholars are of his opinion.

    My grandma always proclaimed that “Stalin was a Good Man”. Yes, grandma.

  115. El Dato says:
    @Priss Factor

    But all those CVN battlegroups, what would they be useful for?

  116. El Dato says:
    @BlackDragon

    The WAR criminal Jiang Kai Ze (Western name Chiang Kai Chek). This asshole traitor to China wanted to LET the Japanese imperial army take over China

    Certainly not.

    It takes some balls to try to go on fighting from a backyard peasant-grade “capital” against a well-equipped army. That’s not “let them take over”.

    Indeed Chiang fought the Japanese while Mao was wandering around, backstabbing, working his internal politics, writing his book and recruiting desperate peasants for the big liberating fight based on really bizarre non-Chinese Marxist modes of thought.

    Total ignorance of Chinese history among Western politicians and even (Eurocentric) historians are common.

    You seem to come with a fat dollop of ignorance yourself, buster.

    Get some reading on.

    Also Mao saved the Wests ass from the Japanese in WW2 by holding up the Japanese army so they had limited resources to occupy the rest of Asia, which was their intention.

    You misspelled “Chiang”.

  117. El Dato says:
    @Anon

    It’s all very Maidan. I can’t distinguish false flags from reality anymore.

    Fact is that certain imageboards are suspiciously flooded by “pro-protester” news on a daily basis which then turn out to be outright fakes. I’m looking at you, imgur.

  118. Anon[401] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I’m not sure where Mr. Buchanan was going with all this worry about the Uighurs, Tibetans and even Chinese Christians. We really have enough problems of our own, where all that should not be our concern.

    “Our concern” meaning every slap in the face someone in the Middle East gets from an Israeli, probably.

  119. @Achmed E. Newman

    History does rhyme

    New tale second time

  120. @SeekerofthePresence

    National Anthem for Brave New Snowflake Woke Amurika

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  121. It doesn’t matter who lost China. China was never a prize.

    As usual, Buchanan gets it wrong. It’s unbelievable that for someone his age, with his education and political experience, he has no clue about the world.

    China is the fastest aging country in the world. Since the mid-70s, they have performed over 400 million abortions (a conservative figure). Their average IQ is only 90. Trump is finally dealing with them on trade. China is collapsing. China will never be a first world country.

    The Japanese are the only intelligent Asians.

  122. @SeekerofthePresence

    LA girls are nothing but fun, as long as you remember to catch and release.

  123. btw says:

    For those who are not aware, the Author P. Buchanan is a holocaust denier and white supremacist, this alone should be cause enough to disregard this fear mongering hit piece.

  124. @Colin Wright

    From Mexico, the USA stole Texas, Southern Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada and California. I don’t know anything about Gulf of Mexico islands. In the case of Texas, the Texan slavers, both Yanks and Mexicans, had already defeated Santa Anna after his abolition of slavery. The first Texan war for slavery was much more successful than their second. [email protected]

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  125. Erebus says:
    @Rurik

    Can I take that to mean that the total surveillance and police and domestic military operations in China are not and never would be used to bolster the power of the Chinese government- over its citizens, and its dissident citizens in particular?

    Well, that’s certainly the danger, because never is a long time.

    At the end of the day, govts spy on their citizens out of fear. The poorer the job they’re doing taking care of the citizens’ interests, the more reason they have to fear.

    At the present time, and for the foreseeable future, the Chinese govt has nothing to fear from its citizens. The overwhelming majority support it, and there’s simply nothing like the fissures you see in the American body politic and now appearing in Europe. China ain’t got no Deplorables, and the govt isn’t creating any. In fact, the opposite. Even though the Uyghurs are but a pinprick on the political map, and nobody in China, not even the general Uyghur population seriously objects to the way the Chinese govt is dealing with the problem. It’s bound and determined that the Uyghurs not be left behind to stew in Islamic fundamentalism – and let Western “NGO”s get as excited as they like.

    China’s real problem, in my estimation is that the country has developed far faster than its people. Vast numbers got catapulted from a 19thC largely agrarian existence to a 21stC hi-tech state in a heartbeat. You can take someone out of the village pretty quickly, but it takes a lot longer to get the village out of them.

    Business was wholly local up until China’s opening and the rise of online platforms like TaoBao. Though China has been a “national” Empire for millennia, the reality is that was an agglomeration of largely isolated populations. Not only did every province have its own language, cuisine and culture, every city and village, or group of villages did as well. As it ever and everywhere was, “Outsiders” were not to be trusted, and the further they were located from you the less they could be trusted. To complete the network of intra-national relations that are fundamental to a national economy, a framework is required that spans the nation to overcome the vestiges of centuries of trusting locals only. That is what the Social Credit system is all about, leapfrogging the generations it would take to create those networks organically.

    Like eBay’s star system rating of Sellers, it tells you something about who you’re dealing with. Can it, will it be abused? In the fullness of time, probably, but I suspect that by the time the Chinese govt fears its people to the point they’d abuse it today’s Communist Party would have long since morphed into something much more sinister.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  126. @d dan

    …the free trade arrangement that lifted the standard of living for millions of Americans…

    The standard of living has been mostly “lifted” by credit expansion. This method of attaining “prosperity” has always ended, and will always end, in catastrophe for the mass of humanity (not to say it does not work very well for others).

    ‘Twas whispered about
    That it’s time to get out
    When the widows and orphans get in”

  127. gT says:
    @gT

    Something interesting appeared on investmentwatchblog. Nazi Germany was to some extent built up by Western industrialists (lots of Westerners supported and admired Adolf before WWII). Nazi Germany went on to attack Russia. And while France, for instance, was well treated by the Nazi’s, the intent was to exterminate the Russians.

    Now China has definitely been built up by Western industrialists, and lots of Westerners support and admire China.

    Deja vu?

  128. Rurik says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    Good questions, but culture-bound because, as you say, you don’t know much about China, whose Confucian attitudes to power are unlike our Roman ones.

    They say the only way to get and keep legitimate power–which they call ‘the mandate of heaven’–is by doing good for the people.

    Different dynasties have practiced that with varying degrees of success but, being fairly familiar with both their and our traditions, I’d say they have had more success than we have.

    OK, interesting.

    But I have to tell you when you mention all that ‘doing good for the people’, and varying degrees of success’, I couldn’t help thinking of Mao’s reign.

    Did Confucianism take a break for a generation or so?

    Is there anything compatible between Confucius and Mao?

    As for more ‘success than we have’, how do you measure success?

    For myself, considering the human condition, I’d say that the Magna Carta was the height of human achievement, until the advent of the Bill of Rights.

    Those are the metrics with which I measure ‘success’. That, and the Rule of Law, that are their founding principles. The idea that the leader of the nation, is in no way any better or subject to the laws any less than the lowliest lout. The rule of law, rather than the rule of men/the jungle.

    {Alas, we in the West have repudiated that hard-won (in blood) inherited legacy, and are not worthy to speak the names of the men who fought heroically to provide it to us}.

    The current dynasty, though still very young by Chinese standards, is an excellent example of the Confucian approach: starting seventy years ago with the largest, poorest nation on earth, they have earned 95% support of the people by doing good

    .
    Don’t you mean 95% support of the people who’re left?

    If I’d have survived The Great Leap Forward, I’d likely too loudly and publically proclaim my undying loyalty. Prudent is the word that comes to mind.

    By 2021 every Chinese will have a home, a job, plenty of food, education, safe streets, health insurance and old age care.

    I confess to being a tad bit skeptical of that. At least by Western standards.

    300,000,000 urban Chinese will have more net worth and disposable income than the average American, their mothers and infants will be less likely to die in childbirth, their children will graduate from high school three years ahead of American kids and live longer, healthier lives (and there will be more drug addicts, suicides and executions, more homeless, poor, hungry and imprisoned people in America than in China).

    Yes, but how much of that comparison is due to the fact that America’s (((government))) hates the White American people with a psychotic zeol0try? And demands they commit collective suicide.

    What would a comparison look like if America had a government that cared about, and even wanted to bolster the fortunes of even the hated White Americans?

    For instance, what if the government of America was more like the government of Switzerland or Hungary, and wasn’t overtly committed to the destruction of their citizens, but rather wanted to see them prosper?

    How many “more drug addicts, suicides and executions, more homeless, poor, hungry and imprisoned people” would America have if it wasn’t importing the world’s poor and criminal and hungry and drug-dealing refuse from every shithole on the planet, as fast as it possibly can?

    What would San Francisco look like today if Rurik were firmly entrenched in power, vs. Team Soy?

    Imagine an America where no one gets in unless by doing so, they bolster the fortunes of the average, typical American Joe.

    Imagine an America, whose cities resemble the glistening triumphs of Asia, more than they do Detroit/Miami/Baltimore/LA.

    If it weren’t for the committed hatred of our elites, what wouldn’t be possible in a parallel America, whose leaders wanted to see Americans prosper, rather than die of opioids or immigrant thugs or on some zio-battle field thousands of miles away.

    So, at least in that sense, yes, I’m very confident that China will continue to be ascendant, if for no other reason, than that their elites don’t hate the Chinese people’s DNA with the seething passion of a thousand exploding suns.

    In short, I wish the Chinese people well. I see no antipathy in China for Americans or the West, as such. Certainly not anywhere near the hatred our ((elites)) harbor for Heritage America.

    So as China prospers, and its people prosper, I wish them God speed.

    Perhaps with Russia’s and India’s and other’s help, together they can bring down the ((Federal Reserve Note)), that menaces and endeavors to enslave us all.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  129. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rurik

    “U.S. interests”? “American values”?

    What are those?

    Besides Eternal Wars for Israel, Total surveillance’ here at home, Diversity is our Strength!, and Celebrate Multiculturalism!

    – what’s left, besides ‘gay weddings” and Bake the Cake!

    You forgot that amazing triumph for civilisation, allowing men to use the ladies’ room. And making unlimited porn available to everybody. And twerking. Surely they’re things worth dying for.

    • Agree: Rurik
  130. Rurik says:
    @Biff

    Social Credit score would be..

    What does your rap sheet say?

    Have you been arrested?
    Do you have a felony?
    Are you related to a politician?

    Well, in some circles I’d be considered a ‘right-winger’, (with verboten ideas about some of our elites)).

    So just take Dr. David Duke.

    He’s been arrested, (I believe on a felony), and he’s an actual (former) politician.

    Would he be allowed to travel on a plane or train?

  131. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Yee

    While you don’t trust the government, I don’t trust the capitalists. They will screw me over given half of a chance. The last thing I want is the capitalists more powerful than government. A weak government wouldn’t mean “power to the people”, it’d mean “power to the rich”. The rich are only responsible for their own interests, not for the naton, not for the people. I don’t want them the most powerful in my country.

    Agreed.

  132. Rurik says:
    @Erebus

    At the present time, and for the foreseeable future, the Chinese govt has nothing to fear from its citizens. The overwhelming majority support it, and there’s simply nothing like the fissures you see in the American body politic and now appearing in Europe

    What about Hong Kong?

    China ain’t got no Deplorables, and the govt isn’t creating any. In fact, the opposite. Even though the Uyghurs are but a pinprick on the political map, and nobody in China, not even the general Uyghur population seriously objects to the way the Chinese govt is dealing with the problem.

    Hmm..

    That last bit sounds a little counter-intuitive.

    From what I understand, the Uyghurs are not ethnic Chinese. But rather a blend of Mongolians and other’s who’ve blended and mixed over the millenniums. Should they be force-assimilated?

    I’m not asking as a proponent of ‘Western’ NGOs, (not hardly), just wondering about a salient, if difficult- topic.

    “Outsiders” were not to be trusted, and the further they were located from you the less they could be trusted.

    Are the Uyghurs any less inclined to feel this way? Are they any less entitled to their own self-determination?

    To complete the network of intra-national relations that are fundamental to a national economy, a framework is required that spans the nation to overcome the vestiges of centuries of trusting locals only. That is what the Social Credit system is all about, leapfrogging the generations it would take to create those networks organically.

    If I was a Uyghur who said’ fuck the Chinese, I like being a Uyghur with my own religious proclivities, — could such a Uyghur find himself on the wrong side of the Social Credit system?

    Is perhaps, that the whole point?

    Like eBay’s star system rating of Sellers, it tells you something about who you’re dealing with. Can it, will it be abused? In the fullness of time, probably, but I suspect that by the time the Chinese govt fears its people to the point they’d abuse it today’s Communist Party would have long since morphed into something much more sinister.

    From what I understand about Mao, it’s hard to imagine something more sinister than his reign.

    As I said, and I’ll repeat, I know very little (almost nothing) about China, other than the stuff I read and knowing lots of (generally exemplary) Chinese people in the US.

    The worst thing I can say about them is I abhor the way some Asians treat cats and dogs. I’ve seen videos that make me physically sick. I don’t know if it’s fair to bring that up, but it is a ‘feeling’ I have about some Asians, and I just wish the rest of the world would shame them into stopping that particular cultural wont.

    Anyways, it’s good to get all these varied impressions, and it helps to put together a better understanding than what we get in our utterly dishonest and agenda-driven media.

    At the end of the day, I never trust anything my government or media says about anything.

    Pat Buchannan is far more reputable in that regard, but he too has his perspectives and view point, not entirely divorced from the Nixon administration, and certain follies there of. IMHO

    Lately they’ve been subjecting China to some chagrin, for whatever their reasons.

    I support Trump’s tariffs, for the reasons I’ve mentioned.

    If the West is unhappy about China’s ascendancy, well then they only have themselves to blame. It was their infinite greed that opened up China’s markets to the greed of Western corporations, so who are these Westerners to complain now, when they were the ones who ‘did it’.

    It was all good when it was bigger market$, and a place for cheap labor, but now that China is a big boy on the block, they act ‘shocked, shocked’.

    It’s always the same thing with humans. Greed and hubris bring unintended consequences.

    I’d like to think that for once in the history of mankind that it would be the people consumed by greed and hubris that would be the ones to suffer for it, rather than powerless innocents, as it always ends up being.

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @dfordoom
  133. @Donald A Thomson

    ‘From Mexico, the USA stole Texas, Southern Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada and California…’

    Huh. First, Mexico had ‘stolen’ those lands herself all of eighteen years earlier, when she had revolted against Spain. The Spanish, of course, had simply taken those lands from the Indians. But by some mysterious alchemy, Mexico’s claim, hallowed by the mists of time, becomes inviolable, and if we in turn take those lands, it’s ‘theft.’

    Secondly, there were only significant numbers of ‘Mexicans’ living in three of those states you mention: Texas, New Mexico, and California. Furthermore, it was not the US that ‘stole’ two of those three states at all: witness the perils of permitting immigration. It was white Anglo settlers who revolted (as the Mexicans themselves had) and took control of California and Texas. Texas, of course, existed as an independent republic for a decade before joining the US, while California became the brief but nevertheless genuine Bear Flag Republic.

    Finally, in all cases, the Mexicans themselves acquiesced in the takeovers; a ‘battle’ in California resulted in a total of one (1) fatality.

    The Mexican government of the era was truly awful; no one wanted to be ruled by that. Did you know the US government actually asked the Mexican residents of the territory annexed to Texas if they wanted to be annexed?

    It’s true: we held a vote, and the Mexicans preferred to become part of the United States. But there; you would hold we should have left them to the delights of being ruled by Santa Ana et al.

  134. @Rurik

    The principal indicator of the success of the Confucian system is that it is going stronger than ever, with more popular support, after 2200 years.

    The atrocity stories we’ve heard about Mao and the CCP are just propaganda. Just more WMD and Russiagate nonsense.

    As far as I can determine, nobody starved to death, nobody was massacred.

    You can check out the main stories here: https://www.unz.com/author/godfree-roberts/

  135. Erebus says:
    @Rurik

    What about Hong Kong?

    Please see my comment at http://www.unz.com/avltchek/hong-kong-is-scared-of-the-rioters/#comment-3473684. That fissure is indeed a big one, but HK is quite separate and its troubles have no impact on the mainland, yet. By cutting its nose off to spite its face (whacking the mainlanders’ spending in HK) it’s isolated itself and its isolation is increasing.

    … not even the general Uyghur population seriously objects to the way the Chinese govt is dealing with the problem.

    Hmm..

    That last bit sounds a little counter-intuitive.

    Assuming “that last bit” is what I quoted, it only sounds counter-intuitive.

    Joe 6-pack Uyghur is typically a law-abiding guy just hacking out a living like all the rest of us are. I don’t know the exact percentages, but it’s clear when one goes there that it’s the vast majority. They’re almost as terrified as the Chinese govt.

    There is, otoh, a radicalized minority. That radicalization results largely from Turkish and Saudi “NGO”s having been given free rein to proselytize Turkic “nationalism” and radical Wahhabi sectarianism. As XinJiang has not seen the same development that the east has, and is in any case generally poorer they’ve preyed on Uyghur malaise and succeeded in radicalizing a significant minority to the point where 1000s uprooted themselves and their families to join ISIS in Syriaq and (more dangerously) Afghanistan.

    Joe Uyghur doesn’t have any use for the radicals. He wants to raise his children and go about his business according to his Islamic lights. He wants his daughters educated and not in burkas, and he doesn’t want his sons to die a Captagon-enhanced death in Syria/Iraq/Chechnya/Afghanistan or in XinJiang. The Chinese govt, as far as I can tell is good with all of that and rather than “killing them on the toilet” is trying to wean them away from radicalism by forcing (yeah, forcing) the worst to learn some skills so they can channel their energies towards contributing to their fellow Uyghurs well-being. Will it work? With some it will, and with some it won’t. The latter will have to die on the toilet.

    So…

    … I like being a Uyghur with my own religious proclivities, — could such a Uyghur find himself on the wrong side of the Social Credit system?

    No, as long as you remain unradicalized, and otherwise honest you’ll be fine.

    Islam has been accommodated in China since its earliest days. More telling than mosques, you’ll find noodle shops advertising Islamic Noodles, and Islamic BBQ restaurants displaying the Halal mark all over China. They invariably do good business, some extraordinarily so, because they make the best noodles and BBQ’d meats. In Shenzhen, at least, they’re full of Han customers (and the occasional foreigner, esp for the BBQ).

    It was their infinite greed that opened up China’s markets to the greed of Western corporations, so who are these Westerners to complain now, when they were the ones who ‘did it’.

    It’s a little more complicated than simple greed. The West’s elite looked at that 1.5B potential producers/consumers and were well aware of their history and civilizational power. They also saw it was at a low ebb and figured they could snatch it from the locals. So they traded their American Rook for a Chinese Queen. Or so they they thought. The Chinese knew the game, took their Rook, put their Queen in safety and are now thumbing their nose at them. That’s why they’re so pissed. It’s their China Dream that ended.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Anonymous
  136. Davie says:

    ”Is China the Country of the Future?”

    I currently live in China and much as I am an admirer of how far the country has come in material terms in the last 30 years and grateful though I may be for the benefits that Traditional Chinese Medicine and energy practices like Chi Kung have brought to my life, I have to say that I doubt that this place is the country of the future.

    There is a lack of originality here which I doubt is due simply to the restrictions imposed on society by the government. The Chinese tend very much to conformity and group think and seem to lack the spark for genius which one sees in the West. I suspect the best they can hope for is to match the aesthetic sophistication of the nearby Japanese.

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @Lin
  137. Erebus says:
    @Davie

    The Chinese tend very much to conformity and group think and seem to lack the spark for genius …

    I suspect that conformity and group think is the future, and not only in China.

    Whether the Chinese are leading that trend or are just a symptom can be debated, but that the West’s genius is waning is plainly visible. We are entering the post-progress age.

    I happen to think that’s a good thing. After 2 centuries of breakneck acceleration, we need to plateau and consolidate for few generations.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  138. Lin says:
    @Davie

    Traditional Chinese Medicine and energy practices like Chi Kung have brought to my life

    You’ve serious problem with your life outlook:
    1)Traditional Chinese Medicine(TCM) is an empirical ‘medical’ system and it’s ‘theory’ is overwhelmingly incompatible with modern science. It can cure some illness at low cost and that’s all about it. And don’t give me ‘Chinese cultural heritage of TCM’ BS because medicine is about saving lives. If TCM is part of traditional Chinese cultural heritage, let Chinese gov dept of antiquity or museums handle it. If certain diets of TCM is good for health, let dietetians(not shopkeepers of TCM herbs stores) handle it. The poorer part of rural china might still need it in some way but as Chinese economy is progressing, definitely within the next decade or so, the state of health of Chinese populace will hardly be affected if TCM disappears from the surface of the earth.
    (because chinese had been poor and couldn’t afford modern medicine for a long time. TCM has acquire quasi-religion status; time to change)

    2)Chi kung(or by any other words to do with ‘meditation’) is basically bio feedback and brain morphine synthesis

  139. DB Cooper says:
    @BlackDragon

    “This asshole traitor to China wanted to LET the Japanese imperial army take over China”

    You must be watching too many ahistorical tv drama. Chiang was already the head honcho of China at that time. The Generalissimo. What possible benefit he can gain from letting Japan took over China? So he can be a prisoner of war? May be a puppet of Japan? You think even the most scummiest person on this world would prefer to be a puppet of another country than the big frog on your own pond? It is Mao that has every thing to gain by China being invaded by Japan. He is the leader of a rebel army and has every thing to gain by exploiting the difficult situation of China.

    “Mao made Jiang sign an agreement to fight the Japanese together.”

    One of the KMT generals the ‘Young Marshal’ ZhangXueliang fall for the CCP’s propaganda and kidnapped Chiang to force the two sides together into a truce to fight against Japan. And for this he regret for the rest of his life. He later remarked that all he wants to do is to force the two sides to cooperate against the Japaneses and never in a million years would thought that the CCP would later turn on the government after the war is won. ZhangXueliang is indeed a patriotic figure. After the ‘Xian incident’ he was put in soft house arrest (basically restrict travelling) for the rest of his life and lived in Taiwan and later Hawaii. He outlived Chiang for almost three decades and lived to a ripe old age of 101. After Chiang’s death he was totally a free man and the CCP repeatedly invited him back to China. If he went he would certainly be feted a heoric welcome yet time and again declined the invitations. Isn’t this embarrasing for the CCP? The patriotic figure that the CCP held in high esteem refuse repeatedly to give any face to the CCP. He knew that he was being used by the CCP in the first time and certainly didn’t want to be used by the CCP a second time. This is called fool me once shame on me fool me twice shame on you.

    That it is the KMT that fights Japan is supported by vast amount of material. The book recommemded by El Dato is a good start. Not only the KMT archives has vast amount of material documenting how it fight the Japanese, it was also corroborated by the Japanese archives. Japan surely know who they were fighting against. I am sure not it knows, it studied its enemies in depth. Things like the commanding structure, estimated number of troops, logistic and supplies condition, what kind of equipments the KMT army has, troop deployment and all other things pertaining in battle. The CCP can spin their tall tale of the stupid Ba Lu for all they want, but the CCP’s account is not corrobated by any other source. I am sure the CCP staged some fake fight and milk it for propaganda purpose till the kingdom comes. But that’s about it.

    I have seen CCP’s ahistorical drama depicting the Soviet army fighting the Japanese in the northeast. This is another spin the CCP put out to cover the treacherous act of Mao. The Soviet red army was in the northeast alright. Not to fight the Japanese but to atttempt to grab northeast from China. The Soviet Union sits out the entire Sino-Japanese war and only opportunistically declared war on Japan two days after the Nagasaki bomb when the defeat of Japan was imminent. Stalin then poured the red army into the northeast. It was only pressure from Roosevelt that Stalin finally pulled its troops back to the Soviet Union. It is under this backdrop that Mao cooperated with the Soviet Union. Isn’t this a fucking piece of shit?

    So the fucking piece of shit Mao corrobated with the biggest land grabber of China Russia and exploit China during her most difficult time when China was in a mortal struggle with Japan. In the end the fucking piece of shit got to be the emperor of China and wrecked China for another thirty years. Fuck that piece of shit. Fuck the shit’s parents, grandparents and his ancestors to the eighteenth generations. Piece of human filth that needs to be cut into a thousand pieces.

    Today the CCP is very sensitive of the subject of who fights the Japanese and it certainly knows it is not the CCP. This is why the CCP continuing putting out this silly drama to fool the gullible mass.

  140. NBA kisses the arse of Beijing.
    Want free speech only if can keep their bling.

  141. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rurik

    From what I understand about Mao, it’s hard to imagine something more sinister than his reign.

    The idea that Mao was an evil mass murderer just like Hitler and Stalin is nonsense. You need to be a bit sceptical about American Cold War propaganda. You also need to be a bit sceptical about the version of events spread by Mao’s successors in China – they were after all his bitter political enemies.

    Right-wingers are just like liberals – they swallow their own side’s propaganda line unquestioningly.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  142. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Erebus

    I suspect that conformity and group think is the future, and not only in China.

    Conformity and group think is definitely the future of the West. It’s highly amusing to hear westerners criticising the Chinese for such things.

    that the West’s genius is waning is plainly visible. We are entering the post-progress age.

    Progress is a two-edged sword. Some progress is indeed progress. And some progress is merely change for change’s sake. Progress should not be fetishised. The West’s cult of progress has led it to the brink of ruin.

  143. How would you characterize the uniformity with which Chinese business, culture, and government has handled one single, solitary tweet from one NBA general manager in which he expressed support for those in Hong Kong who do not want to be subject to rule by the Chi-coms?

    In a truly free society, something alien to the Han, criticism of anything Chicom would be welcome and those who oppose such criticism would be subject to derision and ridicule.

    Please do not subscribe to the folly that the average Chinaman is free. Could the average Chinaman publicly criticize the jejune response of the Chicoms to the tweet?

    Could the average Chinaman publicly urge the removal of all Chicoms who supported the cancellation of the NBA related events?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Rurik
  144. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Liberty Mike

    In a truly free society, something alien to the Han, criticism of anything Chicom would be welcome and those who oppose such criticism would be subject to derision and ridicule.

    In a truly free society people are free to undermine the foundations of society and eventually destroy it. The people who want a truly free society are people who either hate their own society or are indifferent to it.

    The people who want China to be “a truly free society” are actually people who want to destroy China.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  145. Anonymous[983] • Disclaimer says:

    Communists are a lot smarter than nationalists on average, that seems to be the objective reality. They are always many steps ahead, just look at how the Communists have managed to encourage Western nationalists to support the far-left, Communist Kurds. They are proper REDS and loyal foot soldiers of Communists and the NWO.

  146. Rurik says:
    @Erebus

    That fissure is indeed a big one, but HK is quite separate and its troubles have no impact on the mainland, yet. By cutting its nose off to spite its face (whacking the mainlanders’ spending in HK) it’s isolated itself and its isolation is increasing.

    Again, I’ll concede I know little to nothing of what it’s like to be over there. OK, nothing.

    All I can do is attempt to glimmer things from afar, and by reading between the lines, as always..

    So from that, my suspicion is that HK wouldn’t mind the ‘isolation’ from the mainlanders, even if it meant less money spent, because (it seems to me), that they’re far more alarmed by the authoritarianism, than by a loss of economic activity.

    When you give people a taste of freedom, it’s more difficult to rein it in, than if they’d never had had it in the first place. Perhaps?

    … not even the general Uyghur population seriously objects to the way the Chinese govt is dealing with the problem.

    That last bit sounds a little counter-intuitive.

    Joe 6-pack Uyghur is typically a law-abiding guy just hacking out a living like all the rest of us are. I don’t know the exact percentages, but it’s clear when one goes there that it’s the vast majority. They’re almost as terrified as the Chinese govt.

    I’m not even close to being there, and I know the media lies about everything, but I confess your characterization still sounds to me counter-intuitive.

    But I’ll defer to your expertise/personal experience.

    Joe Uyghur doesn’t have any use for the radicals. He wants to raise his children and go about his business according to his Islamic lights. He wants his daughters educated and not in burkas, and he doesn’t want his sons to die a Captagon-enhanced death in Syria/Iraq/Chechnya/Afghanistan or in XinJiang. The Chinese govt, as far as I can tell is good with all of that and rather than “killing them on the toilet” is trying to wean them away from radicalism by forcing (yeah, forcing) the worst to learn some skills so they can channel their energies towards contributing to their fellow Uyghurs well-being. Will it work? With some it will, and with some it won’t. The latter will have to die on the toilet.

    that darn ‘f’ word.

    I myself have a deep and abiding hatred for that word, and everything it implies. I suspect that I’d be a radical anti-Chinese just due to that word, and everything it suggests. (Camps? Iron-fisted domination?)

    I’ve got no issues with Islam, even if I do with the ISIS type of radical Islam, but two wrongs don’t make a right, I’d say (from thousands of miles away and a billion light-years culturally).

    I wish them all the good luck in sorting it out.

    . In Shenzhen, at least, they’re full of Han customers (and the occasional foreigner, esp for the BBQ).

    There’s hope!

    It’s a little more complicated than simple greed. The West’s elite looked at that 1.5B potential producers/consumers and were well aware of their history and civilizational power. They also saw it was at a low ebb and figured they could snatch it from the locals. So they traded their American Rook for a Chinese Queen. Or so they they thought. The Chinese knew the game, took their Rook, put their Queen in safety and are now thumbing their nose at them. That’s why they’re so pissed. It’s their China Dream that ended.

    Intriguing narrative.

    I just wonder if you don’t give the West a little too much credit. From everything I see, they never really understand the motivating principles of the people they intend to loot and ravage. It’s simply enough that they’re positioned to get some advantage, and so they go for it.

    It is a powerful juxtaposition of enormously profound differences in ancient cultures and peoples, and a mingling of mutual, and mutually exclusive greed and national aspirations and values.

    A lot has happened in very short time, so I guess we’ll have a good seat for our popcorn to watch it all unfold.

    Cheers.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  147. Rurik says:
    @dfordoom

    The idea that Mao was an evil mass murderer just like Hitler and Stalin is nonsense. You need to be a bit sceptical about American Cold War propaganda.

    I’m always skeptical.

    If we’ve/I’ve been lied to about Mao, and the mass-terror and slaughter, that would be very interesting indeed.

    What about the Khmer Rouge?

    Some reformers who’re just misunderstood, and unfairly maligned in the Western press?

    Most of what I’ve been taught, I consider pure bullshit. But some of it is soooo uniformly characterized, that I’ve always given the narrative some credence.

    Stalin was ruthless and unscrupulous brut and an imperial mass-murdering fiend. And that characterization comports with everything I’ve been able to glimmer by looking under every rock and doubting just about every word I’ve ever heard. And yet, that is what bubbles to the surface if you ask me now how I’d characterize Stalin.

    If I’m wrong about Mao, then I’d be fascinated to hear the other side of the story.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  148. Rurik says:
    @Liberty Mike

    Could the average Chinaman publicly criticize the jejune response of the Chicoms to the tweet?

    Good question.

  149. Rurik says:
    @dfordoom

    In a truly free society people are free to undermine the foundations of society and eventually destroy it.

    so a truly free society is a bad thing?

    The people who want a truly free society are people who either hate their own society or are indifferent to it.

    Would you say Mao hated Chinese society before he transformed it?

    The people who want China to be “a truly free society” are actually people who want to destroy China.

    Does Chinese society = the current Chinese social, political and economic order?

    And an alternative society/order, would equal the destruction of China?

    Would you describe yourself as an authoritarian?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  150. Anonymous[417] • Disclaimer says:

    Nationalists in the West claim to despise Communism, yet admire Communist China in the way they are ruthlessly and brutally dealing with the Muslim Uyghurs and wiping them out culturally and racially. The same people also admire the Communist Kurds.

    It’s ironic that they hate Communism and rally against it, and yet at the same time they admire many Communist societies and peoples because they deal with things in a way they wish their own “free” capitalist societies would and provide answers to issues and questions that their own “free” capitalist societies will not or can not. It seems to me that even many ardent Western “capitalists” are reluctantly starting to think that Communism is the superior system, even if most wouldn’t actually state that in such terms. What most so called nationalists really want is a strictly controlled Communist system that enforces one national culture and way of life, like China.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @dfordoom
  151. Anonymous[417] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    That’s like arguing that the average Irish Catholic person in Ireland agrees with the way the British government/military dealt with Irish Republican terrorists and fundamentally supports British rule in Northern Ireland.

    To make such a claim would clearly be utter rubbish and obvious pro-British propaganda, not even ardent loyalists would make such a claim. I suspect your claim about the average Uyghur supporting the Chinese government/military is similar.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  152. Rurik says:
    @Anonymous

    Nationalists in the West claim to despise Communism, yet admire Communist China

    who are these mythical ‘nationalists’ of whom you speak?

    If a Westerner admires China today, it is due exactly to the degree that the Chinese gov. is lessening it’s iron grip on the economy and society, and fostering a general prosperity for the common Chinese citizen.

    I personally know of no nationalists who admires communism in any way, shape or form.

    Please tell us who these people are. What are their names?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  153. Erebus says:
    @Anonymous

    I know the sqrt of fuckall about Ireland vs England, but knowing a few of both I’m certain that the “average Irish Catholic” and the Uyghur have about as much in common as chalk and cheese.

    I suspect your claim about the average Uyghur supporting the Chinese government/military is similar.

    Stop “suspecting”. Go there and talk to them if you’re actually interested. Doesn’t cost much nowadays, and the countryside is awe inspiring.

    I agree that the ordinary Uyghur small businessman (grocer, restaurant owner, innkeeper) may not “support” Chinese rule, but he sure as hell doesn’t support Saudi rule, and more to the point he knows that them’s his options.

    The notion of a Uyghur state is preposterous. Like the Kurds, totally unviable and ipso facto totally vulnerable to manipulation by outsiders.

    There’s only 10M of them total, of which ~8M live in Xinjiang along with 13 other ethnic groups. That puts the Uyghurs at ~36% of Xinjiang’s 22M population. Approx equal to the Han, the rest being various ethnic minorities. Maybe a little history would serve to put some of the issues in perspective.

    In the Chagatai Khanate, the Chagataid Khan and princes were the secular rulers. The religious leaders were the Sayyid Naqshbandi Khojas. There were two factions of Khojas, the Qarataghliks and Aqtaghliks. The Qarataghliks and the Chagatai Khan expelled the Aqtaghliks from power. The Aqtaghliks sought aid from the Buddhist Zunghar Khanate, which then attacked the Chagatai Khanate, installed the Aqtaghliks as puppets and forced the turkic population into submission and paying tribute.

    The Chagataid Turks and Qarataghlik Khojas then turned to China for aid. China and the Turkic muslims (Uyghur ancestors) launched a massive campaign the Dzunghars in 1758-1759 and nearly exterminated the entire Zunghar population. Only tens of thousands are still left in Xinjiang.

    The Zunghar Khanate was then absorbed into China, and the Chagatai prince, the Qarataghlik Khojas and the Turkic Khans and Begs then submitted to Chinese rule and the Tarim Basin also became part of China. The Aqtaghlik Khojas were bitter about their loss and tried to forment rebellion but were defeated.

    China then settled in the place of the decimated Dzunghar population, thousands of Han, Hui, Manchus, Xibo, and Turkic Muslims from the Tarim Basin (uyghurs ancestors). Those turkic muslims became known as the Taranchi and the Uyghurs in modern Dzungharia are their descendants. Very few Han migrated into the Uyghurs native Tarim basin.

    Urumqi was originally a Han and Hui (Tungan) city with few Uyghurs. Its the Uyghurs who are the immigrants.

    There are variations on the above, but the reality is that neither the Uyghurs’ history nor their “demands” are as simple as they’re made out to be in the West. “Suspecting” that it is simple is to be wildly off the mark.

  154. Erebus says:
    @Rurik

    Unfortunately, your comment is (as usual) too thoughtful for a quick reply.

    … (it seems to me), that they’re far more alarmed by the authoritarianism, than by a loss of economic activity.

    Emphatically not, in my experience. They’ve squandered the ~20 yrs advantage they held as “gateway to China” and are now suffering from an acute case of ressentiment (in the Nietzschean/Kierkegaardian sense). That’s at the bottom of this. I’ve heard the same thing from too many HK-ers in that regard to think anything else. I started to hear it 10 yrs ago, and it’s now a crescendo.

    The loss of economic activity will destroy the only lifeline most HK-ers have. If the devastation keeps up at its current pace, HK’s economy will revert to what it was – drugs, prostitution and smuggling – run by the Triads. Maybe the whole thing will wind up being like the old Kowloon Walled City. Today’s HK-ers woke up on 3rd base and congratulated themselves on hitting a triple. They forget what HK was and how it got rich and so they waited for somebody to hit them home. Nobody did. The inning ended stranding them on 3rd, and now they’re looking for somebody to blame.

    I myself have a deep and abiding hatred for that word, and everything it implies.

    Of course, but the one’s being so forced are either nutcase jihadis, or on their way to becoming so. They, and the trend towards radicalization must be eradicated. No State worthy of the name can tolerate its presence.

    Look, the Uyghurs developed a reputation as the most fanatical and cruelest of all the jihadists operating in Syria. That’s saying something. China has to deal with the fact that ISIS’ shock troops are starting to come home, and they’re coming with money and a mandate from their Wahhabi sponsors. I suppose that China could save itself a lot of trouble by summarily executing them immediately they cross the border (like Iran does their returning fanatics). Or, hunting them down and “killing them on the toilet” as Putin famously said about how Russia deals with its Dagestani and Chechen terrorists. I’ll grant that the Russian and Iranian solutions are attractive in that they’re cheap, and more importantly occur out of the public eye so the West can’t easily create and amplify a media meme.

    The Chinese are trying something different. Rather than forcing them, it’s the Chinese state that’s being forced to do something. They’re giving the jihadis a choice. Vocational & literacy training on the one hand, or an SF hunt ‘n kill team’s machine guns opening up on the outhouse they’re sitting in on the other. Joe Uyghur is all for the first for the very same reason you would be if it was your son in that outhouse, however much you hate the word.

    I just wonder if you don’t give the West a little too much credit.

    I think we (not just you) don’t give them enough. The West ruled the world for 3-4 centuries, and it did it largely by using superior military power to co-opt local elites. No mean feat that, but they met their match in China (and more recently in Russia).

    In China’s case, America’s imperial strategists ignored, or forgot Kissinger’s warning to Nixon. Upon returning from one of his preliminary trips to Beijing, he (reportedly) told Nixon: “They’re smarter than we are.” Despite the fact that the gap has obviously widened to a chasm since then, America’s imperial strategists blunder on.

    • Replies: @alexander
    , @Rurik
  155. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rurik

    If we’ve/I’ve been lied to about Mao, and the mass-terror and slaughter, that would be very interesting indeed.

    Mass murder and genocide are accusations that get tossed about willy-nilly. If you pursue a policy that has the deliberate intention of killing people you consider to be enemies of the state than that definitely makes you a mass murderer. Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot certainly qualify. But pursuing well-meaning policies that fail and lead to terrible consequences does not make you a mass murderer. If it did then the British government would have been guilty of mass murder during the Irish Potato Famine, and the U.S. Government would have been guilty of mass murder for its sanctions on Iraq.

    If you take the Great Leap Forward as an example it was a policy that was over-ambitious and some elements were badly thought out. It also happened to coincide with natural disasters and the Soviet decision to cut off technical aid to China. The results were disastrous but that was certainly not Mao’s intention. The Great Leap Forward was intended to make things better for the Chinese people. It failed through excessive ambition and pure bad luck.

    It’s very difficult to make a reasoned judgment on Mao because he’s been demonised by western propaganda and by Chinese propaganda (since Mao’s successors were his bitter ideological enemies).

    On the whole he probably did more good than harm. He was certainly not a mass murderer.

  156. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rurik

    so a truly free society is a bad thing?

    Of course it is. A truly free society will inevitably destroy itself.

    That’s why civilisation was invented. To limit freedom so that society can survive. The trick is to find a balance.

    Only lunatics and libertarians believe in absolute freedom.

    Would you say Mao hated Chinese society before he transformed it?

    He certainly hated a lot of things about it. He didn’t hate the Chinese people. He thought he could build a better society. We’ll never know if he could have succeeded. The Maoists lost the ideological war in China.

    Would you describe yourself as an authoritarian?

    Moderately so. Every sane person is an authoritarian to some extent.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  157. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    Nationalists in the West claim to despise Communism,

    There’s no incompatibility between nationalism and communism. Modern capitalism on the other hand is definitely totally incompatible with nationalism.

    You don’t have to be right-wing to be a nationalist. In fact it’s much more logical to be a nationalist if you’re left-wing. There’s no way to reconcile socialism with globalism.

    There really aren’t many nationalists in the West. There are the white nationalists but they’re crazies. There’s the dissident right in general but most of them, sadly, are not too bright. Most of these right-wing nationalists inhabit a fantasy world.

  158. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rurik

    If a Westerner admires China today, it is due exactly to the degree that the Chinese gov. is lessening it’s iron grip on the economy and society, and fostering a general prosperity for the common Chinese citizen.

    No, that’s certainly not why I admire China. I admire China to the extent that they resist stupid western ideas like democracy. I think they’re making a tragic mistake in loosening their grip on the economy and society.

    I personally know of no nationalists who admires communism in any way, shape or form.

    Well firstly China is not a communist country. China is an interesting attempt to combine the virtues of communism and capitalism. I wish them luck but I don’t think it will work.

    I think communism is less socially destructive than capitalism. And I’m a nationalist.

  159. alexander says:
    @Erebus

    Erebus and Rurik,

    China has spent the last 18 years using its wealth and resources to build up its economy, build out its infrastructure, expand its capital markets, and turbo charge its high tech sector, as a consequence, it has lifted almost a half billion Chinese out of poverty.

    Within that same time frame ,The USA, under neocon stewardship, has squandered nearly all of its immense wealth, committing illegal, unconstitutional , acts of war of aggression, based on neocon fraud and neocon lies.

    While the USA , under neocon tutelage, is going bankrupt bombing millions of people in countries who never attacked us on 9-11, …..China has been building bridges of trade and cooperation throughout the world.

    The verdict is all but in, our neocons (which comprises our entire ruling establishment on both sides of the aisle) have failed us. Their signature belief in defrauding Americans into initiating illegal wars, has mass murdered millions of innocents, destroyed whole nations which never attacked us, and run up our debt to a whopping 23 trillion, in a mere 18 years.

    If Americans do not regain control of their nation, soon, from the neocons who have all but exterminated its solvency ,well being, and future….the world will resolve itself to abandoning our dollar as its reserve currency.

    What a catastrophe.

  160. Erebus says:
    @dfordoom

    so a truly free society is a bad thing?

    Of course it is. A truly free society will inevitably destroy itself.

    A “truly free society” is like a truly square circle.

    The lone wolf gives up his freedoms to join a pack, gaining security and companionship in compensation. The pack as a whole may be as free as he was alone, but the individuals can never be as free as the pack or there simply wouldn’t be one.

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @Rurik
  161. Rurik says:
    @Erebus

    a deep and abiding hatred for that word

    Of course, but the one’s being so forced are either nutcase jihadis, or on their way to becoming so. They, and the trend towards radicalization must be eradicated. No State worthy of the name can tolerate its presence.

    Well, I do remember being appalled at the stories of Saddam’s harsh treatment of radical Islamic Jihadists, and the stories of torture. I’m an American, and as such, consider torture to be barbaric and sub-human.

    But then I saw what ISIS was capable of, and realized once again how narrow my understanding of the world outside the (((iron dome))) of Western “reality” actually is.

    I just wonder if you don’t give the West a little too much credit.

    I think we (not just you) don’t give them enough. The West ruled the world for 3-4 centuries, and it did it largely by using superior military power to co-opt local elites. No mean feat that, but they met their match in China (and more recently in Russia).

    The West used to be something to admire, but from my perch, they weren’t defeated by China or Russia, but by their own vanity, venality and moral cowardice.

    IOW Woodrow Wilson- who sold Western civilization down the river to its most intractable enemy, International Jewish supremacism, and thereby doomed it to humiliating dissolution.

    Some say he was blackmailed. Was one man’s vanity so precious? Yes, if you asked Wilson or his wife.

    China’s (and Russia’s, even as I consider Russia part of the West) ascendancy isn’t due so much to its genius, as to the suicide of its rival on the world’s stage.

    Lucky for them, their society is not infested with a deadly virus.

    Cheers

  162. Rurik says:
    @Erebus

    Responding to posts after a thread has dropped off the page, is often a exercise in frivolity, yet because I enjoyed and appreciated all the thoughtful responses, (Alexander, Dfordoom, etc..), I figured I would take the time to say thanks.

    A “truly free society” is like a truly square circle.

    The lone wolf gives up his freedoms to join a pack, gaining security and companionship in compensation. The pack as a whole may be as free as he was alone, but the individuals can never be as free as the pack or there simply wouldn’t be one.

    Is the wolf free to leave?

    And perhaps therein lies the rub..

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Erebus
  163. I could not help noticing the lack of evidence supportive of the proposition that Chairman Mao was not a mass murderer.

    That the ((( ZUSA ))) is an abomination should not deter us from being critical of the Chi-coms.

    Authoritarianism, communism, democracy, dictatorship, oligarchy, and socialism are all kakistocracies, bar none. Chinese communism is no exception.

    A society is truly weak and uncivilized if its people can not brook tepid criticism of its murderous leaders.

    • Agree: Rurik
    • Replies: @dfordoom
  164. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rurik

    A “truly free society” is like a truly square circle.

    The lone wolf gives up his freedoms to join a pack, gaining security and companionship in compensation. The pack as a whole may be as free as he was alone, but the individuals can never be as free as the pack or there simply wouldn’t be one.

    Is the wolf free to leave?

    A difficult question. It depends on how many lone wolves there really are. And whether they really are lone wolves. How many of those lone wolves are actually prepared to give up the advantages of living in an ordered society?

    My suspicion is that the answer is, not very many. Libertarians for example talk big about their precious liberty but they still expect the military to defend them from external threats. They still expect the police to defend them from internal threats. They still expect to enjoy the advantages of infrastructure funded directly or indirectly by government. They want the advantages provided by the pack but they don’t want to pay for those advantages.

    They’re not lone wolves. They’re adolescent wolves who think they can benefit from the pack without contributing.

    How many “lone wolves” actually want to leave the pack completely?

    • Replies: @Erebus
  165. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Liberty Mike

    I could not help noticing the lack of evidence supportive of the proposition that Chairman Mao was not a mass murderer.

    If you’re going to accuse someone of deliberate murder the onus is on you to provide evidence that the person actually did commit deliberate murder. The problem is that there’s a distinct lack of evidence that Mao ever committed deliberate mass murder.

    American Cold War propaganda is not evidence. The testimony of Mao’s bitter political enemies within China, men with an immense vested interest in discrediting Mao, also hardly qualifies as unbiased evidence.

    The argument for Mao as a mass murderer goes like this.

    1. Mao was an evil commie.

    2. Commies are all evil mass murderers ’cause they’re commies and everyone knows commies are evil.

    3. Therefore Mao was an evil mass murderer.

    That’s not an argument. It’s crude propaganda.

  166. Let’s see, you think that the prevailing understanding that Mao was a blood-thirsty, mass murdering tyrant is wrong cuz evil anti-communists and those Mao’s bitter Chinese critics just fabricated it all.

    Put another way, in your view, the Black Book of Communism, which places the number of deaths attributable to Mao’s execution, starvation, and internal gulaging ways at 65 million, is just CIA / Mossad propaganda. Or maybe its libertarian propaganda!

    How about Mao’s question, “what’s so unusual about Emperor Shih Huang? He had buried alive 460 scholars only, but we have buried 46,000 scholars.” Just more propaganda from anti-communists?

    Do you think it just myth that Mao expanded the laogai? Harry Wu, who was incarcerated in Mao’s forced labor camps for 19 years, estimates that 20 million human beings died in Mao’s gulag.
    In your view, Mr. Wu was nothing more than an anti-communist dupe.

    Just because Deng Xiaoping was himself forced to wear a dunce cap and be made to suffer ridicule by Mao does not, in and of itself, discredit his regime’s estimate (which some view as a gross underestimation) that 16.5 million died as a result of the Great Leap Forward.

    Frank Dikotter, a Hong-Kong based historian, who has studied Chinese rural history between 1958 and 1962, estimates that at least 45 million people were worked, starved, or beaten to death during the Great Leap Forward in just those 4 years.

    Mao was a mass murderer.

    PS – If you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao,
    You ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow

    Even the commie loving bloke who co-wrote the above lyrics knew Mao was bad news.

    .

  167. Erebus says:
    @Rurik

    Indeed, the thread is dead, but we ain’t. 🙂

    Gonna try to address both your posts in one.

    But then I saw what ISIS was capable of…

    … and the worst of ISIS (reportedly) were the Uyghurs. They are no joke. The Saudis have poured money into Xinjiang for decades funding Wahhabi madrassas. Doubtless, they were obliging their American masters, but a decade or so ago the Uyghurs went live in China. Some 1400 people died in various terror attacks on airports, rail stations, etc. The CCP ain’t gonna lose their Mandate of Heaven over some lunatics.

    The West used to be something to admire, but from my perch, they weren’t defeated by China or Russia, but by their own vanity, venality and moral cowardice.

    Well, when “vanity, venality and moral cowardice” meets modesty, incorruptability and moral courage, they lose. Especially if the latter are embodied in elites with more money and firepower. Had Western elites maintained a modicum of those virtues, we’d be looking at an actual balance of power instead of the pretence we have now.

    Is the wolf free to leave?

    Of course he is, and if he’s “the meanest son-of-bitch in the valley”, he may even thrive. His life will be brutish, nasty and short but it will be lived in as much freedom as his wits and prowess allow.
    I’d guess China would welcome Uyghur emigration, but they aren’t exactly welcome anywhere but a warzone. You can’t deport a citizen to nowhere, or even to a warzone. It’s their repatriation that’s problematic.

    The Uyghur issue is grossly misrepresented in the West. I was in Urumqi about a year ago, and there were Uyghurs, Kazakhs, Uzbeks going about their business quite normally. At that time, Uyghurs were fleeing Syria, and not all of them stopped at Afghanistan so the security presence was high in public venues. At the level of say a Super Bowl game.

  168. Erebus says:
    @dfordoom

    A difficult question.

    From my understanding most lone wolves have been rejected from the pack for misbehaviour – unwilling or failing to fall in line with the pack’s rules. Rare is the truly free version who chooses to go it alone. They don’t live into old age, and they don’t usually pass their genes on.

    I’m no wolf naturalist, so take the above with a bucket of salt.

    There aren’t many libertarians once you get above reptiles in the animal kingdom. There’s simple economic (evolutionary) reasons for that.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  169. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Erebus

    There aren’t many libertarians once you get above reptiles in the animal kingdom.

    My impression of libertarians is that they like to think of themselves as lone wolves. They’re like dogs who fantasise about being wolves.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 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 Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS