The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewMichael Hudson Archive
America’s Neoliberal Financialization Policy vs. China’s Industrial Socialism
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
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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
Something Here
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Nearly half a millennium ago Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince described three options for how a conquering power might treat states that it defeated in war but that “have been accustomed to live under their own laws and in freedom: … the first is to ruin them, the next is to reside there in person, the third is to permit them to live under their own laws, drawing a tribute, and establishing within it an oligarchy which will keep it friendly to you.”[1]Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince (1532), Chapter 5: “Concerning the way to govern cities or principalities which lived under their own laws before they were annexed.”

Machiavelli preferred the first option, citing Rome’s destruction of Carthage. That is what the United States did to Iraq and Libya after 2001. But in today’s New Cold War the mode of destruction is largely economic, via trade and financial sanctions such as the United States has imposed on China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela and other designated adversaries. The idea is to deny them key inputs, above all in essential technology and information processing, raw materials, and access to bank and financial connections, such as U.S. threats to expel Russia from the SWIFT bank-clearing system.

The second option is to occupy rivals. This is done only partially by the troops in America’s 800 military bases abroad. But the usual, more efficient occupation is by U.S. corporate takeovers of their basic infrastructure, owning their most lucrative assets and remitting their revenue back to the imperial core.

President Trump said that he wanted to seize Iraq’s and Syria’s oil as reparations for the cost of destroying their society. His successor, Joe Biden, sought in 2021 to appoint Hillary Clinton’s loyalist Neera Tanden to head the government’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB). She had urged that America should make Libya turn over its vast oil reserves as reparations for the cost of destroying its society. “We have a giant deficit. They have a lot of oil. Most Americans would choose not to engage in the world because of that deficit. If we want to continue to engage in the world, gestures like having oil rich countries partially pay us back doesn’t seem crazy to me.”[2]Neera Tanden, “Should Libya pay us back?” memo to Faiz Shakir, Peter Juul, Benjamin Armbruster and NSIP Core, October 21, 2011. Mr. Shakir, to his credit, wrote back: “If we think we can make money off an incursion, we’ll do it? That’s a serious policy/messaging/moral problem for our foreign policy I think.” As president of the Center for American Progress, Tanden backed a 2010 proposal to cut Social Security benefits, reflecting the long-term Obama-Clinton objective of fiscal austerity at home as well as abroad.

U.S. strategists have preferred Machiavelli’s third option: To leave the defeated adversary nominally independent but to rule via client oligarchies. President Jimmy Carter’s national-security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski referred to them as “vassals,” in the classical medieval meaning of demanding loyalty to their American patrons, with a common interest in seeing the subject economy privatized, financialized, taxed and passed on to the United States for its patronage and support, based on a mutuality of interest against local democratic assertion of nationalistic self-reliance and keeping the economic surplus at home to promote domestic prosperity instead of being sent abroad.

That policy of privatization by a client oligarchy with its own source of wealth based on the U.S. orbit is what American neoliberal diplomacy accomplished in the former Soviet economies after 1991 to secure its Cold War victory over Soviet Communism. The way in which client oligarchies were created was a grabitization that utterly disrupted the economic interconnections integrating the economies. “To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires,” Brzezinski explained, “the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected and to keep the barbarians from coming together.”[3]Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives (New York: 1997), p. 40. See the discussion by Pepe Escobar, “For Leviathan, It’s So Cold in Alaska,” Unz.com, March 18, 2021.

After reducing Germany and Japan to vassalage after defeating them in World War II, U.S. diplomacy quickly reduced the Britain and its imperial sterling area to vassalage by 1946, followed in due course by the rest of Western Europe and its former colonies. The next step was to isolate Russia and China, while keeping “the barbarians from coming together.” If they were to join up, warned Mr. Brzezinski, “the United States may have to determine how to cope with regional coalitions that seek to push America out of Eurasia, thereby threatening America’s status as a global power.”[4]Brzezinski, ibid., p. 55.
(Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives (New York: 1997), p. 40. See the discussion by Pepe Escobar, “For Leviathan, It’s So Cold in Alaska,” Unz.com, March 18, 2021.)

By 2016, Brzezinski saw Pax Americana unravelling from its failure to achieve these aims. He acknowledged that the United States “is no longer the globally imperial power.”[5]Brzezinski, “Towards a Global Realignment,” The American Interest (April 17, 2016) For a discussion see Mike Whitney, “The Broken Checkboard: Brzezinski Gives Up on Empire,” Counterpunch, August 25, 2016. That is what has motivated its increasing antagonism toward China and Russia, along with Iran and Venezuela.

 

The problem was not Russia, whose Communist nomenklatura let their country be ruled by a Western-oriented kleptocracy, but China. The U.S.-China confrontation is not simply a national rivalry, but a conflict of economic and social systems. The reason why today’s world is being plunged into an economic and near-military Cold War 2.0 is to be found in the prospect of socialist control of what Western economies since classical antiquity have treated as privately owned rent-yielding assets: money and banking (along with the rules governing debt and foreclosure), land and natural resources, and infrastructure monopolies.

ORDER IT NOW

This contrast in whether money and credit, land and natural monopolies will be privatized and duly concentrated in the hands of a rentier oligarchy or used to promote general prosperity and growth has basically become one of finance capitalism and socialism. Yet in its broadest terms this conflict existed already 2500 years ago. in the contrast between Near Eastern kingship and the Greek and Roman oligarchies. These oligarchies, ostensibly democratic in superficial political form and sanctimonious ideology, fought against the concept of kingship. The source of that opposition was that royal power – or that of domestic “tyrants” – might sponsor what Greek and Roman democratic reformers were advocating: cancellation of debts to save populations from being reduced to debt bondage and dependency (and ultimately to serfdom), and redistribution of lands to prevent its ownership from becoming polarized and concentrated in the hands of creditors and-landlords.

From today’s U.S. vantage point, that polarization is the basic dynamic of today’s U.S.-sponsored neoliberalism. China and Russia are existential threats to the global expansion of financialized rentier wealth. Today’s Cold War 2.0 aims to deter China and potentially other counties from socializing their financial systems, land and natural resources, and keeping infrastructure utilities public to prevent their being monopolized in private hands to siphon off economic rents at the expense of productive investment in economic growth.

The United States hoped that China might be as gullible as the Soviet Union and adopt neoliberal policy permitting its wealth to be privatized and turned into rent-extracting privileges, to be sold off to Americans. “What the free world expected when it welcomed China into the free trade body [the World Trade Organization] in 2001,” explained Clyde V. Prestowitz Jr, trade advisor in the Reagan administration, was that, “from the time of Deng Xiaoping’s adoption of some market methods in 1979 and especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1992 … increased trade with and investment in China would inevitably lead to the marketization of its economy, the demise of its state-owned enterprises.”[6]Clyde Prestowitz, “Blow Up the Global Trading System, Washington Monthly, March 24, 2021..

But instead of adopting market-based neoliberalism, Mr. Prestowitz complained, China’s government supported industrial investment and kept money and debt control in its own hands. This government control was “at odds with the liberal, rules-based global system” along the neoliberal lines that had been imposed on the former Soviet economies after 1991. “More fundamentally,” Prestowitz summed up:

China’s economy is incompatible with the main premises of the global economic system embodied today in the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and a long list of other free trade agreements. These pacts assume economies that are primarily market based with the role of the state circumscribed and micro-economic decisions largely left to private interests operating under a rule of law. This system never anticipated an economy like China’s in which state-owned enterprises account for one-third of production; the fusion of the civilian economy with the strategic-military economy is a government necessity; five year economic plans guide investment to targeted sectors; an eternally dominant political party names the CEOs of a third or more of major corporations and has established party cells in every significant company; the value of the currency is managed, corporate and personal data are minutely collected by the government to be used for economic and political control; and international trade is subject to being weaponized at any moment for strategic ends.

This is jaw-dropping hypocrisy – as if the U.S. civilian economy is not fused with its own military-industrial complex, and does not manage its currency or weaponize its international trade as a means of achieving strategic ends. It is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, a fantasy depicting American industry as being independent of government. In fact, Prestowitz urged that “Biden should invoke the Defense Production Act to direct increased U.S.-based production of critical goods such as medicines, semiconductors, and solar panels.”

While U.S. trade strategists juxtapose American “democracy” and the Free World to Chinese autocracy, the major conflict between the United States and China has been the role of government support for industry. American industry grew strong in the 19th century by government support, just as China is now providing. That was the doctrine of industrial capitalism, after all. But as the U.S. economy has become financialized, it has de-industrialized. China has shown itself to be aware of the risks in financialization, and has taken measures to attempt to contain it. That has helped it achieve what used to be the U.S. ideal of providing low-priced basic infrastructure services.

Here is the U.S. policy dilemma: Its government is supporting industrial rivalry with China, but also supports financialization and privatization of the domestic economy – the very policy that it has used to control “vassal” countries and extract their economic surplus by rent-seeking.

Why U.S. finance capitalism treats China’s socialist economy as an existential treat

Financialized industrial capital wants a strong state to serve itself, but not to serve labor, consumers, the environment or long-term social progress at the cost of eroding profits and rents.

U.S. attempts to globalize this neoliberal policy are driving China to resist Western financialization. Its success provides other countries with an object lesson of why to avoid financialization and rent-seeking that adds to the economy’s overhead and hence its cost of living and doing business.

China also is providing an object lesson in how to protect its economy and that of its allies from foreign sanctions and related destabilization. Its most basic response has been to prevent an independent domestic or foreign-backed oligarchy from emerging. That has been one first and foremost by maintaining government control of finance and credit, property and land tenure policy in government hands with a long-term plan in mind.

Looking back over the course of history, this retention is how Bronze Age Near Eastern rulers prevented an oligarchy from emerging to threaten Near Eastern palatial economies. It is a tradition that persisted down through Byzantine times, taxing large aggregations of wealth to prevent a rivalry with the palace and its protection of a broad prosperity and distribution of self-support land.

China also is protecting its economy from U.S.-backed trade and financial sanctions and economic disruption by aiming at self-sufficiency in essentials. That involves technological independence and ability to provide enough food and energy resources to support an economy that can function in isolation from the unipolar U.S. bloc. It also involves decoupling from the U.S. dollar and from banking systems linked to it, and hence from U.S. ability to impose financial sanctions. Associated with this aim is creation of a domestic computerized alternative to the SWIFT bank-clearing system.

The dollar still accounts for 80 percent of all global transactions, but less than half of today’s Sino-Russian trade, and the proportion is declining, especially as Russian firms avoid dollarized payments or accounts from being seized by U.S. sanctions.

These protective moves limit the U.S. threat to Machiavelli’s first option: destroy the world if it does not submit to U.S.-sponsored financialized rent extraction. But as Vladimir Putin has framed matters: “Who would want to live in a world without Russia?”

ORDER IT NOW

Kin Chi: My quick comment: The USA surely would want to destroy its rival, taking the first option. But it knows it is impossible to succeed, even in the case of Russia, and not to mention China. Thus it hopes for the rival to disintegrate from within, or for substantial interest blocs from within to be complicit with US interests. Hence we need to assess how Russia and China are reacting to this challenge, given that there are multiple contesting forces within each country. And that is also why we have been very concerned with pro-US neo-liberal political economists and policy-makers in these two countries.

I agree with you that China has put much investment into infrastructure and industry. However, we have been concerned with China’s financialization moves. Hence your statement that “China has avoided financialization” may not be the actual case, as various moves have been taken in financialization, but we can say that China seems to be aware of the risks in financialization, and has taken measures to attempt to contain it, causing discontent from US financial interests which would want to see China going further down the road.

It is interesting that yesterday, the White House expressed concern over the China-Iraq use of digital RMB to settle oil accounts as this would be beyond US monitoring of transactions.

Notes

[1] Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince (1532), Chapter 5: “Concerning the way to govern cities or principalities which lived under their own laws before they were annexed.”

[2] Neera Tanden, “Should Libya pay us back?” memo to Faiz Shakir, Peter Juul, Benjamin Armbruster and NSIP Core, October 21, 2011. Mr. Shakir, to his credit, wrote back: “If we think we can make money off an incursion, we’ll do it? That’s a serious policy/messaging/moral problem for our foreign policy I think.” As president of the Center for American Progress, Tanden backed a 2010 proposal to cut Social Security benefits, reflecting the long-term Obama-Clinton objective of fiscal austerity at home as well as abroad.

[3] Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives (New York: 1997), p. 40. See the discussion by Pepe Escobar, “For Leviathan, It’s So Cold in Alaska,” Unz.com, March 18, 2021.

[4] Brzezinski, ibid., p. 55.

[5] Brzezinski, “Towards a Global Realignment,” The American Interest (April 17, 2016) For a discussion see Mike Whitney, “The Broken Checkboard: Brzezinski Gives Up on Empire,” Counterpunch, August 25, 2016.

[6] Clyde Prestowitz, “Blow Up the Global Trading System, Washington Monthly, March 24, 2021..

 
• Category: Economics • Tags: American Military, China, Neoliberalism, Russia 
Hide 203 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Dutch Boy says:

    I would think China’s policy would more properly be termed state capitalism rather than socialism. The old Maoist socialism bred poverty, the new state capitalist system creates wealth, increases the power of the CCP (their main goal), and prevents restiveness from growing among the Chinese people.

  2. Kouroi says:

    Japan and South Korea have done in the past the same as China: http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue23/Locke23.htm (Japan, Refutation of Neoliberalism). But I guess they are occupied countries…

    • Agree: showmethereal
    • Replies: @showmethereal
  3. Its not finance capitalism it racist supremacist Jewish Mamonism / criminality of the racist supremacist global Jewish satanic slave empire dictatorship.

    Theft it theft, murder is murder, genocide is genocide, don’t try to call it some kind of capitalism to try to cover up the crimes against humanity.

    They are not part of the market place and they destroy capitalism as well as all of humanity.

    Its not all Jews of course, only around 90% to 95% of Jews according to Israeli polling.

    • Thanks: Alfred Muscaria
  4. Alfa158 says:
    @Dutch Boy

    I’ve always thought of the current system in China as being best described as national socialism, which I define as a system that permits limited capitalism in order to reap the development, prosperity and material progress that can be created by capitalism, but that as a policy controls and directs that system to serve the collective interests of the nation.
    But honestly I have no coherent idea of how to distinguish national socialism from state capitalism.
    Any help?

    • Replies: @TG
    , @Right_On
    , @Vidi
  5. It’s very interesting that Michael Hudson talks about vassal states, debt slavery, and related subjects. Since he is so very much enthusiastic about China, perhaps he and his readers would be interested in a newsstory which was posted by reader A123 in the Newslinks section two days ago:

    EU rebuffs Montenegro plea to help repay $1B Chinese highway loan
    https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-montenegro-billion-dollar-china-unfinished-highway-loan/

    China is indeed a first class country. Reliable all the way.

    • Disagree: Badger Down
    • LOL: HeebHunter
    • Replies: @Daniel H
    , @Rdm
    , @Rubicon
  6. Always nice to hear from Prof. Hudson.

    People get stuck on labels like Communist or Capitalist. What we see in China (and early American development) is better called Dirigism.

    Dirigisme or dirigism (from French diriger ‘to direct’) is an economic doctrine in which the state plays a strong directive role as opposed to a merely regulatory or non-interventionist role over a capitalist market economy.

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

  7. TG says:

    Indeed. Well said.

    But long term the Chinese will still have to face one thing that has destroyed all such attempts in the past: sooner or later the siren call of cheap labor and easy profits will slowly and steadily corrupt even the most vigilant and well-grounded system.

    For all of its flaws, the United States used to be a lot like China. But slowly at first, and now more rapidly as even the news media and universities have been de-facto privatized, the old restraints on parasitic finance have been all but torn asunder.

    That happened to England, it happened to Holland… it may just be human nature.

    The issue is not whether China right now is going to do well, I think it will, more or less. But can they maintain this focus as the years turn into decades turn into generations? No other society in history has, but I wish them luck nonetheless.

    • Replies: @Alfred Muscaria
  8. Daniel H says:
    @Brás Cubas

    OK. Montenegro has defaulted on the loan and has no inclination to pay it back, but what can China actually do about this? Can they invade Montenegro and commandeer customs or tax collecting? Hah, cmon. Now if this were pre 19th century and the creditors were French/British/German/Venetian/Austrian that is invasion and occupation would be the recourse. Looks like China will hold the bag on this one.

  9. TG says:
    @Alfa158

    “Capitalism is man exploiting his fellow man, while communism is exactly the reverse!”

    Good point, but ultimately I think political labels are so debased as to be misleading if not completely useless.

    “a system that permits limited capitalism in order to reap the development, prosperity and material progress that can be created by capitalism, but that as a policy controls and directs that system to serve the collective interests of the nation.” It’s awkward but maybe we should just spell it out. The problem with giving things labels, is that labels can be debased and used by people working for the opposite.

  10. Right_On says:
    @Alfa158

    I’ve always thought of the current system in China as being best described as national socialism

    This. The tragic Francis Parker Yockey was an American who stunned other radical-right thinkers by arguing that, after the disaster of WWII, fascists should hope that Communism would triumph over western capitalism as it would be far easier to turn a Communist system into a fascist one. He claimed that the war had already pushed the Soviet Union towards a quasi-fascism with its ‘Great Patriotic War’ propaganda, its militarization and technocratic pragmatism. Doesn’t the evolution of ‘Red’ China – particularly the unapologetic racial pride – suggest he may have been prophetic?

    • Replies: @Mary Marianne
  11. bayviking says:
    @Dutch Boy

    Stalin and Mao were dictators, not communists. They just used these words to engage the world and attempt to win political battles, as we do. Every country in the world is a unique mix of capitalist and socialist policies, including our own that has developed so socialist many water projects ion the past, not to mention social security itself. Only in the USA has the word socialism has been rendered into something bad, as part of a broad based class war, that Marx explained.

    CCP has nothing to do with China. CCCP is as the abbreviation for the full name of the former Soviet Union.

  12. bayviking says:

    Michael Hudson is a brilliant economist, with a long strong academic and international banking background. But, what really makes his insights unique is the additional context he brings to economics and politics by tying it all into an extensive knowledge of global human history. In this article he exposes the behavior of the ruling class for what it really is and what they do their best to prevent anybody from understanding.

    Three cheers for Michael Hudson. May he help to reshape the world in a manner consistent with classical economics and away from the feudal-like system that is destroying the middle class at home and around the world. Our Government has a written responsibility to “promote the general welfare”, not create a global banking cartel with a few families in charge, based on bloodlines.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  13. @si1ver1ock

    Economic dirigism “dirigisme economique” was the french economic doctrine up to 2007. When Sarkozy became French president after Chirac, he started the neo-liberal push before the 2008 financial crisis.

    I remember many Anglo-saxon media outlets mocking the French for adopting their decaying neo-liberal system – foster child of Margaret Tatcher of the 80s and Ronald Reagan’s Tricle-Down Economics of the 80s called Reganomics!

    Today, Macron (former Rotchild banker) has turned France upside down and completed the work of Sarkozy. The word economic dirigism is dead in France and the country has become a US vassal.
    De Gaulle never allowed NATO to have a military base in France. The first achievement of Sarkozy was to submit the french sovereignty to the North Atlantic Terrorist Organization and he used it as cover to bomb Libya “to the stone age” the same thing C. Powell had promised to Musharaff of Pakistan in case he didn’t allow US military bases in his country.

    • Agree: Joe Levantine
  14. @Dutch Boy

    The government in China has explicitly denied that their system is capitalist. Students are given political education at my university, 8th-ranked in China, that describes their current model as socialist.

    Who do you think has more of a claim to being correct? The government that engineered this, or you — an Unz Review comment section resident who is clearly coping and seething?

  15. Daemon says:
    @Supply and Demand

    Calm down son. No need to go on the attack on someone who is just expressing their non-hostile opinion.
    Pick your battles.

  16. KA says:

    “Neera Tanden “We have a giant deficit. They have a lot of oil. Most Americans would choose not to engage in the world because of that deficit. If we want to continue to engage in the world, gestures like having oil rich countries partially pay us back doesn’t seem crazy to me.”[2”

    Serail rapist in DC area might take a cue and ask the rape victims to pay for room service,and for hotel stay,and transport to the hotel by limousine.
    Neera can take charge as ‘ Madame Maxwell ‘. Unless she always demands to come ,to see,and declare the death from rape is be broadcast perfectly simulacruming other members of the Murder Corp LLC. –

    By the way,was she sexually exoloited by Clinton and Trump? She talks like a raging unforgiving victim of something. The dead giveaway is her claim that she isnt crazy .

  17. @bayviking

    CCP is used as an abbreviation for ‘Chinese Communist Party’.

  18. Realist says:
    @bayviking

    CCP has nothing to do with China. CCCP is as the abbreviation for the full name of the former Soviet Union.

    What is wrong with these two statements???

    • Replies: @Weston Waroda
  19. Realist says:

    Yes, China is and will continue to eat our lunch.

    • Replies: @Thomasina
    , @anon
    , @picture111
  20. I appreciate Mr. Hudson’s articles even if I don’t agree with everything he writes. I have some quibbles with his stark contrasts. There is certainly a creeping financialisation in China. The recent tussles with Ant financial proves that. The party cracked down a little bit but did not change the system.

    In addition, China has a *gigantic* housing bubble, far more significant than anything seen in the US. That, too, is intimately tied up in the financial sector dysfunctions. In particular, the way that local governments raise money through bond funding is connected to land value sales, which drives up these insane valuations. One should not underestimate these issues – and certainly the ruling party does not.

    I ultimately think the Chinese have more tools at their disposal to deal with these issues, but getting to grips with the shadow banking and the massively bloated housing sector has been a nightmare for them. To put it differently, China has its fair share of problems with these issues, but it takes a different shape in their system.

    I haven’t even mentioned their rampant income inequality – which the leadership is now finally adressing head on. Talking about these issues is a good start but dealing with them is far harder because of entrenched interests – just as in the US. At the moment they are growing so fast that they can paper over these kinks somewhat. Sooner or later a reckoning has to come, even if it will take a different shape than in the more venal neoliberal system that the West has.

  21. Marcali says:

    It is Chinese national socialism that worries America.

    In a communist country we students were taught the following:

    If a one-party state is coupled with a socialist economic system (no private property) then the society is socialist/communist.
    If however a one-party state is coupled with a capitalist economic system then the society is fascist/national socialist.

    • Replies: @bayviking
  22. bayviking says:
    @Marcali

    China posses a serious threat to free speech and their one party system bears strong resemblances to Fascism. But it would be wrong to think that we don’t have the same problem, with two parties that serve only one master.

    Professor Hudson’s more important point is that for all activity which involves natural monopolies, the post office, water and other utilities, roads, healthcare and schools, we are better off letting Government fund and direct those policies because by doing that you lower the cost of doing business for everyone in the country. You are more competitive when you socialize natural monopolies because their costs are subsidized by Government and protected from becoming sources of exorbitant profits, which all natural monpolies are prone to in an otherwise capitalist system.

    Patents do much to protect monopolies. In some cases 1000 year old seeds or a new vaccine are patented and extortion prices are demanded. Because of the value of interest over time, capitalism always favors old money. One gold coin compounded at 6% interest, since the birth of Christ, would fill our entire solar system, except there isn’t that much gold. But there is that much imaginary money inside a computer.

    • Agree: frankie p
    • Replies: @St-Germain
    , @Mefobills
  23. Rdm says:
    @Brás Cubas

    I’m not sure of cognitive ability of current generation these days. It’s either the decades long dwindling capacity of school curriculum or people just became lazy to even think.

    If Montenegro government doesn’t want to build roads in their country, they can refuse Chinese loans. If Montenegro thinks they can pay back Chinese loans with their republic, it’s up to China either to lend or not. If Montenegro defaults, China would take the hit first. But it’d hurt Montenegro in the long run from all social aspects, inability to issue government bond, etc.

    Banks issue a credit line for you. It’s upto you either to use or not.

    Since you thought that the pool in the backyard can be renovated to attract local swimmers, you took out the credit line. Since no one wants to come to your home and swim, you now IOU to banks.

    You’d say

    “Bank is indeed a first class bank. Reliable all the way.”

    What kind of logic is that?

    Lately the conversation goes like this. All you need is Anti-China trope.

    It’s raining outside. Thanks China!
    Jeez… I didn’t pass my exam. It’s because of those paper tiger Chinese!!
    Fking …. my wife cheated on me. It’s CHINA !!!

  24. Thomasina says:
    @Realist

    “Yes, China is and will continue to eat our lunch.”

    Especially since they were given the “lunch” in the first place.

    U.S. elites to Chinese elites:

    “Do you want to get filthy rich? Then open up your country to our corporations. We’ll move our manufacturing over to China, taking advantage of your cheap labor and non-existent environmental controls. Each U.S. firm will take on a Chinese partner, which means you’ll get wealthy beyond your wildest dreams. Then we’ll ship the made-in-China U.S. consumer products back into the U.S. market.

    Yes, the U.S. work force will get destroyed, but they can do “service” jobs…..or whatever.

    You can take your ill-gotten gains and move to the U.S., buy a mansion. It’s a win-win for us elites. Are you in?”

    That’s about how it worked. So how can China NOT eat our lunch when they were provided the lunch in the first place?

  25. Smith says:

    Hudson view on economy is visionary BUT also historical.

    I have my odd bits with China (hint: it’s not socialism), but I do agree with the analysis.

    US must go down first, and then we can see how China act, either to become the next America, or the next USSR.

    • Replies: @Badger Down
  26. Realist says:
    @Thomasina

    The Deep State billionaire class along with the multi-millionaire minions were the ones to gain the most.

  27. anon[417] • Disclaimer says:
    @Realist

    But you don’t have lunch.Its mirage and the tab will come due for consuming now your own lunch free on the back of the other countries .

  28. @Dutch Boy

    The ‘secret’ of Chinese ‘success’?

    [MORE]

    “China initially had a soviet-style
    40:48 economy but in 1978 a new leader came to
    40:53 power in China Deng Xiaoping and he
    40:56 analyzed the situation and he concluded
    40:58 that the Soviet system is doomed to
    41:01 failure and that’s of course dangerous
    41:04 he concluded for you know for the
    41:08 country and it’s better to abandon this
    41:10 system and instead he looked at other
    41:14 countries that had a more successful
    41:16 monetary system such as Japan and
    41:19 Germany and the US and he concluded well
    41:23 we need to decentralize banking and so
    41:26 when he came to power 1978 what what was
    41:28 the key one of the key things he
    41:30 introduced was he found it thousands of
    41:34 banks thousands of new banks local banks
    41:36 small banks regional banks specialized
    41:40 banks all across China and the rest is
    41:43 history that’s how you get high economic
    41:44 growth “

  29. Chris Moore says: • Website

    This is jaw-dropping hypocrisy – as if the U.S. civilian economy is not fused with its own military-industrial complex, and does not manage its currency or weaponize its international trade as a means of achieving strategic ends. It is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, a fantasy depicting American industry as being independent of government. In fact, Prestowitz urged that “Biden should invoke the Defense Production Act to direct increased U.S.-based production of critical goods such as medicines, semiconductors, and solar panels.”

    Fascism, directed by Jews, masquerading as “free markets.” Zionist wars are also dictated by Jews. It all adds up to Judeofascism.

  30. @Right_On

    The western capitalist system is (neo)liberalism, which basically means a weak government, unable to protect its own citizens from oligarchical rent seeking and exploitation, which results in greater class difference.

    Fascism seeks a strong government with the aim to maintain or strengthen hierarchical difference of societal classes, often by breaking them along the lines of ethnicity, religion, caste, etc.

    Communism seeks a strong government with the aim to minimize and ultimately eliminate class difference. Hence, all the poverty alleviation programs that exist within CPC-lead China.

    So, yes, the fascist system is closer to communism than the western (neo)liberal one, as both at least try to create a strong government.

    That being said, Red China is not about “racial” pride. China has 50+ ethnic groups. All of these groups can participate under the Red China banner. Red China is about patriotism, and patriotism is not exclusive to one ethnic group within China.

    • Agree: Curmudgeon
    • Thanks: Iris, Joe Levantine
  31. @Realist

    CCP is an acronym in English (Chinese Communist Party). CCCP is an acronym in Russian using Cyrillic letters (translteration: Soyuz Sovietski Socialistechki Respubliki). They are not related.

    • Replies: @Realist
  32. Realist says:
    @Weston Waroda

    They are not related.

    Correct.

  33. @Kouroi

    There is a very good documentary called “Princes of the Yen” which details how the Japanese central bank basically had to fall on it’s sword… That is partly what lead to their real estate implosion and then of course the Plaza Accord

  34. frankie p says:
    @Thulean Friend

    I think you make some good points, but at the same time you reinforce what Michael Hudson is saying about the superiority of the Chinese financial system, which is driven and regulated by government (PBOC + big 4 banks and regulatory mechanisms) instead of by a private financial overclass. The example you provide, the tussles with Ant financial, proves that. Can you imagine the US system using regulatory mechanisms to deny big finance what it wants in a similar fashion? The Chinese will regulated Fintech and online banking services from this point forward, both to retain control of the banking system AND to protect the Chinese people from unscrupulous bankers.

    I think your third paragraph is excellent. The Chinese DO have more tools at their disposal, and perhaps the biggest tool is the fact that the PBOC and big 4 are government controlled, and as such, they control the lower tier of banks, those who are making bad lending decisions that drive speculation in land, stocks, etc. The government has a strategy of pushing lending for industry, agriculture and infrastructure. The lower tier of banks want to make profits. This results in a kind of a whack-a-mole situation, where the PBOC, big 4, and regulatory authorities become aware of irresponsible lending in the lower tier and have to react and right the wrongs. It will continue, but as you say, these tools will ultimately be more effective than the twisted western model of banking.

  35. @Thulean Friend

    Yes you made a good point about how local governments raise money can skew pricing… That is also because there is no real estate tax in China (which I have heard Mr. Hudson suggest to the Chinese government to implement one).
    But one must note that Chinese tend to put down much higher percentage of a down payment… They used to mainly just use cash but because of price appreciation people take out mortgages… But again the down payments are higher. They still have work to do to try to balance it all out though.

  36. @Mary Marianne

    China has 56 ethnic groups. One of them comprises more than 90% of the population. Draw your own conclusions.

    • Agree: GomezAdddams
    • Replies: @Showmethereal
  37. This article is a re-tread from weeks ago, isn’t it?

    • Replies: @Biff
  38. @Rdm

    I think you’ll find Sr Cubas routinely says the opposite of what he means. Stupid really.

  39. @Smith

    China will become a major player in united Asia. It doesn’t want to ape the USA and rule the world. It isn’t infested and doesn’t have to fight against the ape USA, so it doesn’t need to be like the USSR.

    • Replies: @Showmethereal
    , @Smith
  40. The USA is a country owned and controlled 100% by the rich oligarchs. Since the Jewish elites took control, the economy has been financialised, ie parasitised, and the serfs have fallen ever further into the mire, while the blood-suckers wax fatter and fatter.
    In China, in total contrast, the Government runs the country. If the rich look with yearning to the US model, they get ‘re-educated’ like Jack Ma. In China the Government rules, hence the unprecedented economic, social, scientific/technological and cultural leap forward. And things are only going to get better, as China builds an ecological civilization, and, having eradicated poverty, works to lessen inequality. All the US has left is military threats, aggression, subversion, sanctions, empty threats and the vulgar popular kultur of the likes of Ga-Ga, Beyonce and ‘gangsta (c)rap’.

  41. @Rdm

    When moneys were loaned by the US-dominated economic hit-men, the IMF and World Bank, if the countries involved got into trouble repaying, as when Volcker kicked global interest rates sky-high in the early 80s, the Western blood-suckers demanded much more than a pound of flesh. ‘Structural Adjustment’ plans ALWAYS opened the economies for looting by the West, ALWAYS demanded huge cuts in public provision, in education, heath, transport, housing etc, and the privatisation of every State asset. The human misery and deaths caused by these deliberate policies were huge, and now the vermin who inflicted this pain on the poor world have the stinking gall to FALSELY accuse China of acting like them. By God, the West is Evil Incarnate.

  42. The Chinese listened to LaRouche!

  43. Thank’s Michael Hudson!
    A magnificent script that explains why the West, which has fallen into selfishness, will be destroyed and the East will flourish as it cares for its people.

  44. Biff says:
    @Jim Christian

    This article is a re-tread from weeks ago, isn’t it?

    Somebody’s got to beat it into the dummies.

  45. @Daniel H

    China should have known better than to lend money to a bunch of criminals pretending to be a state. Anyway, I’m sure China can make things very difficult for them.

  46. @Change that Matters

    That is really a misnomer about the 1 ethnic group. Han people are just like if Europe stayed under the Romans and everyone called themselves Roman. Han people in various parts of China have diverse languages and customs as French people are from Hungarians. Some groups chose not to be identified as Han centuries ago. Even 70 years ago Mandarin was not spoken by the majority of even Han. Again – think EU or India to a degree. Even among those who are not Han… If you saw a Yi or Tujia person in western clothes you could think they were a Han…

    • Agree: Badger Down
  47. @Badger Down

    Depends on what you mean “united” Asia. East and South East are converging but will still be separate blocks. RCEP is a good example of the market opening up. The biggest thing is that it will facilitate trade in local currencies. The wild cards are India and Japan. Do they embrace Asia or the west (both have a pride issue when it comes to China). It will be interesting to see what happens between Sout Asia and ASEAN. The ASEAN countries in now way want a repeat of George Soros destruction of the 1997 – so they are apprehensive and want to draw away from western finance (hence they were the architects of RCEP). Will South Asia learn from them? Hopefully. South Asia would naturally be in India’s sphere – but in the last decade have been drawing closer to China (Bangladesh allowed China to invest in one of their bourse).
    That leaves Central into western Asia. Pakistan is still under the IMF and Saudi thumb. But they have been embracing the Belt and Road from China and trying to refinance their IMF amd Saudi debt from Chinese money. They are also building closer ties with Iran and Russia. We of course know both are doing all they can to move away from US banking and commerce. Leading to western Asia where Turkey is the wild card. They can go either way. The Central Asian stans of course are still Russian oriented even though the war on terror allowed some NATO in roads. But they are very much tied to the Russian Eurasian Economic block – which of course now ties in with China’s Belt & Road. Very complex web indeed. SCO was formed by Russia and China to prevent a collapse ofmthe region after the US went into Afghanistan. But I think prevent regime change is also part of the calculus.

  48. @bayviking

    You are more competitive when you socialize natural monopolies because their costs are subsidized …

    Agreed. So who controls the air waves? I’ve never seen Dr. Hudson discussing the de facto (corporate-government) media monopoly that now dominates our cyber commons. Maybe he ought to.

    Is digital communication a new “natural monopoly” as the now essential social artery for public discourse? Or are creatures like Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, etc. just private platforms that have a perfect right to censor or skew incoming content at will?

    China’s answer, namely government control, is that this is obviously a natural monopoly. The oligarchic USSA pretends it hasn’t noticed the issue, probably since the monopolists do the government’s bidding. Ignoring the First Amendment, it refuses to regulate in the public interest. But what DARPA created, DARPA can also destroy. What should the policy be?

  49. I don’t know what you call China exactly. Nor do I care. China’s problems are they can’t feed or hydrate themselves. As of now they write checks. What happens when consumerism dies? I think we see they are planning for that stage with their military investment. Yes, it is likely being prepped to deal with us as we rapidly head to insanity.

    However reading the first part on how to destroy a nation, it sounds like the USA got numbers two and three. First strategy of our demise, mass legal and illegal immigration. We ceased being American. Now we are into the next stage of being rotted in the insides by the oligarchs via their myriad of Bolshevik-ish parasitical pets.

    • Replies: @Badger Down
  50. Is this Jeopardy? “the first is to ruin them, the next is to reside there in person, the third is to permit them to live under their own laws, drawing a tribute, and establishing within it an oligarchy which will keep it friendly to you.” I’ll take SmallHats for 500 Alex.

  51. “Its most basic response has been to prevent an independent domestic or foreign-backed oligarchy from emerging.”

    Unlike its neighbor India, which has a perfectly pliant oligarchy made up of Brahmins and Banias (former the Kohens, if you will, and the latter just mercantile Jews, again if you will) who rape and pillage for the benefits of the cunting rentier class of the West. No wonder then China is kicking India’s behind!

    • Agree: Showmethereal
  52. @Showmethereal

    That is a good outline of the situation.
    My hope for Eurasian trade integration is that a multitude of interests keep everyone honest, it would be unfortunate if China were to dominate the trade group as then the World could end up with a bigger monster than Zamerica.
    Historically, the Chinese have only ever sought security and stability. The Great Wall speaks volumes if people would listen. The only concern I have is those near or at the levers of power wanting revenge for a century of humiliation. I would also be concerned that they understand who it was that wronged them as opposed to the mere agents.
    Tangentially, the architecture in Astana, Kazakhstan is a bit disturbing and I’m pretty sure the same could be said for some buildings in Tehran.
    A wise man, about 86 years ago, attacked Masonry in Germany. He understood what a danger some groups can be. In Italy they on occasion go after Masons but, as a group, they seem to fly under the radar throughout the West. A sad state of affairs.

    • Agree: Joe Levantine
    • Replies: @Showmethereal
  53. @TG

    That happened to England, it happened to Holland… it may just be human nature.

    Jews happened to England and Holland although in the reverse order. We most likely would never have had slavery in the United States if Holland and Belgium had not allowed them entry after Spain kicked them out in 1488.

    • Agree: Thomasina
  54. But as the U.S. economy has become financialized, it has de-industrialized.

    The Economics of Finance 101

    Assume that a certain relatively high-end automobile were to cost $40,000 to produce and deliver, while supporting a selling price of $50,000.

    As such it takes $40,000 of input to get a net $10,000 of gross operating profits or operating margin to provide for the operation and continuance of the business.

    And the total gross operating profits is equal to the number of such cars produced and sold, times the gross operating profit per car.

    A typical financial-service such as provided under a visa or mastercard account transaction costs the card-issuer about two-cents to provide, while being sold for a de facto retail price of $2 or 100-times its cost of production and provision.

    So while the high-end automobile producer has to survive and thrive on a 25% mark-up and 20% gross-operating-margin, the producer / seller of the financial service applies a 10,000% mark-up, and it obtains a near 100% gross-operating-margin.

    The automobile manufacturer has to source and build, from scratch, and then sell, 100 million (100,000,000) such automobiles, to obtain $1 trillion ($1,000,000,000,000) in gross operating profits.

    The financial service provider has to process two billion transactions a day at a cost of about $40 million per day, and re-sold / billed to the card-users for $3 billion a day, to obtain $1 trillion in gross operating profits per year.

    Gee dad – which business should I go into?

    And of course the obvious question arises as to why anyone would invest in the production of automobiles for a 25% mark-up to yield a 20% gross operating margin, when they can obtain a 10,000% mark-up and near 100% gross operating margin providing financial services.

    The just-as-obvious answer is that most all property on the planet is owned by the same small group who manage all it – including the bio-units they refer to as human capital – according to some form of linear-programming-algorithm to maximise according to some target utility.

    (Although, to be fair, the $1 trillion annual rake-off represents the combined total of all broadly-defined payment-cards and not just the visa and mc issuing banks. And of course it helps immensely that it is all administered by concealed-credit-charges embedded in the “sticker-price” so as to spare the card-user the trauma of realising the cost of their free-loan. In the famous words of amex’s then President and CEO James Robinson III: “We can’t have our g*ddamn [concealed credit charges] paraded around in the g*ddamn newspapers!” (House of Cards – the Amex story (1992)).

    • Agree: Thomasina
  55. Agent76 says:

    Apr 10, 2021 American Greed Helps China’s Military Rise | China Uncensored

    China has a secret weapon. One so devastating, it could even make an invasion of Taiwan possible. What is this secret weapon?

    • Troll: Showmethereal
    • Replies: @Badger Down
  56. Mefobills says:
    @bayviking

    Our Government has a written responsibility to “promote the general welfare”, not create a global banking cartel with a few families in charge, based on bloodlines.

    The revolutionary war was fought over these “General Welfare” principles. As was subsequent wars, up until the Spanish American. At that point in time, America turned fully outward toward Oligarchy and Financialization.

    The American System of Economy was transmitted from Mass. Bay (John Winthrop) through Cotton Mather, to Franklin. Franklin’s protégé Matthew Carey wrote on the system as he observed it first hand, especially as Franklin deployed it in Pennsylvania Colony.

    The Lords of Trade and Plantations, charged with over-seeing the colonies, harassed the Colonial paper money on a case by case basis. From 1720, most new colonial money issues were considered suspended until approved by the crown. After the Lords of Trade learned about Pennsylvania’s money, a letter condemning it (money) was issued in October 1726, and threatened to void said money. On May 1729, Governor Patrick Gordon defied the Lords of Trade and authorized 30,000 pounds in Bills of Credit, but to be paid back in 16 years instead of the normal 8. Gordon also reissued 40,000 pounds of the formerly issued 45,000 pounds worth of Bills of Credit. This defiance of Lords of Trade, so that the Colony could function, and not be turned over to the Bank of England, was a major reason for the revolutionary war.

    The same thing happened in Mass. Bay, where industrial capitalism was invented. The Lords of Trade began a series of monetary repressions in 1727. They ordered all existing bills of credit be withdrawn and no new ones issued; all local taxation was to be paid in metal money e.g. coinage. This started 25 years of deflation. By 1735 coinage was so scarce Massachusetts citizens could not pay their taxes.

    In the articles of confederation in 1781, the key monetary provision was in Article 9, giving Congress the power to “emit bills of credit” But, the (((merchants))) wanted the money power for themselves.

    This fight over land rent, usury, and extractions always finds its central locus in the money power. Robert Morris the richest merchant in America due to war profits during revolution, attempted to privatize the money power for himself and his cronies. The Pennsylvania Bank was transformed into the Bank of North America, a BANK OF ISSUE, which could create money, and were acceptable for state taxes and duties, the same formula used for BANK OF ENGLAND.

    So, the privateer financier was deploying public money to establish a private finance institution, though incorporated by government, which was largely private. Morris also said that the paper money had to be convertible to gold and sliver, and that the money system must be based on the interest and influence of the monied men.

    The Key person for throwing up road-blocks at the Constitutional Convention to re-establish the Colonial “Bill System” and state banks was the Calvanist John Witherspoon. Calvanism is judeo-christianity, and has erased usury from core doctrine.

    To “Emit Bills of Credit” did not make it from the Articles of Confederation, and into the Constitution. Instead it became Article 1, section 8, The Congress… shall have the power to borrow money on the credit of the U.S..

    China is not making the same mistakes that were made at America’s founding. The Constitution has a gaping hole, an error made at its founding, that subsequently made America malfunction, and then fall backwards into financialization; financialization was the very thing the revolutionary was was fought against. The general welfare clause was made moot due to the money power being privatized by “borrowing” the nation’s credit from privateering banking corporations.

    • Agree: HeebHunter
    • Thanks: Grahamsno(G64)
    • Replies: @Thim
  57. Mefobills says:
    @bayviking

    China posses a serious threat to free speech and their one party system bears strong resemblances to Fascism.

    It is appropriate to call China as Fascist. Fascism is industrial capitalism, with state control over the money power. State Control is hierarchical and over corporations.

    The very first corporations (Dutch and English Indies Corporations) had “charters” and said charters were issued or revoked by the state.

    In today’s finance capitalist “western” countries, corporations have become perpetual, because corporations have usurped the state.

    China does not let “capital” arise above the polity. It’s more than strong resemblance – China has replicated the core features of Fascism.

    Hudson will never use the word Fascism in a positive light, he tends to cast Fascism in negative terms. So we get new terms, like “industrial socialism.” Fascism = industrial socialism.

    • Agree: HeebHunter
  58. The price of Goods can be established by competition. but how you establish the value of currencies if you bypass the dollar. That is the question!

    Almost brilliant article.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
    , @Badger Down
  59. Mefobills says:
    @Zarathustra

    The price of Goods can be established by competition. but how you establish the value of currencies if you bypass the dollar. That is the question!

    As if the dollar is an anchor for the world? It is just a hop and skip to say that Gold is the anchor because it is shiny and doesn’t rust.

    Dollars are emitted at debt by private banking corporations. There is no limit, and therefore no anchor for other currencies. The FED is guarantor of last resort for all debt hypothecations. A bank at any time can go to the FED’s discount window and get reserves. No loan is ever forbidden for lack of reserves.

    The dollar is not U.S. DOLLARS, it is Federal Reserve Notes. The Federal Reserve System is a money trust of banking corporations, with limited government oversight.

    Almost brilliant article.

    China established the value of their Yuan with Industrial Capitalism. The Yuan finds PRODUCTION OF GOODS and services. The productivity of the Chinese people and soon “belt and road” economies is the anchor for the Yuan. The build up of Chinese military is to prevent (((international))) “finance capital” from ginning up another WW1 and 2, to then make sordid gains.

    The other side of dollars are debt instruments, finance paper in wall street, and London finance creating dollars outside of the U.S.. There is also trillions in derivatives making claims on dollars. Dollars have a mirror, or reflection, and it is finance capital, not industrial capital.

    China and Russia are wise to exit the dollar um-er, Federal Reserve Notes (petro-dollar/TBill system), post haste.

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
  60. jsinton says:

    Look out, world. Here it comes. Forget about your silly “industrial socialism” Chinese economy. China is just a big Wal-Mart: stop buying and watch them starve.

    The big news is “Cyber Polygon”. The next phase in the WEF/NWO conspiracy to wreck the economy and depopulate the earth. Lew Rockwell reports:

    “The World Economic Forum, which was a co-sponsor to EVENT 201 at Johns Hopkins Center For Health Security along with Bill Gates in October of 2019, just prior to the onset of COVID-19 in January of 2020 and announcement of a mutated coronavirus pandemic in March of 2020, is now announcing CYBER POLYGON, a war cyber warfare game that will be blamed on overseas “enemies.” CYBER POLYGON is a drill scheduled for July of 2021.

    Should such an event occur, it would paralyze every business, church, hospital, even security and police forces. It appears prudent to make plans for a major online cyber business disruption given public authorities appear to be clueless or even complicit in this event as they have been in COVID-19. Consumer-related businesses would be wise to advise their customers to stock up on necessities, particularly food, toiletries, vitamins, medicines and alternate sources of power if possible. Doctors should schedule patients accordingly.”

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  61. @steinbergfeldwitzcohen

    Currently China’s way is for currency swaps between trading nations. It would make no sense to try to make the yuan the dollar replacement. For instance in BRICS loans can be in of the 5 local currencies. Both Russia and China prefer hard assets – so are buying up as much gold as possible. As to the revenge issue – nah…. There is a sector who do want revenge against Japan – but that is it really. The government keeps them contained. The irony is that if China was a western style democracy then there would be more fervent calls for revenge. If Japan keeps pushing with Quad then who knows. Anti Japanese sentiment was more raw in Hong Kong under the Brits. The question is the next generation.. Will the younger Japanese still be happy being under US military control? I have a relative who works in Osaka. I should ask him what the mood is. Do younger Japanese really want to fight China over unihabited rocks far from the Japanese mainland? Really there is no other real dispute between the two. China’s “revenge” against Japan was taken when it passed Japan economically and except for a few areas – has done so technologically as well.
    At the same time it needs to be a good neighbor. They had to k ow Korea and China and Russia would all be upset at the idea of dumping nuclear waste jnto their near waters…

    But I dont want to stray too far from the economics.

    • Troll: Agent76
    • Replies: @Agent76
  62. Is it perhaps an error that labels like “Eastern” and “Western” have deep and eternal meaning where the latter can not help but be different than the former? That it could not in a milion years have the intrinsic spiritual ability to emulate and adopt a system that China is riding into Heaven on?

    When I think of western technocratic elites (i.e. centralized system of government), I think of the worst possible reality facing western civilization.

    Perhaps we should re-examine what makes westerners “western” and play to our strengths, wishing China the best in the great decoupling that is to come.

    A good start for this re-examination might be to read “The Greek Way” by Edith Hamilton.

  63. @Thulean Friend

    “ Talking about these issues is a good start but dealing with them is far harder because of entrenched interests – just as in the US”

    The moment Xi assumed power, he directed the government to investigate about one thousand deals made between the government and the richest and most powerful families in China putting many of them in jail and imposing heavy fines on them. Recently, Jack Ma got a drubbing from the Chinese government by opening an antitrust investigation of Alibaba and blocking Ma’s Ant’s IPO. China’s Bernie Maddoff, Zheng Chengjie was executed for his fraudulent deals. These are samples of the way the Chinese government tries to keep the would be oligarchs in check; definitely not something the liberal West can emulate.

    China’s approach towards the oligarchs is similar to that of Hitler and Mussolini who preserved the oligarchic privileges as long they were kept under the umbrella of the government and in the national interest. The primacy of the banking elites has not taken hold of China yet, and it is doubtful that it will ever will under the leadership of the strongman Xi.

  64. FvS says:
    @Mary Marianne

    The Chinese absolutely have racial pride in the Chinese mongoloid stock of which pretty much all Chinese ethnic groups belong to. And there’s nothing wrong with that per se.

    • Replies: @Mary Marianne
  65. BorisMay says:

    The western world needs a Solon because living in a rent economy is hell for the majority who do not own property.

    With all sincerity I hope the US financial set up is destroyed. The whole edifice is pure evil. And those that support it are pure evil too.

  66. @Daniel H

    Should have known better than to lend money to Mountain Negroes.

  67. Mefobills says:
    @jsinton

    Look out, world. Here it comes. Forget about your silly “industrial socialism” Chinese economy. China is just a big Wal-Mart: stop buying and watch them starve.

    China can always turn on internal consumption. They don’t need to sell to goods to Wall Mart.

    I had this same discussion with Anti-Beast, here:

    https://www.unz.com/mhudson/the-consequences-of-moving-from-industrial-to-financial-capitalism/#comment-4441425

    _________________________________

    It’s fundamentally two very different geopolitical models: Atlanticist vs Eurasianist. (Atlantacists are finance capitalists using the Bank of England/London model of International Credit)

    The Atlanticists were wrong to assume that China would not be able to turn around its manufacturing industries to serve its own domestic market. In other words, China would be perpetually relegated to the ‘outsourcing’ business just like Mexico or Malaysia, unable to climb out of the so-called ‘middle-income’ trap. Also, the Atlanticists assumed that China’s export trade will always be oriented towards serving the US market which requires access to the transpacific shipping lanes guarded by the US Navy. They also assumed that China’s imports will always come from seaports located in the coastal cities of the Eastern Seaboard which face the East and South China Seas.

  68. @Supply and Demand

    The government in China has explicitly denied that their system is capitalist. Students are given political education at my university, 8th-ranked in China, that describes their current model as socialist.

    Who do you think has more of a claim to being correct?

    The government that engineered this

    , or you — an Unz Review comment section resident who is clearly coping and seething?

    Wrong the government explicitly defines its political system as ‘Socialism with Chinese Characteristics’ The latter part of the definition is the capitalistic part of the hybrid economy they have. And governments can call themselves any ludicrous thing like the North Koreans calling themselves a Democratic Peoples Republic when it’s neither democratic or a republic or the east Germans calling their tyranny a democracy.

    • Replies: @Zarathustra
  69. @bayviking

    Stalin and Mao were dictators, not communists.

    Dictators and communists are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Marxism was state control of all aspects of the economy. A dictator has that power. It is more important to note that Marx was not a socialist, according to his contemporary socialist critics. Even in the Marxist/Leninist context, the real commune wasn’t the people, it was the planners. It’s all about defining the commune.

  70. @Supply and Demand

    This is not a criticism, rather my view of the differences. Real socialism wants the state (and church) to play no role in the economy. Marx, and by extension Mao, were not socialists. Their communism was supposed to seize the economy, then devolve to socialism. As foreseen by Marx’s socialist contemporaries, those that seize power are reluctant to give it up. Where that never happened in the USSR, post Mao, the Chinese have begun to devolve. I have no recent statistics, but about a decade ago I recall that large numbers of new companies in China, were employee owned. That would support the move to a socialist economy. They appear to be well on the way, but I would hesitate to say they are there yet.

  71. Mefobills says:
    @Mary Marianne

    Fascism seeks a strong government with the aim to maintain or strengthen hierarchical difference of societal classes, often by breaking them along the lines of ethnicity, religion, caste, etc.

    Fascism is the boogey man, and to make it the boogey – it has been redefined to be something different than what it is, and this false definition persists in the minds of modern peoples, especially those from the West.

    China asserts the dominant ethny of the Han peoples. Other Chinese races have to norm to the dominant culture group, as should be the case for immigrants to the U.S. White people, who should be dominant as the founding ethny, are now being demonized by in-groups, where said in-groups are elbowing for power.

    Fascism does not try to create dissension between social classes and break them along lines of ethnicity, religion, and caste. Divergent interests are to be coordinated and harmonized.

    In Mussolini’s own words:

    http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm

    (Mussolini’s use of the word socialism is more in alignment with communism of that day.)

    No individuals or groups (political parties, cultural associations, economic unions, social classes) outside the State (15). Fascism is therefore opposed to Socialism to which unity within the State (which amalgamates classes into a single economic and ethical reality) is unknown, and which sees in history nothing but the class struggle. Fascism is likewise opposed to trade unionism as a class weapon. But when brought within the orbit of the State, Fascism recognizes the real needs which gave rise to socialism and trade unionism, giving them due weight in the guild or corporative system in which divergent interests are coordinated and harmonized in the unity of the State

    • Agree: Curmudgeon
  72. @Mefobills

    Unfortunately, people have been bombarded with bullshit for almost 90 years, and can’t see the real world. Clifford Douglas developed the Social Credit theory of economy about a century ago, noting that interest produces the law of diminishing returns. Fascism bought into that, somewhat, as it was anti-usury. When National Socialism came to power in Germany, it began trading commodity for commodity, making currency exchange irrelevant. It’s Greenback-like Labour Certificates circumvented usury. The real reason for WWII was the international banking cartel being shut out. The wars in Iraq and Libya along with sanctions against Iran and Venezuela were about getting out from underneath selling oil in “US dollars”. Nor only was Venezuela not selling in “US dollars”, the Bolivarian Revolution went Nazi and was trading oil for commodities or services. These countries are dangerous to the house of cards created by the international banking cartel.
    Americans aren’t even allowed to learn about how the State Bank of North Dakota has provided stability to the State’s economy and puts it outside the total control of the Fed.
    In 2008, the “value” of derivatives was 14 times the “value” of the world’s GDP. It’s worse now. Get ready for another transfer of wealth to the parasites.
    It’s all about the Benjamins, these days.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  73. anon[164] • Disclaimer says:

    Even a decade ago, The Economist was harping on China’s state controlled, “inefficient” financial markets. TE called for China to allow foreign investors to buy A shares in Chinese companies, and for foreign banks to operate freely within China. The implication was that until those two things happen, Shanghai cannot replace HK as a major financial center.

    So the question is, what does the CPC want in the end? Does it want to turn Shanghai into the next NYC or London? Or does it want to keep tight controls over its economy to prevent Shanghai from being taken over by Wall Street? Xi seems to have high ambitions for Shanghai as a world financial center. My understanding is that China has now allowed foreign investors to purchase A shares in their corporations, and have started allowing foreign banks to take deposits and operate inside China.

    However, the recent scrapping of Ant Financial’s IPO at the eleventh hour and pledging of China’s big tech firms against anti-competitive behavior is interesting. Perhaps Xi sensed that Jack Ma was getting too cocky fancying himself an oligarch, and decided to wake him up to the danger of having Wall Street taking control of Ant Financial. But then shouldn’t they have been more concerned about all their major tech firms listing in the NYSE? Or do these firms only sell the non-controlling shares to overseas investors? Why is the CPC so much more concern over Ant Financial than Alibaba?

    • Replies: @Showmethereal
  74. Vidi says:
    @Alfa158

    I’ve always thought of the current system in China as being best described as national socialism, which I define as a system that permits limited capitalism in order to reap the development, prosperity and material progress that can be created by capitalism, but that as a policy controls and directs that system to serve the collective interests of the nation.
    But honestly I have no coherent idea of how to distinguish national socialism from state capitalism.

    Many Westerners want to smear China as a Nazi country. Of course, some similarities exist between national socialism and China’s socialism, just as many political/economic systems share common features. However, there are at least two major differences between National Socialism and China’s Socialism With Chinese Characteristics.

    The first is that the government owns all the land in China — yes, every square inch. As far as I know, fascist governments can’t make the same claim. Government ownership of all the land has profound consequences.

    A second deep division is that enormous State Owned Enterprises contribute mightily to the economic output of China. Hudson says here that they “account for one-third of production”, but I think it’s far more. Again, the fascist governments can’t make the same claim.

    In summary, China’s government is very, very different from National Socialism.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  75. Mefobills says:
    @Curmudgeon

    Unfortunately, people have been bombarded with bullshit for almost 90 years, and can’t see the real world.

    They have been narrative controlled, and now we have clown world. I talk to average people all the time, including professors and the like, and in general, they have been bamboozled, and don’t know which was is up or down.

    Clifford Douglas developed the Social Credit theory of economy about a century ago, noting that interest produces the law of diminishing returns. Fascism bought into that, somewhat, as it was anti-usury.

    Yes, Fascism is still not evolved fully. For example, in China they have allowed a mid-tier of private banks to create a property bubble. Private debts in NSDAP Germany were not easily erased. The only debt release was in external trade through the trading banks, where it was goods to goods transfer. The trading banks negotiated debts and credits at an ongoing basis, without either party making exponential claims.

    It’s Greenback-like Labour Certificates circumvented usury.

    Exactly, the “certificates” and other purchasing power instruments were non usurious.

    Douglas really wanted an audience with Hitler, because Hitler was the most important man on the world scene:

    https://www.socred.org/images/douglas-archives/Letter-to-Herr-Hitler.pdf

    This employment policy which is here challenged is now recognized to be inseparable from the Jewish Financial system.

    (DOUGLAS WAS JEW WISE)

    A simple change in this system would make full employment unnecessary, eliminate the competition for markets and destroy the power of the international financier, which war only increases and which if not destroyed will destroy civilization in Europe.

    I earnestly request that the present crisis may in the key position in the history of the world, which you hold, be used to force an exposure of this false and destructive policy.

    The Bill System (labor certificates) fluxed interest OUTWARD and into the money supply, rather than interest draining the money supply. For example, when a MEFOBILL was discounted it paid face value, plus interest accrued. So, the full monetary cycle for the bill system was non usurious. Reichsmarks fluxed outward from the Reichsbank to the bill holder, who was paid with new money.

    NSDAP thought was still not as advanced as Douglas Social Credit, as it did not fully understand Gap Theory. However, there was some gap spending via the labor certificates, just not through the price system as Douglas recommended.

    Americans aren’t even allowed to learn about how the State Bank of North Dakota has provided stability to the State’s economy and puts it outside the total control of the Fed.

    State banks are the low hanging fruit. Even Hudson has admitted that Sovereign Money at the Treasury level is probably impossible, and that Brown’s quest for State Banks is more practical.

    • Agree: Curmudgeon
  76. Vidi says:
    @Daniel H

    OK. Montenegro has defaulted on the loan and has no inclination to pay it back, but what can China actually do about this?

    It’s only $1 billion, nothing to the Middle Kingdom.

    China doesn’t have to answer immediately. As I said, the billion dollars isn’t much to a large economy; there’s no urgency to respond. I can see one possibility though: after the Belt and Road is finished, China can ensure that Montenegro doesn’t get much benefit from it. China should be able to lock the little country from the Yuan world — which is what the BRI will be. When they stay poor while their neighbors get rich, the Montenegrans will realize the magnitude of their blunder.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  77. Mefobills says:
    @Vidi

    In summary, China’s government is very, very different from National Socialism.

    It is a matter of degree, not VERY VERY.

    Ownership of the land means little, when the government has the power to tax.

    State owned enterprises are part of mixed economy. Inelastic sectors must be government regulated or government owned. Again, it is a matter of degree, not VERY VERY.

    China will start up state owned enterprises, to then acquire foreign technology, or to enter into new markets. This is actually more advanced than the Fascist economies of Italy or NSDAP Germany.

    Example: You want to acquire Solar Cell technology. You also want to dominate that market as it is key to energy, and you have little oil in your lands. You then channel state credit to acquire the technology, and additional state credit to start up a company. Later you can transfer the “state owned” company into the market by selling shares.

    Also, being called NAZI is no longer a smear among certain crowds, including me. It is a badge of honor.

    • Thanks: HeebHunter
    • Replies: @Vidi
  78. @si1ver1ock

    Orientalism. China is Chinese. Using Western labels to describe China is a pointless exercise.

  79. Thim says:
    @Mefobills

    Witherspoon was no Calvinist. He was the destroyer of Calvinism in America. A key pointman in the transition from Puritan to Yankee. Witherspoon was pure yankee, and surely an agent of the (((bankers))) in the City.

    Early American Calvinists maintained laws against usury. That is the main reason they are so hated today. It is also why they fought the Lawyers of Philadelphia, and wanted to keep the Articles. By 1790 they were a relic.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  80. Vidi says:
    @Mefobills

    It is a matter of degree, not VERY VERY.

    All governments are similar. Even the US can be compared to Nazi Germany in many ways, and so can China. But when the contrasts are major, they become differences in kind; they are not just differences in degree.

    Also, being called NAZI is no longer a smear among certain crowds, including me. It is a badge of honor.

    I think I speak for the overwhelming majority of the world when I say that “Nazi” is still a smear. And I think I demonstrated that the Middle Kingdom is quite far from being National Socialist — and I do not appreciate anyone who tries to smear China as a Nazi country.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  81. Agent76 says:
    @Showmethereal

    “A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.” William Shakespeare

  82. @Old and Grumpy

    China feeds itself and exports food. It allows some of its abundant fresh water to flow down to Japan:
    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=hokkaido+okhotsk+ice&t=hy&va=z&iax=images&ia=images

  83. @Agent76

    Oh dear! The second sentence “Deadly new weapons could destroy Taiwan” blows this video out of the water. As if China wants to destroy one of its provinces! Talk about shooting yourself in the foot! We’re not going to get much sense out of this quacking “American”.

    • Agree: showmethereal
  84. Mefobills says:
    @Vidi

    All governments are similar.

    No they are not. There can be vast differences in government. You are trying to gas-light UNZ readers.

    But when the contrasts are major, they become differences in kind; they are not just differences in degree.

    The contrast between fascism and national socialism is small. China = industrial socialism = fascism = national socialism.

    Fascism and National Socialism and China’s Industrial Socialism type of government are characterized by government intrusion into the market, and control over corporations; and most importantly… control over the money power.

    I think I speak for the overwhelming majority of the world when I say that “Nazi” is still a smear. And I think I demonstrated that the Middle Kingdom is quite far from being National Socialist — and I do not appreciate anyone who tries to smear China as a Nazi country.

    I think not.

    It’s becoming more mainstream – people willing to call themselves as a NAZI, and do it unapologetically. It requires jettisoning your brainwashing.

    http://dissident-mag.com/2021/04/06/get-off-the-sinking-ship/

    Here is Alex McNabb:

    It’s time to become a fucking Nazi.

    There is literally only one political group in the entire United States that is genuinely anti-trans, anti-gay, anti-drug, anti-prostitution, anti-sex-trafficking and PRO family. It’s Nazis. Republicans can’t even be relied on to not molest your daughter or ban boys from the girls locker room. No one in American politics has the moral courage to explicitly take a stand for normal white people, except Nazis. It’s okay to be a little afraid at first, Nazis are also the only group in American politics willing to tell the truth no matter how scary it is and use any word they damn well feel like. Your enemies have already defined any political objective worth having as Nazism, so why don’t you go straight to the source? America isn’t a normal country anymore, everyone with power in the United States is politically committed to giving your kids the best chance in human history of turning into trannies and the worst chance of achieving the quality of life of their parents, let alone grandparents. Only Nazis are genuinely mad about this.

    • Replies: @GeeBee
    , @Vidi
    , @picture111
  85. Mefobills says:
    @Thim

    The book “Essays on Money” was published anonymously, and its date of publishing 1786 is very curious, and intent was to influence the Convention. The thrust of the book was to “theoretically” attack the idea of government money, or in other words the ‘BILLS OF CREDIT” that worked so well for the Colonials.

    It turns out the book was written by the Calvinist Clergyman, John Witherspoon.

    He said things like this: State bills are an absurd form of money, but could not explain why.

    Or if he did explain, it was “They seem to deny the intrinsic value of gold and silver.”

    Then Witherspoon went after the Continental, and ignored what Payne had said – “The Continental is the cornerstone of our success.”

    With regards to the counterfeiting of the continental by the British – Witherspoon was silent.

    Calvinism and Protestantism and their apologetics for usury is a recurring theme in history, mostly because it is Judeo-Christianity. The religion was funded into existence by Jewish money derived from Amsterdam’s stock market.

  86. @Grahamsno(G64)

    Capitalist system is when private banks that take investment risks and also profits US is capitalist.
    Socialist system is when government takes investment risks and so also profits. China is socialist.

    • Replies: @Thomasina
  87. “China is fascist” Looks like we got some Vaush fans here

    Same people if China’s economy ever hit the skids: “See, I told you communism/socialism always fails!”

    Thats gonna cost you a few social credit score points buddy! China lost 20 million people to the Axis powers in WW2, I don’t think they would take kindly to being called fascist. China is also lacking in the main feature of fascism, violence. Its also governed by a communist (Marxist-Leninist) party.

    C’mon man!

    https://www.invent-the-future.org/2018/05/why-doesnt-the-soviet-union-exist-any-more-part-8-will-the-peoples-republic-of-china-go-the-way-of-the-ussr/

  88. Thomasina says:
    @Zarathustra

    “Socialist system is when government takes investment risks and so also profits. China is socialist.”

    And they’re capitalist too. Look at the huge numbers of Chinese who have become rich, look at the cars their children are driving, look at the property they’ve bought all over the world, look at the money they’ve spent on education abroad.

    China has flooded their economy with freshly-printed money. Stimulus out the yin yang. And people are borrowing like crazy.

    So I’d say they’re a mixture of socialist and capitalist, with a heavy emphasis on the latter.

  89. @Thomasina

    No, you are wrong.

    What the American elites were hoping was for the Chinese elites to continue to produce and sell goods in exchange for printed papers. This was what the Chinese did from Iraq war to 2008. They weren’t and aren’t prepare for the Chinese elites to want to have their own paper printing machine.

    American elites were and are too full of themselves. So much like blinken in Alaska.

    You are in the right direction, but give waaaaaay too much credit to American elites. Blinken spoke in 1000% the same way as the zionazies that comes here. I thought they were trolling, but apparently that is how all zionazies are, how they think and speak.

    The media black out on the Chinese response in the Alaska meeting was just sad. Like a bunch of bitches got bitch slapped and trying super hard to cover it up with make up.

    • Agree: Showmethereal
  90. GeeBee says:
    @Mefobills

    Vidi is of course a ‘normie’ and when he says that ‘I think I speak for the overwhelming majority of the world when I say that “Nazi” is still a smear’ he is, in truth, speaking for pretty much all ‘normies’. Our task, as I see it, is to spread the truth about the origins and purpose of WWII, and to point out that the reason that Vidi is right regarding the great majority is that we have all been fed the most egregious lies for so long that, like the metaphorical goldfish in his bowl who cannot imagine anything that lies beyond his narrow world, it is indeed the normative experience to believe this unending tsunami of lies – this farrago of utter rot – that we have all been sold.

    Those of us with eyes to see and, yes, with the courage to believe our eyes, know full well that the sole rationale and motive for the ‘Allies’ to have the war they were so determined to wage against the Axis powers was to keep the parasites who pick the pockets of the ordinary people throughout the Western world, dominated as it was and remains by the ‘Financial International’ hegemon, in power, and thus, that the one chance to free our people from this slavery was the very thing they were duped into help destroy.

    It is indeed hard for most people to confront, never mind to accept, that they have been so woefully tricked and abused. One wonders, for example, whether dear old ‘Coronovirus’ so passionately supports these lies and their nefarious purpose because he is too proud or too stubborn to gaze at the truth (he is possibly of course ‘one of them’, or at best – as I recently observed to him – a mere shabbos goy.)

    As you well know, I, like you, am proud to call myself a National Socialist – a ‘Nazi’ if people prefer it. The likes of Vidi will no doubt interpret this as my admitting that I am an evil monster who wishes to abuse everyone. He will think this because he knows no other version of National Socialism than that so assiduously peddled by the victorious parasites we pick out pockets every day of every week of every year. He could not, as you and an increasing cohort of others well know, be more wrong.

    • Replies: @GeeBee
    , @Mefobills
  91. GeeBee says:
    @GeeBee

    The second from last line should, of course, read ‘the victorious parasites who pick our pockets every day of every week of every year’. Blasted keyboard has a mind of its own – rather like its owner in fact!

  92. @anon

    Alibaba was defintely not the only company that had to pay a fine for anti competitive practices. Tencent actually got fined before Alibaba.
    The same with Ant Financial. Its because of the name and their size but everyone gets similar scrutiny. It was always easier to list in NY than in China. They have only recently begun to make it easier to list in China and that has only really been because of US hostility.
    And just for the record – Shanghai’s stock market is actually bigger than Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s role ismfor international interaction. But now with the link between London and Shanghai (which is why London refused Hong Kong overtures) that is called into question. I dont think China will “go all the way” with Shanghai since if they did it would seriously deflate Hong Kong. They dont want that to happen – simply for legacy reasons.

  93. Mefobills says:
    @Vidi

    after the Belt and Road is finished, China can ensure that Montenegro doesn’t get much benefit from it. China should be able to lock the little country from the Yuan world

    Vidi, you are such a normie you cannot think outside of your box.

    China routinely reduces or releases debts. With regards to the loans to belt and road countries, the only expectation for returns is raw materials, and the creation of new markets. The timeline may be measured in 100 year increments.

    The Yuan debt instruments are housed in China’s state banks, or in the AIB, which is within the reach of Chinese law. The debts are not on-sold into markets, so there is no western style “economic hitman” tactics.

    China will probably just wait for Montenegro to change government, and then re-engage. And they may even forgive the loan, with the long term objective of having a reliable trading partner. China is not stupid, and they know that European Vassals are under pressure from Uncle Schumel.

    You continue to gas-light the Unz readers because you yourself are gas-lit.

    Varoufakis sets a brainwashed person straight, and maybe it will help you as well:

    • Replies: @Vidi
  94. Mefobills says:
    @GeeBee

    He (Vidi) will think this because he knows no other version of National Socialism than that so assiduously peddled by the victorious parasites we pick out pockets every day of every week of every year. He could not, as you and an increasing cohort of others well know, be more wrong.

    A very large percentage of the population cannot think critically. When their world-view is challenged, rather than adjusting to new data, they dig in their heels and continue bleeting our their nonsense, even when the falsity of their belief system is exposed.

    Observing this phenomena among people like one-born-free-dumb, Coronacorvinius, and many other debates I (and you) have had with this type of person, it is apparent why Hitler instituted the labor camps.

    People get ideas in their noggins and they don’t want to let go, because to let go, un-moors them. They are cast adrift. If one is old, it is even harder – maybe even impossible to adjust because their thought patterns are so ingrained. It takes a large emotional shock to dislodge false narrative from the brains of normies. In my debates with Jews, they are especially intransigent, because to go after the religion and behavior, is to go after their self-identity.

    The labor camps delivered an emotional shock. The Chinese camps appear to be doing the same to the Uighur population, where they are being de-radicalized from Wahabbi Takfiri (CIA) methods, and are simultaneously learning employment and life skills. The West will devolve further into hysterics and clown world, while fascist China has the tools to put their population into camps, to then set them straight. China is demonstrably lifting up their population, a fact that is not debatable for anybody with eyes that can see.

    I’m surprised more people didn’t challenge me when I said I was proud to call myself a NAZI.

    The regular readers know my position well enough by now, and probably got a chuckle; but I was actually expecting more “normie” outrage than I received. Unz crowd appears to be a self-selected cohort, and is less “normie” than the general population.

    Because I have a large physical presence, I don’t speak any different in a general population crowd than I do on-line. What are they going to do, beat me up? Sometimes people get very upset at the things I say out loud. (I go easy when my wife and daughter are with me, as women are socially conscious and react to shaming. Women shouldn’t vote.)

    In my conversations with negroes, they like it. I don’t talk down to them, I just lay it out, and surprisingly they don’t get butt-hurt. The majority of negroes want to be told what to do, and will take instruction if they believe you have their best interests at heart.

    So, this idea that national socialism has to be racist is an implanted memory. A national socialist economy type can work for all the peoples within a nation. With the exception of Jews of course, as they will want to take over to self-aggrandize.

    • Agree: GeeBee
    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  95. Vidi says:
    @Mefobills

    China will probably just wait for Montenegro to change government, and then re-engage. And they may even forgive the loan, with the long term objective of having a reliable trading partner. China is not stupid, and they know that European Vassals are under pressure from Uncle Schumel.

    Why would a new Montenegran government be under less pressure from the AngloZionist Empire?

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  96. Vidi says:
    @Mefobills

    All governments are similar.

    No they are not. There can be vast differences in government. You are trying to gas-light UNZ readers.

    Allow me to clarify: all governments are similar in some ways. As I said, “But when the contrasts are major, they become differences in kind; they are not just differences in degree.”

    China = industrial socialism = fascism = national socialism.

    I strongly disagree with your attempt to equate the Nazis with China’s government. Now YOU are gaslighting me. For the two systems are not identical: China is industrial socialsm + other things, and Naziism is industrial socialism + still other things. Equaling the two systems is a total fallacy, and probably an attempt to smear China with the Nazi label.

    It’s becoming more mainstream – people willing to call themselves as a NAZI, and do it unapologetically.

    Speak for yourself. As for me, I think I’m with probably 99.99% of the world’s population in rejecting the Nazis. They may have done some decent things, but that does not excuse the other things they did.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
    , @Ron Unz
  97. Mefobills says:
    @Vidi

    Why would a new Montenegran government be under less pressure from the AngloZionist Empire?

    What cannot persist, will not.

    The Anglo-Zionist empire is falling apart due to internal contradictions. The proper response from China and Russia is exactly what they are doing, playing defense and waiting.

  98. Mefobills says:
    @Vidi

    They may have done some decent things, but that does not excuse the other things they did.

    There you go again. You are a brainwashed normie, who believes in narrative that has inherent contradictions.

    Much of the “inexcusable” things you attribute, did not happen, as it was wartime propaganda that was never refuted. Post war, the west just shrugged and did not bother to correct the record. Also, Jewlywood spun up more propaganda, and now a large percentage of people are walking around with falsehoods rattling around in their brain. You have some work to do to overcome your programming.

    You mind cannot go there – the equivalence of NSDAP and China. They are very equivalent, but not in your worldview, because you harbor illusions that are out of alignment with known facts.

    • Agree: GeeBee
  99. Ron Unz says:
    @Vidi

    I strongly disagree with your attempt to equate the Nazis with China’s government. Now YOU are gaslighting me. For the two systems are not identical: China is industrial socialsm + other things, and Naziism is industrial socialism + still other things. Equaling the two systems is a total fallacy, and probably an attempt to smear China with the Nazi label.

    Actually, I’d say the analogy of today’s China with Nazi Germany isn’t too unreasonable. Indeed, the “excitability” of the Chinese on issues of reuniting with the separated bits of their country such as Taiwan has considerable similarities to Hitler’s strong feelings about gathering together all the German territories including Austria, the Sudetenland, and Danzig, though unlike in the case of Taiwan support in those places seemed above 90%.

    Speak for yourself. As for me, I think I’m with probably 99.99% of the world’s population in rejecting the Nazis. They may have done some decent things, but that does not excuse the other things they did.

    I’d say 99.99% seems far too high, especially since Hitler has for decades been fairly popular in the Arab world, other parts of the Third World, and (I think) India. But it’s certainly true that Hollywood has ferociously demonized the Nazis, much like they’ve more recently demonized the Russians and the Chinese.

    However, if you’re interested in a somewhat more realistic discussion of that era, you might want to take a look at my long article analyzing World War II:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-understanding-world-war-ii/

    • Thanks: GeeBee, Mefobills
    • LOL: Rdm
    • Troll: d dan
    • Replies: @d dan
    , @Vidi
  100. d dan says:
    @Ron Unz

    I join Vidi in protesting you guys associating China with Nazi.

    If Nazi is so good, it should be able to stand on its own. But if you really want to compare, I am sure you can find 100 things Nazi is similar to US, or similar to Zimbabwe too. So leave China out of your non-sense.

    • Agree: Vidi
    • LOL: Mefobills
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  101. @Mefobills

    I watched that hard, far, far Right, religious fundamentalist fanatic and deep Sinophobe Adrian Zenz, the source of most of the ‘Uighur genocide’ lies, outlining a ‘secret’ Chinese document concerning labour migration in China. It stated pretty openly that labour movement, common in all countries, by Uighurs, in search of employment, was a poverty alleviation method. Cotton production in Xinjiang is now heavily mechanised, and other labour opportunities still inadequate, so people move to the work, as people from throughout China do. Yet he declared this to be ‘forced labour’, and the Western presstitute vermin interviewing him did not dare point out the lunatic fallacy of his assertions. On this, the deranged lying of a fanatic hate-monger, the drive to war on China rests, aided and abetted by the diabolical Evil of the Western fakestream media hate-machine, particularly the cancer that is the BBC.

  102. Vidi says:
    @Ron Unz

    Actually, I’d say the analogy of today’s China with Nazi Germany isn’t too unreasonable. Indeed, the “excitability” of the Chinese on issues of reuniting with the separated bits of their country such as Taiwan has considerable similarities to Hitler’s strong feelings about gathering together all the German territories including Austria, the Sudetenland, and Danzig, though unlike in the case of Taiwan support in those places seemed above 90%.

    You are committing the same mistake @Mefobills did: the two systems share some features, so we can throw them into the same garbage can.

    Can we use the same trick to compare Americans to some cannibal tribe? After all, people from both groups have many features in common: they have noses, they have hands and feet, and they’re breathing (the live ones anyway). So people in the US may as well be cannibals? Technically, the comparison can be made, but I doubt Americans would appreciate being associated with eaters of long pork.

    Do you see the trap you have fallen into? China wants Taiwan back, the Nazis wanted Sudetenland back, therefore China can be compared to the Nazis. That’s the same poor reasoning as comparing Americans to cannibals.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  103. Mefobills says:
    @Vidi

    You are as the Russians would say, agreement non compliant.

    Do some homework. Start with Ron’s link. Challenge yourself.

    • Replies: @Vidi
  104. Tim too says:

    it will be interesting to see what policy of China is anything like Generalplan Ost of the NAZIs. Short and simple, the Chinese wont be embarking on anything like Generalplan Ost. The mind sets of the Chinese and the NAZIs are not similar.

    It is a grave mistake to compare the Chinese to the NAZIs. Sharing some development policy similarities is insufficient.

    Or was Generalplan Ost a myth?

    My understanding of the Chinese is that they wont be insulted by comparisons to the NAZIs. They will understand that it is some sort of inept provocation.

  105. Vidi says:
    @Mefobills

    You are as the Russians would say, agreement non compliant.

    No, I don’t break my promises, as the US does all the time, especially to the Russians. If I ever agree with you on the Nazis being great guys, I will certainly let you know.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  106. Ron Unz says:
    @d dan

    I join Vidi in protesting you guys associating China with Nazi.

    If Nazi is so good, it should be able to stand on its own. But if you really want to compare, I am sure you can find 100 things Nazi is similar to US, or similar to Zimbabwe too. So leave China out of your non-sense.

    You seem to have a rather naive view of reality and the extent to which our perceptions are shaped by the media.

    For example, the Nazis are best known for being a “genocidal regime.” Okay.

    But over the last year or so, the US government under both Trump and Biden has now officially declared China to be “genocidal” and the NYT, WSJ, and our other media organs are increasingly repeating that description, while I assume the same is true on TV. So within another year or two, I’d think that a large majority of Americans may be fully convinced that China is a “genocidal regime” just like Nazi Germany. Perhaps Hollywood will even start producing movies or television shows portraying that supposed reality.

    I suspect that you strongly disagree with this and feel sure that the accusation that the Chinese are “genocidal” is completely ridiculous and nothing more than anti-China propaganda lies entirely invented for political reasons.

    Okay, maybe you’re correct. But if you’re so convinced that the American MSM is blatantly lying about something in the here-and-now, why are you so absolutely convinced that you should believe everything it says about things that happened very long ago and far away?

    You really should read some of my articles in the American Pravda series:

    https://www.unz.com/page/american-pravda-series/

    • Replies: @d dan
    , @Anonymous
    , @Vidi
  107. d dan says:
    @Ron Unz

    “why are you so absolutely convinced that you should believe everything it says about things that happened very long ago and far away?”

    My objection for associating Nazi with China is not based on any evaluation of whether Nazis is good or bad or anything in between. My objection is based on very pragmatic reason that Nazism has very poor reputation today in most of the world. China is already under opinion-siege from all directions in the Western media, it would be an additional tough burden for China to defend whatever good parts, if any, of the similarity.

    Furthermore, if you guys are really as friendly or at least neutral about China as you claim, the minimum courtesy of a good relation would entail consideration of the other party feelings and preferences, isn’t it? Imagine your friend keeps associating or comparing you with a gangster (or someone you dislike greatly), you would wonder whether that person is your real friend or not.

    Finally, the “reasons” (similar policies, lost lands, others?) you guys are advancing to compare Nazis with China sound terribly superficial to me. As Vidi and I already argue, there are thousands of ways to compare governments/nations, and there are infinite ways in which people can claim similarity.

    As to learning more about Nazism and the history, I may or may not do that, depending on my personal priority, and contingent on you guys showing minimum respects and restraints on the said association. The minimum commitment I can promise is that I will not repeat any bad thing about Nazism before I research further and make up my own conclusion. However, if I sense disregard of our request, then I definitely would not bother to learn anything about Nazism.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  108. Anonymous[721] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    But if you’re so convinced that the American MSM is blatantly lying about something in the here-and-now, why are you so absolutely convinced that you should believe everything it says about things that happened very long ago and far away?

    It is very obvious, Ron.

    d dan fears the European solidarity that National Socialism represents. A meticulous and technically competent apparatus that seeks to pare down and excise foreign control, foreign influence, and foreign trade.

    So while he protests that the jewish media machine is now turned on his country, he derives benefits from previous iterations of jewish liberalism that included his country in its anti-European endeavors.

    It’s why no European or European-American should take Asian opinions or interests seriously at all. Every waking moment and every corner of society needs to be dedicated to using organized State power to eliminate them from our lives and lands, one product, one job, one business, one piece of property at a time.

    • Replies: @frankie p
    , @Anon
  109. Ron Unz says:
    @d dan

    My objection for associating Nazi with China is not based on any evaluation of whether Nazis is good or bad or anything in between. My objection is based on very pragmatic reason that Nazism has very poor reputation today in most of the world.

    Actually, MSM images are notoriously malleable. You’re generally correct that the American MSM portrays “Nazis” and “Neo-Nazis” in a very negative manner. But don’t forget that we’re explicitly allied with the Ukrainian “Neo-Nazis”, whose foremost advocates and supporters are the Jewish Neocons. So it’s a bit more complicated that you seem to realize.

    Or consider the violent Islamicists. During the 1980s, the American MSM portrayed them as great heroes for leading the fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan, and the Islamicists of Chechnya were also regarded as freedom-fighters rather than terrorists. But after 9/11, they became America’s leading boogie-men, the worst people on earth. Then they once again became our heroic allies when we used them against the governments of Libya and Syria.

    Furthermore, if you guys are really as friendly or at least neutral about China as you claim, the minimum courtesy of a good relation would entail consideration of the other party feelings and preferences, isn’t it?

    Sure, I’m quite friendly towards China as I’ve demonstrated by all the numerous articles I’ve written on the subject. But frankly, the most positive thing I could probably do to improve China’s image would be to ban you and most of the other pro-China commenters from this website. I think you’re among the worst propagandists I’ve ever encountered, and your efforts are so enormously counter-productive that if the anti-China groups aren’t secretly paying you, they probably should.

    Assuming that you’re actually pro-Chinese rather than a bunch of anti-China false-flaggers, you really should give a little more thought to how you sound and just how much anti-China sentiment you create among people who were originally friendly or at least neutral. An excellent example is Malla, who had always been saying nice things about China until you started attacking him in a stupid and ignorant way, naturally leading him to become hostile himself.

    As I’ve sometimes mentioned in my articles, China seems terrible at propaganda so it’s very fortunate that they banned Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and other American software systems in the early 2000s, or its government might have already been overthrown.

    I think the problem may be that some of you don’t really have a good understanding of American society so you say totally ridiculous things representing a mixture of PC American MSM nonsense and stupid PRC propaganda. Believe me, it really doesn’t help your case.

    • Agree: frankie p
    • Replies: @d dan
    , @Astuteobservor II
    , @gT
  110. frankie p says:
    @Anonymous

    No, I don’t think so. I think that you’re giving him much more credit for intelligence than he deserves. I feel that he has swallowed the fake Hollywood narrative that the German National Socialists were evil monsters, and so any comparison with his China, based rationally on economic and political policies as it is, is seen as a way to equate China with evil monsters. The fact that the Mainstream Media, Hollywood and the modern narrative creators are doing this exact thing, falsely labeling China as genocidal maniacs, in the real time present means nothing to him. He is unable to undo what has been done to his mistaken perception of the past.

  111. Anon[378] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    “…and foreign trade”

    while relying on imported oil, gas etc. … and expanding markets. Back in the day, Standard oil shipped oil to the Nazis.

    The real competency was at traditional European brutal imperialism. Unable to actually cut it without grabbing resources from other lands. Hence the invasion of Russia/USSR.

    So it will be interesting to see whether the Chinese PR is false, and they are just as brutal imperialists as they pretend they are not. Time will tell.

  112. Mefobills says:
    @Vidi

    Agreement non compliant also means you are irrational, and unwilling to challenge yourself.

    Ron gave you a link, especially about WW2, which will refute much of the wrong narrative bouncing around inside of your skull.

    But, if you don’t have the courage to seek out information, and do some hard thinking, then nobody is going to take you seriously. When people call you out as a normie, that is not a compliment. It is also a condemnation of much of the population, as much of the population are normies.

    You probably are in agreement with the big lies.. for example, that Germany started both world wars.

    • Replies: @Vidi
  113. d dan says:
    @Ron Unz

    “MSM images are notoriously malleable. … So it’s a bit more complicated that you seem to realize.”

    Sure. That argues more for keeping the association out of China.

    “if the anti-China groups aren’t secretly paying you, they probably should.”

    LOL, neither would I object receiving money from them to do what I am doing. Do you know where can I apply for some?

    “Malla, who had always been saying nice things about China “

    I don’t agree Malla was friendly to China since the day one I know him/her. Far from it. For example, the very first thing I debated with her in Unz Review was her support for the independence of Tibet. I believe she also supports Xinjiang and Taiwan independences (and probably other independences too that I can’t remember now). She supports many of the revisionist history of Japanese invasion of China (e.g. believing that Japan did not start the wars with China, denying the war crimes Japanese committed, believing Nanjing massacre was fake, etc…) and many more others that are very offensive to a lot of Chinese. Sure, she says good things about China too (and still does), but those are of relatively perfunctory nature (e.g. India started the aggression against China in 1962).

    Saying some nice things about you does not automatically make someone your friend. I doubt you use that standard in your real life. I certain don’t, e.g. some gangsters many years ago actually commented that I had a very nice car.

    “you started attacking him in a stupid and ignorant way…”

    The attack may or may not be stupid – it is too early to tell, or we may never know. But I disagree it was ignorant. Knowing how you casually mis-interpreted Chinaman’s comments, I can confidently assert that you didn’t understand the full context of the whole heated debate at that time.

    “naturally leading him to become hostile himself.”

    You are exaggerating the power of my words. Seriously, I believe my words (and most commenters’ words) may sway people in the margin, but hardly would have any effect on someone like Malla who already has such firm believes in so many issues well before I debated her (probably < 2 years ago).

    “China … banned Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and other American software systems in the early 2000s,”

    Technically, China did not ban them – it would violate WTO rules. China laid down the laws to ensure its own security, and those companies couldn’t comply and left. But I agree with you it was a very wise move.

    You spend a lot of time and money build this site – so it is naturally within your rights to ban me anytime you like and I would have no personal grudge. The only thing I request is you doing it transparently (i.e. people know you ban me rather than I leave voluntarily). Thank you for the conversation and candid feedbacks.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @Kundalini
  114. Vidi says:
    @Mefobills

    Agreement non compliant also means you are irrational, and unwilling to challenge yourself.

    Nice try at using the Nazi’s Big Lie technique to try to push me into a corner. You have been invoking Russian wisdom, saying (link) “You are as the Russians would say, agreement non compliant.” It’s unfortunate for you that the Russian word недоговороспособны does not mean what you want it to mean.

    Ron gave you a link, especially about WW2, which will refute much of the wrong narrative bouncing around inside of your skull.

    You have no idea what I am thinking. You are just projecting your prejudices on me, and I reject your conclusions. Have I said what the Nazis did that I find offensive? I have not. How can Ron Unz possibly have refuted something I did not say?

    You probably are in agreement with the big lies.. for example, that Germany started both world wars.

    Nice sneaky propaganda. Goebells would have been proud of you. Germany started the second World War; there isn’t much doubt about it. I don’t know about the first World War. To say that Germany started both is indeed a big lie — and to accuse me of fomenting that big lie is itself a big lie. Congratulations, you win this year’s Goebbels Propaganda Award.

    • Replies: @GeeBee
  115. @Ron Unz

    I think I understand where they are coming from.

    It doesn’t matter what we know to be the truth. But Nazis = genocidal. By equating it to the current Chinese govt and China. You and other comments are playing right into the hands of the propaganda aimed at China.

    But then you point out the obvious that the Germans were probably under the exact kind of propaganda before WWII and the last 70 years after. China and Germany seems to be in the same circumstance.

    But, But, we got nukes in play now. This changes the entire “great game”. Makes it moot.

    We can compare the”circumstance and predicament of China” under the current anti China propaganda in the english media to the same treatment Nazi Germany got in the 1940s.

    What vidi and dan was protesting against was you guys directly saying China and Nazi Germany is the same. Without clarifying you meant the treatment it is receiving in the english speaking MSM propaganda outlets.

  116. Ron Unz says:
    @d dan

    I don’t agree Malla was friendly to China…I debated with her in Unz Review was her support for the independence of Tibet. I believe she also supports Xinjiang and Taiwan independences.

    Actually, I’m about 95% sure that Malla is male. The fact that you believe otherwise hardly strengthens your credibility.

    If you’d bothered reading Malla’s comments, you’d notice that over the years he’s been *exceptionally* harsh on his own country of India, including its ignorant masses and its corrupt political elites. And although my own knowledge of Indian society and history is too rudimentary to judge, he also seems exceptionally erudite in those areas. Indeed, one of his weaknesses is that he sometimes provides enormously long and detailed discussions of Indian/Hindu history or politics in threads nominally focused on other subjects. (He also seems very knowledgeable about Western history, though I think he leans far too much in a “conspiratorial” direction on many matters.)

    When someone provides very detailed, seemingly candid, and often negative appraisals of his own country and its politics, he greatly increases his own credibility. Meanwhile, when someone like you uniformly spouts a crude version of the “Go China!!!” party line, you considerably diminish your own.

    You also don’t seem very sharp. I happened to look at a thread a couple of days ago in which Malla was quite objectively explaining the very hostile current views of the Indian masses towards China, and you repeatedly seemed to assume that was his own position, and denounce him for it.

    He also has a very positive view of the British role in India, and while I can’t say whether he’s right or wrong, he seemed quite knowledgeable on the subject. But since you’re very hostile to Britain over China issues, you strongly argued with him, handicapped by the fact that you apparently know absolutely nothing about Indian history. I also seem to recall that a couple of weeks ago you were denouncing American whites for their current wave of violent attacks against Chinese and other Asians, proving that you know absolutely nothing about American society either.

    If I had to guess, I’d think you’re an elderly Chinese retiree living outside the PRC who’s become angry at all the dishonest anti-China propaganda spouted by American politicians and media, and therefore wants to hold up the China side. But since you apparently know very little about most non-Chinese parts of the world and see everything through a China lens (e.g. the Japanese are totally evil because their great-grandfathers attacked China), your totally ignorant spouting off on all these other subjects does your cause absolutely no good and considerable harm.

    You’re not all that different from that “denk” fellow, who’s always ranting in broken English and also using very strange jargon that few normal people can understand.

    I think the best service the two of you could give your cause is to try to write coherent English on topics about which you actually have some knowledge, or failing that, go and rant elsewhere.

    • Disagree: d dan
    • Replies: @Smith
    , @Tim too
  117. Vidi says:
    @Ron Unz

    For example, the Nazis are best known for being a “genocidal regime.”

    Actually, that is not why I dislike the Nazis, and why I am most allergic to any attempt to associate China with Hitler and Co.

    You have made a strong case that the Nazis may not have committed the Jewish Holocaust, strong enough that I am suspending judgement on it.

    I dislike the Nazis for two things, neither of which are doubtful: (1) starting World War II, the worst, the deadliest war in history; and (2) lying blatantly, nearly all the time. As China is not warlike and the Communist government has a long record of hardly ever telling an untruth, I vehemently reject any attempt to smear the Middle Kingdom as a national socialist regime.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @Smith
  118. GeeBee says:
    @Vidi

    Germany started the second World War; there isn’t much doubt about it

    It saddens me to see someone who is so thoroughly mired in seventy-five year-old propaganda that they cannot and will not countenance any challenge to the false narrative that surrounds them like a cocoon spun by a deadly spider. Almost no objective modern scholars continue to preach the nonsense that Germany started WWII – or even that Germany was primarily responsible for that criminal and unnecessary tragedy. Rather, they have cleaved to the truth, which is that the USA (FDR and his handlers), together with the UK – the spark that was designed to set off the conflagration, so that the USA could sneak in and invade Europe later – planned their war on Hitler from around 1936. There is much material here on Unz Review that demonstrates this perfectly well. So much so that it is painful to see ‘normies’ continuing to parrot their Pavlovian hissing and screeching, like the good goyim they have been carefully trained and programmed to be, whenever the truth appears on the horizon.

    As for example when you invoke ‘the Nazi’s Big Lie technique’ and go on to remark that ‘Goebells would have been proud of you’. You are not aware of the truth behind this ‘big lie’ canard, endlessly trotted out by good goyim like you, because the hegemon will never teach the truth, but merely continues to repeat its own lies, designed to project their own crimes upon a vanquished enemy. Goebells was actually pointing out that the Jews had invented and mastered the technique of ‘the Big Lie’, and that they used it to promote their own ends. Cue the victors projecting Goebells’ insight into Jews as being a technique which he had devised in furtherance of Germany’s ends. The utter cheek of it! But then the ‘Allies’ have become masters themselves of this same Jewish ‘Big Lie’ technique identified by Goebells. I wonder how that came about? Surely nothing to do with the fact that the Allies were the unwitting tool of our (((friends)))?

    The Allies had to eradicate National Socialism and the Third Reich in order to protect their disgusting exploitation and parasitism of much of the world (and especially of their own people) from a very similar phenomenon to that which the Western Financial Capitalist hegemon confronts today. It was, if you like, the first of many American ‘regime change’ campaigns. Winston Churchill himself is said to have admitted as much to Lord Boothby some years after the war. Now, to the unutterable horror of the Neo-Liberal Zio-American hegemony, Hitler and Mussolini sit reincarnated in Moscow and Beijing. Only this time it is most unlikely that the hegemon will get away with bearing arms against this perceived ‘sea of troubles’ as they did in 1939-45.

    As Mefobills and Ron Unz have both kindly suggested to you, you really ought to take a look at yourself and then – carefully, perhaps even tentatively – take a look at the truth. It’s there for anyone with an open mind and eyes to see to imbibe freely. So far, you have merely doubled down and resorted to unpleasant and insulting language. Perhaps you are, like so many, beyond redemption. But as I believe the Christian bible puts it: ‘there is more rejoicing in heaven when one lost sheep is found’ etc. etc…

  119. Smith says:
    @Ron Unz

    d dan is one of those chinese nationalists who live in the West.

    Armchair warriors.

  120. Ron Unz says:
    @Vidi

    I dislike the Nazis for two things, neither of which are doubtful: (1) starting World War II, the worst, the deadliest war in history; and (2) lying blatantly, nearly all the time.

    I don’t have a solid impression of your background aside from that you seem heavily focused upon China and quite supportive. Maybe you’re Chinese and maybe you’re not.

    But your knowledge of the actual history of World War II is *appallingly* lacking. To use a more recent analogy, your statement is almost the equivalent of stating “Saddam Hussein started the Iraq War by attacking America on 9/11.” According to public opinion polls, that’s actually what 70% of American Republicans had come to believe by 2003.

    Assuming you do wish to gain a somewhat more realistic understanding of the origins of World War II, I would very strongly urge that you begin reading my own long article on the subject, which I’d previously suggested:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-understanding-world-war-ii/

    The sources I cite are mostly leading mainstream historians and journalists from America and Britain, and most of their works are easily available either on this website or elsewhere.

    Seriously, the statements you’re making about World War II are so totally ridiculous they’re roughly comparable to those Falun Gong articles about a top Chinese general in the early 2000s declaring that China planned to conquer the world by using bioweapons to exterminate all non-Chinese. What would be your opinion of an American who quoted those claims and considered them credible?

    • Agree: GeeBee
    • Replies: @Vidi
  121. Smith says:
    @Badger Down

    China will either become a financial craphole like the USA, or actually becomes socialist like the USSR, that’s what I meant.

    China right now is like the FDR America, where it’s all shiny and hopes, but you still see billionaires plowing around and workers in bad conditions. Until China solves that, it will never become great.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  122. Tim too says:
    @Ron Unz

    “Actually, I’m about 95% sure that Malla is male. The fact that you believe otherwise hardly strengthens your credibility.”

    Ron, Chinese language does not parallel English in pronouns. The Chinese have one word for he, she, it. The word ‘ta’. They do not have the gender locked into the language usage as in English. The Chinese in all the places I’ve worked characteristically misuse he, she, it and him, her and it. The mis-usage does not relate to credibility. He may be not credible, but not because of the usage of gender pronouns, if Chinese is his first language.

  123. Mefobills says:

    China will either become a financial craphole like the USA, or actually becomes socialist like the USSR, that’s what I meant.

    Dialectics abound.

    China is industrial capitalist, or “industrial socialists.”

    As long as China continues to inject state capital into production (industry and the commons) then the general welfare will continue to improve.

    Hudson has shown in his latest book, “And forgive them their debts,” that civilizations lasting over 1000 years are possible, especially when the King forgives unpayable debts on a regular basis.

    The other necessary condition for stable civilizations are smashing of oligarchies and of potential wannabe kings (who may be sociopaths) emerging out of the population. These emergent types are something like Jack Ma, who get froggy and think they know best, or want to self-aggrandize.

    Industrial Capitalism and Industrial Socialism is not part of your false dialectic.

    There is good reason to believe that China will learn how to do jubilees, and then the cake is baked.

    • Replies: @Smith
  124. Kundalini says:
    @d dan

    d dan,

    Just a piece of advice, take a deep breath and a step back by re-reading what Ron Unz has written to you. And also try to get the points from Mefobills.

    Ask yourself why you trust the media demonizing Nazi, yet you don’t believe the same media that accuse CPC of genocide. If I remember correctly, the level of demonization to Nazi was almost similar (ridiculous things like German soaps were made of human oil, the lamp covers from human scalps etc).

    Maybe reading Hitler’s War by David Irving will enlighten you.

  125. Vidi says:
    @Ron Unz

    But your knowledge of the actual history of World War II is *appallingly* lacking …. [citation of your previous long article on the origins of WW II (link)]

    Even your article does not dispute that Hitler did invade and conquer Poland. That is hard to dispute, as he very definitely did it. He did not have to do it; Poland wasn’t seriously threatening him. But he did. In a tense world in which Germany was not overwhelmingly dominant militarily, a move as aggressive as that was bound to have explosive pushback from the other powers. Every historian that I know about cites the invasion of Poland as the start of World War II. The Nazis did that, so WW2 was their fault. I blame them for it.

    Which is why I detest the smearing of the Middle Kingdom with the Nazi label. China’s nowhere near as militarily agressive as the Nazis were, and does not lie anywhere near as much as they did. Any attempt to do a Goebbels on China is pure propaganda.

  126. Smith says:
    @Mefobills

    Disagree.

    In China, there is two competing thoughts.

    Let’s bake a bigger cake, thus making everyone richer.

    Let’s divide the cake equally, thus making everyone fair.

    China is trying the first approach, but I predict it will fall because the ones with the ones with bigger slices never want to share in the first place.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  127. @FvS

    I guess that would depend on what you mean by “race”.

    Personally, I use “race” as more or less a synonym of ethnicity. Others would say that there is only one human race.

    You seem think of “race” along the lines of skin color, which can often times be ambiguous (e.g. Is a light-skinned person from Turkey “white” or not? What about a light-skinned Latino?).

  128. @Smith

    China is trying BOTH, with an added emphasis on reducing inequality in the latest plans. The Chinese rulers don’t think like Western elites ie avaricious thugs who hate and fear others.

    • Replies: @Smith
  129. @Vidi

    When Western psychopathic thugs entirely falsely accuse China of being ‘new Nazis’ it is both lying of preposterous magnitude, but also the purest expression of racist hate, fear and pathopsychological projection. If Western ‘elites’, Evil beyond belief, say something is so, you can be sure that it is not.

    • Agree: Vidi
  130. @Smith

    The conditions of workers and their remuneration in China have steadily improved for decades, while those of the serfs in the West, particularly in the USA and the Five Eyes racist goons, have fallen dramatically. No average wage increases in hyper-racist Austfailia for seven years, with none foreseen for at least another five. Better start looking for external boogey-men, and the ‘Chinks’ are perennial favourites.

  131. Ron Unz says:
    @Vidi

    Even your article does not dispute that Hitler did invade and conquer Poland. That is hard to dispute, as he very definitely did it. He did not have to do it; Poland wasn’t seriously threatening him. But he did…Every historian that I know about cites the invasion of Poland as the start of World War II. The Nazis did that, so WW2 was their fault. I blame them for it.

    I glanced at your comment-archive and since you so uniformly focus on China issues, I assume you’re Chinese, though probably residing in the West given your complete English fluency. So I’ll continue to focus on the China analogy to WWII.

    First, most wars are started by a mixture of proximate and ultimate factors, and by focusing upon some and ignoring others, it’s easy to shift the blame around.

    Danzig was 95% German by population, had been part of Germany for most of the previous 500 years, and (from what I recall) had been illegally seized by Poland after Versailles. Hitler asked that the city be returned, something desired by almost all of its inhabitants, and offered all sorts of concessions to Poland in exchange. Instead, under British and American pressure, the Poles absolutely refused to negotiate, and began severely mistreating other ethnic Germans, brutally killing large numbers of them. The entire reason for all of this was to provoke Hitler into declaring war and attacking, which he did. So it’s really somewhat a matter of opinion whether Hitler “started” the war or not.

    Now consider a good Chinese analogy involving the island of Formosa/Taiwan. Although the bulk of the current population is ethnic Chinese, it’s only been very tenuously held by China over the last 500 years, either being fully independent or constantly rebelling against Mainland rule. Over the last 110 years, I think it’s been politically united with the Mainland for only about 4 years. My impression is that although a substantial minority of the Taiwanese would like to be reunited with the PRC, a large majority feels otherwise. (I’m not an expert on those issues, but that’s my impression.)

    However, mostly for ideological reasons the PRC considers ultimately reuniting with Taiwan absolutely non-negotiable, and has repeatedly indicated that a declaration of Taiwanese independence would immediately prompt a Chinese invasion.

    Now suppose that the US wanted to provoke a war with China but do so in a way that made the Chinese look like the aggressors. Presumably, the easiest strategy would be for the US to persuade the Taiwanese to declare independence, thereby provoking a Chinese attack, and allowing the US to declare war against China’s “aggression.” This is an absolutely exact analogy to the start of World War II.

    Under those circumstances, should China be blamed for starting the war? It depends upon how you look at it. China would have initiated military action, but been deliberately provoked into doing so by the US, which had actually wanted to start the war. But obviously every American history book would make it very clear that China had started the war, and if America won, most of the world’s history books would say the same thing. But if China won, most of them would say the opposite.

    One problem I’ve noticed with Chinese commenters on this website is that they tend to adopt a combination of (often biased) Chinese propaganda on Chinese issues and (often biased) American propaganda on everything else. Thus, the notion of an analogy between Taiwan and Danzig is simply unimaginable to them.

    • Agree: frankie p
    • Replies: @Vidi
  132. Smith says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    If China is trying both, why would billionaires like Jack Ma exist?

    Dividing the cake equally mean either there is no billionaire, or everyone is a billionaire, no matter how big the cake is. Evidently, neither is true.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  133. Vidi says:
    @Ron Unz

    I glanced at your comment-archive and since you so uniformly focus on China issues, I assume you’re Chinese, though probably residing in the West given your complete English fluency. So I’ll continue to focus on the China analogy to WWII.

    This thread is at least partly about China, after all.

    Danzig was 95% German by population, had been part of Germany for most of the previous 500 years, and (from what I recall) had been illegally seized by Poland after Versailles. Hitler asked that the city be returned, something desired by almost all of its inhabitants, and offered all sorts of concessions to Poland in exchange. Instead, under British and American pressure, the Poles absolutely refused to negotiate, and began severely mistreating other ethnic Germans, brutally killing large numbers of them. The entire reason for all of this was to provoke Hitler into declaring war and attacking, which he did. So it’s really somewhat a matter of opinion whether Hitler “started” the war or not.

    Now consider a good Chinese analogy involving the island of Formosa/Taiwan ….

    Now suppose that the US wanted to provoke a war with China but do so in a way that made the Chinese look like the aggressors. Presumably, the easiest strategy would be for the US to persuade the Taiwanese to declare independence, thereby provoking a Chinese attack, and allowing the US to declare war against China’s “aggression.” This is an absolutely exact analogy to the start of World War II.

    Thank you for clarifying your position. You will probably not be surprised that I do not agree.

    I doubt that the Poles killed a significant number of ethnic Germans in Danzig. A few perhaps, similar to the recent Asian killings in the US. Why would Poles be as despicable as alleged, knowing how vulnerable they were to Germany, and the likely terrible price that Poland would pay? Would they be fools enough to trust a guarantee from Britain on an issue where their existence was at stake? No, I suspect this is yet another Goebbels Big Lie.

    So I disagree that Hitler had sufficient excuse to start the Second World War. But the Nazis did it. Therefore I blame them. I find them even more disgusting for all the lies they perpetrated.

    I also disagree that an attack by mainland China on Taiwan is an exact analogy to Germany’s invasion of Poland. Modern Taiwan is the remnant of the loser of a civil war. A peace treaty between the two sides has never been signed, and Taiwan has invaded the mainland at least once (for example, the attack on Sungmen, near Shanghai, on March 18, 1950). So a mainland counterstrike, however delayed, would be a justified continuation of an existing war, not the start of a new one. Furthermore, the mainland has repeatedly warned Taiwan as to what would happen if the island should attempt to declare independence. If the Taiwanese do that anyway, the resulting violence would be their fault.

    In short, I do not appreciate the smears that paint China as a disgusting Nazi-like regime. The smears are not in the least justified, and I have shown why. Between the USA and China, I think most of the world knows which side acts more like Goebbels and the rest of the Nazis.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  134. gT says:
    @Ron Unz

    “But frankly, the most positive thing I could probably do to improve China’s image would be to ban you and most of the other pro-China commenters from this website. I think you’re among the worst propagandists I’ve ever encountered, and your efforts are so enormously counter-productive that if the anti-China groups aren’t secretly paying you, they probably should.”

    Ron, the Chinese commentators on your website are just parroting the official line they receive from their leaders in the Communist party, it is what is prevalent in the Chinese media, which is as you know 100% controlled so it is the official line. Your mainland Chinese commentators should be applauded for their loyalty to the party. The peasants are most dedicated to the cause.

    Any Westerner who supports Communist China though should get the wall.

    • Troll: Vidi
  135. Ron Unz says:
    @Vidi

    You’re just making yourself look foolish by discussing historical matters you’ve apparently never investigated.

    I doubt that the Poles killed a significant number of ethnic Germans in Danzig. A few perhaps, similar to the recent Asian killings in the US. Why would Poles be as despicable as alleged, knowing how vulnerable they were to Germany, and the likely terrible price that Poland would pay?

    Actually, I never suggested that the ethnic Germans killed were in Danzig but in other parts of Poland. I think several hundred were killed, but the Nazi propaganda exaggerated that figure to many thousands (It’s been a while since I looked into the matter). Also, you seem not to be aware that Poland had a large and powerful army, and the foolish Polish military commanders believed they could defeat the Germans and perhaps even seize more of Germany, especially with the support of Britain and France. Indeed, a decade or so earlier Poland had strongly considered attacking and invading Germany, whose military was far weaker at the time. You clearly know absolutely nothing of the history of that era other than from television cartoons and such.

    No, I suspect this is yet another Goebbels Big Lie.

    Your endless spouting of “Goebbels Big Lie” makes you look ignorant and ridiculous, roughly similar to someone on Breitbart constantly ranting about the “Evil ChiComs.” Goebbels’ entire personal diary was recovered and last year I read Irving’s authoritative 700 page biography. I fail to see any evidence that Goebbels lied any more than Allied propagandists, and probably quite a bit less. Indeed, I think Goebbels emphasized that truth was an important part of good propaganda. Meanwhile, much of the Allied propaganda was utterly and totally ridiculous.

    I also disagree that an attack by mainland China on Taiwan is an exact analogy to Germany’s invasion of Poland. Modern Taiwan is the remnant of the loser of a civil war. A peace treaty between the two sides has never been signed, and Taiwan has invaded the mainland at least once (for example, the attack on Sungmen, near Shanghai, on March 18, 1950).

    Taiwan and China may never have signed a peace treaty, but have de facto been at peace for three generations, and similarly Taiwan has become de facto an independent country. If China attacked and invaded Taiwan, it would be very widely seen as the military aggressor, though if it won the resulting war against the US, it’s perfectly possible that most of the global media and history books would say otherwise. (Similarly, German Danzig had been illegally seized by Poland in 1919, so the German demand to have it returned had some reasonable legal justification.)

    Consider that South Korea and North Korea have never signed a peace treaty ending the Korean War, which therefore technically continues to this day. So in your opinion, if North Korea suddenly launched a massive attack and invasion of the South, trying to conquer the country that should not be seen by the world as an act of military aggression?

    Here’s another example. Japan and Russia have never signed a peace treaty ending World War II, so they’re still technically at war with each other. Therefore, in your opinion, if Putin suddenly launched an all-out attack against Japan and tried to invade and conquer the country, that would be perfectly fine and no one in the world should regard it as an act of military aggression?

    https://www.npr.org/2019/01/22/687319777/russia-and-japan-are-still-at-war-at-least-on-paper

    As I’ve said, the problem with some Chinese people is that they blindly accept Chinese propaganda on everything relating to China and then by default blindly accept American/Western propaganda on almost everything else, which produces a very unrealistic view of the world.

    • Replies: @Vidi
  136. Mefobills says:
    @Smith

    If China is trying both, why would billionaires like Jack Ma exist?

    Please explain how and why Jack Ma’s “Ant Group” just got smashed by China’s regulators.

    https://www.rt.com/business/521362-ant-group-jack-ma-exit/

    China does not allow “capital” to arise above the polity.

    • Agree: Rubicon
    • Replies: @showmethereal
    , @Smith
  137. @Mefobills

    Western media was claiming Jack Ma was “disappeared”… It was hilarious. People believed it too. Ma had already retired and was going back to teaching and doing philanthropy. For some reason he decided to make a comment that the banking regulators were too old school in their thinking. That dovetails with this thread. He was close to spouting a form of neoliberal financialization. For that he was told to stand down indeed. But Ant Group’s IPO wasn’t going to go through the way it was set up (are you a tech firm or a bank? make up your mind). So Ant Group will survive and Jack Ma can still be a billionaire – but indeed – finance isn’t allowed to control the show. It is a good thing to focus on the real economy and make the banking system serve the real economy than everyone serving finance. I say it all the time – economically – China is better off being an XL sized Germany (the current one – not the 1930’s one argued about in this thread) rather than an Asian US. Young people in China have started falling into the evil of financing their purchases and paying interest rather than saving… The government is wise to regulate it. Yes China needs more consumption – but not to the extent that people are buying tv’s and paying for dinner with credit. Which I think Mr. Hudson would espouse.

  138. Smith says:
    @Mefobills

    It’s a regulatory action? A literal slap in the hands?

    Jack Ma is still a billionaire, and Alibaba still remains private. In fact he got richer recently.

    The chinese billionaires list become longer each year, while the gap between a migrant worker to a billionaire has also become unsurmountable.

    No one cares what China allows, since China isn’t allowed to shut them down.

    • Replies: @anon
  139. Vidi says:
    @Ron Unz

    You’re just making yourself look foolish by discussing historical matters you’ve apparently never investigated.

    I am hardly a professional historian, but some history is so solidly established that even amateurs like me (or you) can know it. For example, the Nazis definitely invaded Poland, and not even you dispute this fact.

    Actually, I never suggested that the ethnic Germans killed were in Danzig but in other parts of Poland.

    You have a point, a minor one that does not affect my argument much.

    I think several hundred were killed, but the Nazi propaganda exaggerated that figure to many thousands (It’s been a while since I looked into the matter).

    You think? Have you any credible sources for the claim of “several hundred” ethnic Germans killed by Poland prior to the military action by the German nation? You are trying to excuse the Nazis for sparking the most lethal war of all time, so surely you have solid proof that the claim was not another of their many lies?

    Also, you seem not to be aware that Poland had a large and powerful army, and the foolish Polish military commanders believed they could defeat the Germans and perhaps even seize more of Germany, especially with the support of Britain and France. Indeed, a decade or so earlier Poland had strongly considered attacking and invading Germany, whose military was far weaker at the time.

    Every country, even Poland, has intemperate loudmouths. What they say is generally not credible.

    Your endless spouting of “Goebbels Big Lie” makes you look ignorant and ridiculous

    Goebbels was notorious for being proud of his Big Lies — and he was the Nazi mouthpiece. Therefore, I am justified in treating with suspicion anything the Nazis said.

    Since Iraq’s invasion on bogus WMD charges, the world is starting to treat any US statement the same way. Thus a fair warning to Americans: your credibility is a precious thing whose loss can hurt profoundly.

    Taiwan and China may never have signed a peace treaty, but have de facto been at peace for three generations, and similarly Taiwan has become de facto an independent country.

    Who has the right to say what is true de facto? As far as I’m concerned, only the United Nations Security Council has the right to make declarations that are binding on its member nations. And the UNSC has not declared the Chinese civil war done, nor has it stated that Taiwan is an independent country.

    As I’ve said, the problem with some Chinese people is that they blindly accept Chinese propaganda on everything relating to China and then by default blindly accept American/Western propaganda on almost everything else, which produces a very unrealistic view of the world.

    The problem with most Americans is that when their propaganda contradicts something China has said, they think their propaganda is true and China’s statements are lies — when the truth is usually the other way around. Once a liar, always a suspected liar. Ever since Iraq got neoconned, I think most of the world believes the US less and less.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  140. Ron Unz says:
    @Vidi

    I am hardly a professional historian, but some history is so solidly established that even amateurs like me (or you) can know it.

    Okay, have it your way. If you want to continue to blindly accept all sorts of ridiculous World War II propaganda that you learned in your television shows or your comic-books, there’s really not much I can do about it. If you do bother reading any of my articles, including the one I repeatedly linked, you’ll notice I cite very highly credible contemporaneous sources, including leading mainstream historians and journalists. Indeed, my entire American Pravda series might be worth investigating:

    https://www.unz.com/page/american-pravda-series/

    Once a liar, always a suspected liar. Ever since Iraq got neoconned, I think most of the world believes the US less and less.

    I agree entirely, and indeed that’s one of my main points. The people who made up the Iraqi WMD lies are pretty much the same sort of people who made up all those other silly World War II lies that you seem to cling to with such deep determination.

    • Replies: @d dan
  141. anon[389] • Disclaimer says:
    @Smith

    We’ll see.

    https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3111016/xi-jinping-has-pledged-double-size-chinas-economy-2035-can-he

    China’s rapid growth over the past four decades has lifted living standards, but coincided with a widening wealth gap

    President Xi Jinping says China must address the issue more seriously, indicating renewed focus over the next 15 years

    • Replies: @Smith
  142. Smith says:
    @anon

    Xi Jinping is a Hitler-like figure or Mao-like, not Stalin.

    Instead of wiping out the corporate class and nationalize industry, provide free healthcare and tuition, he goes on to execute some, punish some, and make some extra holidays. During the pandemic, he also refused to offer stimulus or monetary aid to the people.

    He wants to scare the corporate powers on the surface, but deep down he’s still indebted to them.

    This is why Vietnam isn’t scared of China, we know if China doesn’t take care of the billionaires, the billionaires will take care of China.

    But it is very important to crush their naval ambition, land BRI is fine and beneficial to central Asia and can in fact be used to counter China since roads are two-ways, but their naval fleet, as many chinese posters have already said, is served to protect “their trade routes” i.e. their empire. In short, their navy and ship building capacity must be smashed. It’s very important for ASEAN to learn from Iran and Russia, especially in missile tech, to accomplish such a task.

  143. anon[389] • Disclaimer says:

    He wants to scare the corporate powers on the surface, but deep down he’s still indebted to them.

    Nah, Mefobills is right about China in that China does not let “capital” arise above the polity.

    This is why Vietnam isn’t scared of China,

    Vietnam has a great future ahead. Despite all the rhetorics against China, the Vietnamese leaderships are pragmatic people. They pick their battles but also work closely with the Chinese. (e.g. the signing of RECP ) And the Vietnamese government used to – at least up until a few years ago – send their party members and bureaucrats to learn from the so-called Chinese Socialist model.

    • Agree: showmethereal
    • Replies: @Smith
  144. Smith says:
    @anon

    If China is actually about that, all capitals would be controlled by the state. The idea of having private capital then “reigning” them in is false action in the first place, just as nurturing tigers in our home.

    And no, Vietnam itself is still infected by the same Dengist madness that infected China since the 80s. Vietnam is doing great because its billionaire class is still small (we only have about 7 for now), but once they get more power like in China, we will be in great peril.

    We must do our best to not follow the road of US/China, but the USSR, where the state serves the people, and not corporate interests.

  145. d dan says:
    @Ron Unz

    “… all sorts of ridiculous World War II propaganda that you learned in your television shows or your comic-books…”

    The question I have here is why did Germany need to invade the WHOLE Poland? Why couldn’t they simply stop at Danzig? A quick browsing of your recommended articles doesn’t provide the answer.

    The analogy with Taiwan therefore does not sound logical. The more appropriate one would be the China-India border conflict – after claiming back the disputed lands (e.g. South Tibet), China continued marching into New Delhi and occupied the whole India. The allies then joined the war after the whole India was occupied. That seems to be the more appropriate analogy with the behavior of Nazi Germany.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Ron Unz
  146. Anonymous[721] • Disclaimer says:
    @d dan

    Just stop embarrassing yourselves. It’s beyond obvious you’re all a group of paid Chinese shills who have a specific script you can’t deviate off of beyond a certain point.

  147. Ron Unz says:
    @d dan

    The question I have here is why did Germany need to invade the WHOLE Poland? Why couldn’t they simply stop at Danzig?

    Well, after Poland was defeated, the Germans tried to make peace with the British and French, and offered to leave Poland, but the Allies stubbornly refused (after all, many of their leaders had been very eager for a war against Germany and had just tricked Poland into provoking it).

    However, I think the Germans did demand that they keep some of the Polish territory they’d conquered which Poland had previously seized from Germany. For 500 years those areas had been inhabited by intermingled Poles and Germans and had previously been controlled by Germany for about 200 years, but Poland had grabbed all of it after WWI, even places where Germans were in the majority. That’s why Germany was 99% German while Poland was less than 70% Polish.

    Again, I think China provides a good analogy. I’m no expert on Chinese minorities, but suppose China had been defeated in a major war, and some neighboring countries had seized several provinces containing mixed Han/non-Han populations like Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, and Yunnan. Once China regained its strength, it might want those back, and if it fought a victorious war, would probably demand that it regain them as part of the peace treaty.

    Incidentally, the Soviets invaded Poland just after the Germans, and after WWII, they ended up keeping *all* of the Polish territory they seized, even the parts with few Russians or Ukrainians, though admittedly much of it had been previously controlled by Czarist Russia.

    During their invasion, the Soviets captured the bulk of Poland’s entire officer corps as POWs, and in 1940 killed them all in the Katyn Forest Massacre, one of the worst war-time atrocities in modern history. When those facts came out a couple of years later, the leader of the Polish government in exile was extremely outraged and planned to make lots of trouble for the Allies. So the British assassinated him.

    • Replies: @d dan
  148. d dan says:
    @Ron Unz

    “Well, after Poland was defeated…”

    I am sorry Ron, you still did not explain to me why did Nazi Germans need to invade the WHOLE Poland in the first place, instead of stopping at ONLY what they were entitled to.

    “… offered to leave Poland…”

    But that is very different than not invading the whole Poland in the first place.

    “… but the Allies stubbornly refused”

    Frankly speaking, if I was an Allies leader, I would be very suspicious of Nazi by then, and probably would refuse too.

    “many of their [Allies] leaders had been very eager for a war against Germany”

    I am 100% convinced of that. But that argues it was even more important for Germany not to use excessive force than necessary. Their actions clearly marginalized the doves and emboldened the hawks in the Allies. Of course, I might be arguing too much from hindsight.

    “Once China regained its strength, it might want those back, and if it fought a victorious war, would probably demand that it regain them as part of the peace treaty.”

    Again, I disagree with that analogy. If China stopped at what they claimed to be their, than that was totally understandable. But if they went on to conquer the invading country, than that was hard to justify. The closest example might be when Han overthrew Manchus, they retook the whole empire. But that was because Manchus conquered the whole China FIRST. Furthermore, Manchus had threatened and attacked Han Chinese for a long time even before that.

    But did Poland attacked Nazis? Did Nazis felt threatened? Probably not. Maybe there was some military reasons (e.g. indefensible lines at Danzig) or some other strategic considerations that I missed. That is why I am seeking answers.

    “Katyn Forest Massacre”

    I saw a Chinese language video about this many decades ago. But I am not aware that the Polish exile government was assassinated by the British.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  149. Rubicon says:
    @Brás Cubas

    We are always weary of anything emanating from “Politico” They are very tight with the Elites that control ALL of the US/EU media.

    We recommend looking for an independent report on the issue. See what they say.

  150. Ron Unz says:
    @d dan

    I am sorry Ron, you still did not explain to me why did Nazi Germans need to invade the WHOLE Poland in the first place, instead of stopping at ONLY what they were entitled to…But that is very different than not invading the whole Poland in the first place.

    You probably don’t realize just how small most European countries are. For example, China is roughly the same size as all of Europe, which contains 50 different countries, with Poland just being one of them.

    European wars have been fought for hundreds of years, and the victorious side almost always tries to occupy the capital city and territory of the defeated power, using that leverage to then impose a peace agreement. The Germans couldn’t possibly just occupy a border strip of Poland and allow the Polish armies to withdraw into the rest of the country, still allied with the much more powerful British and French forces. Anyway, the Soviets had already conquered and occupied half of Poland, so it would be very odd if the victorious Germans didn’t occupy the other half.

    But I am not aware that the Polish exile government was assassinated by the British.

    It was just Polish Prime Minister Sikorski who was assassinated, not his whole government. The Americans later assassinated France’s leader after he allied with them, and the British had earlier tried to assassinate French leader Charles de Gaulle, but failed. The memoirs of Roosevelt’s son-in-law claimed that during WWII the US got so fed up with Chiang Kai-shek’s corruption and incompetence that they decided to assassinate him and his wife, but never went through with it. So assassinations were actually pretty common on the Allied side.

    • Replies: @Boomthorkell
    , @antibeast
  151. @Realist

    It is the U.S. has been Eating the FREE lunch from other countries who actually manufacturing real products, by printing US$ out of thin air!

  152. @Mefobills

    The United States = fascism

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  153. Anonymous[721] • Disclaimer says:
    @picture111

    Wrong. This is just idiocy spouted by low end thinkers who don’t want to own the postwar order’s logical conclusions and outcomes.

  154. @Ron Unz

    Even China in its rather limited border war with India still occupied a larger area, before withdrawing to the actual claims it wanted to enforce.

    Our war with Mexico is another good example of “why stop here?” Though we occupied less than we could have, we certainly got more than we set out to (I love to use that example as a tale of the possible dangers of immigration and a “how we got here now” with my, often Hispanic, students.)

    • Agree: Showmethereal
  155. I just want to reiterate this point as it gets lost in the heated arguments.

    The propaganda that USA is using against China now is the same as the ones used for Syria, Libya, Iraq, and Hitler Germany. It doesn’t matter what the truth is. Nazi Germany is synonymous with very, very bad things to the majority of the stupid public. By equating it to China, you are playing right into the propaganda points.

    What the Chinese anons seem to object to is saying Nazi Germany is the same as China without clarifying it is the similarity of how it is treated in the English media. The propaganda points are the same.

    MFObills did it before and I told him to stop, I told him it will just mislead anons. And now the Chinese anons have their pitchforks ready.

    About Ron’s points in how Germany was provoked into starting WWII. But how much would that accomplish by forcing China to do the same with Taiwan now or in the near future? China has nukes. It is no longer 1939. Even American war games concludes a Chinese victory of any conventional war with China in any sea near China.

    What do you all think would have happened with WWII if Hitler had a few hundred nukes?

    Unless USA is willing to go nuclear, there is nothing to fear or talked about. And I 99.999% doubt the moneyed elites of the USA wants to live in a nuclear bombed country. I certainly 1000% don’t, and I am not rich with not much to lose, just enough to get by comfortably.

    • Replies: @Chinaman
  156. https://asiatimes.com/2021/04/chinas-digital-yuan-displaces-the-dollar/

    When pepe brought up digital yuan, I didn’t think it was that big of a deal. I have now changed my mind. It is do or die for the USA. It does take a former banker to explain the situation fully.

    credit goes to silverlock for finding the link.

  157. antibeast says:
    @Ron Unz

    With all due respect to your kindness in allowing us to post our views on your website, I think the opposition of posters who object to the characterization of China as ‘Nazi’ has to do with their rightful assessment of the German Nazi regime as an odious regime. Despite the superficial similarities in economic policies between ‘Communist China’ and Nazi Germany, the political ideologies of both States have important differences, such as the fact that China does not promote ethno-nationalism which the German Nazis did by inventing the Nordicist doctrine of ‘Aryan’ supremacy. The political goal of the German Nazis is to invade, conquer and occupy the whole of Europe in order to create a Third Reich which would be populated by superior ‘Aryans’ after carrying out the genocide of the ‘Untermensch‘ such as the Slavs. This is proven by the horrific mistreatment of Slavs in the Soviet Red Army who were captured as POWs by the German Nazis.

    In terms of its ethno-nationalism, Imperial Japan has more in common with Nazi Germany, both of which ran their industrial economies for the express purpose of waging genocidal wars. While the economic policies of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan might have some superficial similarities with the State-led economic model of China, they differ in that China organizes its industrial economy around infrastructure and manufacturing industries for the express purpose of developing the country as well as improving the material standard of living and the social welfare of its people. The economic means might have some coincidental similarities but the political ends are completely different. In this sense, both Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany were ‘fascist’ while ‘Communist China’ is ‘socialist’.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @gT
  158. Ron Unz says:
    @antibeast

    The political goal of the German Nazis is to invade, conquer and occupy the whole of Europe in order to create a Third Reich which would be populated by superior ‘Aryans’ after carrying out the genocide of the ‘Untermensch‘ such as the Slavs.

    Look, I assume that you’re some overseas Chinese guy, so it’s obviously not your fault that you’re just blindly repeating ridiculous American wartime propaganda from 70-odd years ago, but that’s exactly what you’re doing. I assume you’re unaware that Nazi Germany was actually allied with several Slavic countries, whose armies were part of the Barbarossa invasion of the USSR. You’re also probably unaware that Hitler had been pretty friendly toward the Slavic Poles, who had also previously been his quasi-allies against the Soviets. And you’re probably unaware that a much larger theme of the American propaganda of that period was that Nazi Germany planned to invade and conquer all of Latin America…despite lacking any significant surface navy!

    On the other hand, I assume you’ve heard of that Falun Gong article claiming that about 15-odd years ago a top Chinese general declared that China planned to conquer the entire world by using bioweapons to exterminate all non-Chinese everyone, and that article has been widely republished on all sorts of other websites, in India and elsewhere. Doesn’t that claim sound a little familiar to you?

    And I’m certainly not claiming that there’s a perfect match between Communist China and Nazi Germany, just some areas of similarity. Indeed, prior to this particular comment-thread, I’m not sure I’d ever previously suggested it in any of my writings. I think it came up because both the Trump and Biden administrations have now officially declared China to be a “genocidal regime,” and that same statement is increasingly appearing in all our media outlets, including the NYT. So perhaps you could take your complaints over to them.

    Indeed, in many respects there’s probably a much closer historical correspondence between Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Putin, a statement I have previously made in several of my articles. For example, it looks like the West just tried to use Ukraine to provoke a war with Russia, but Putin’s forceful mobilization apparently scared off the Ukrainians.

    I realize you’re mostly focused on China issues and only very slightly interested in the history of World War II in Europe, but if you want to dilute your Hollywood movie version with somewhat more realistic accounts, you can read the article I linked above, or a couple of others:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-how-hitler-saved-the-allies/

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-secrets-of-military-intelligence/

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-jews-and-nazis/

    • Thanks: antibeast
    • Replies: @Not only wrathful
  159. Both are vague ideas being promoted by the same parasitic usual suspects, based on paper pushing, centralization, bloat and anything unrelated to providing real jobs, products and services.

    China is lagging behind the eastern first world and as terrible or worse as other surrounding countries, having huge problems with parasitism and sabotage both from private and public sector, and almost the same problems the west always had.

    It’s just yet another narrative of questionable persons without any data to back it up.

  160. LOL. Embrace your Nazi-past!

    The Stahlhelm (Nazi helmet) instantly made the malnourished Chinaman soldierlike. It is frequently ranked as one of the best industrial designs and manufactures of the 20th Century!

  161. @Maowasayali

    The ashkeNAZI jews always stage some crisis when SHTF to obfuscate their mafia, this was no different.

  162. Chinaman says:
    @Astuteobservor II

    Ron’s points in how Germany was provoked into starting WWII. But how much would that accomplish by forcing China to do the same with Taiwan now or in the near future? China has nukes. It is no longer 1939. Even American war games concludes a Chinese victory of any conventional war with China in any sea near China.

    I have been thinking about this a lot.

    China is in a passive position in which it is forced to take Taiwan if it declares independence or Taiwan allows the US to use it as a base. Thus, US is in complete control of China’s actions when it comes Taiwan.

    Globalisation and the economic integration that was built over the last 40 years have ensured US and China are so entwined today that an abrupt decoupling would be disastrous for both countries and the world ( more so the US). Heightened tensions in the SCS and Taiwan and the rabid warmongering would make anyone think twice about doing business in China ( and vice versa) and potentially accelerate that decoupling process.

    The goal is not a war that the US knows it cannot win but to decouple from China. To wean off the fentanyl and Walmart addiction. To blockade the malacca strait and strangle China’s growth. The only question is why it hasn’t happened already ? What most Americans don’t realise is that it is too far gone and it is China that is propping up America. Kind of like the owner of a company who realise he don’t know what is going on anymore and is beholden to a key employee. The owner is vexed between firing the guy or letting it slide since he can’t find a replacement. His only solution is to agitate the guy just to show him who’s the boss.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
  163. Smith says:
    @Vidi

    Yo, Vidi, you seem to at least know a lot about the history of the Communist Party of China, can you give your takes on the following questions?

    1. What is the cause behind the Cultural Revolution?

    2. What was the Red Guard that was propped up by Mao and then cleansed by Mao?

    3. Why Peng Dehuai, a chinese war hero, got publically humiliated and tortured to death?

    4. What really happened to Lin Biao? Was he a traitor?

    5. Why did the Cultural Revolution, which official goal was to reform the culture of chinese people end up giving rise of revolting leaders such as the Gang of Four (having Mao’s wife) and Deng Xiaopeng that shamelessly restore capitalism?

  164. gT says:
    @antibeast

    Yeah, and Imperial Japan had big heads then and mainland China has got big heads now, history repeats itself. As other commentators have said, China is National Socialist, with all the implications thereof. History repeats itself.

    Interesting that war was declared on National Socialist Germany by the Jews in the early 1930’s already, but war has not been declared on National Socialist China. Very suspicious! Jews support National Socialist China en-masse.

    • Replies: @antibeast
  165. @Chinaman

    No, that is a bad analogy.

    The relation is more like a supplier, manufacturing base for goods, China, vs the end user, consumers, USA.

    The fact that USA is doing everything it can to slow down China before finding a replacement supplier shows desperation. That means the elites in the USA thinks the window to stop China’s growth is rapidly closing, it is now or never. While the Chinese elites just continue full steam ahead with their development plans.

    I personally think it is two late by about 12 years. 2008 was the turning point for the Chinese elites I think.

    Regarding Taiwan, China can take it at anytime. I 100% doubt USA would start anything that would push China to take it in the next 10 to 20 years. Unless you think USA is willing to go nuclear, to use nukes, to be nuclear bombed over Taiwan. I think China actually has the initiative on this issue. As USA and China decouples more every single day, all the cons, negatives of a military take over of taiwan, ending the Chinese civil war once and for all, would be gone. When a decision is all positive with almost no downsides, how easy would that be right?

    • Replies: @Chinaman
  166. antibeast says:
    @gT

    You’re completely delusional. Reread my post where I specifically mentioned the differences between German Nazism and Chinese Socialism. Nazi Germany promoted its Nordicist ideology of pan-German ethno-nationalism based on the concept of the Germans as the Aryan Master Race — Übermensch — against the Roma, Jews and Slavs as the Untermensch which it sought to exterminate by waging genocidal wars against Europe.

    Ron Unz clarified that the German Nazis had Slavic and other Eastern European allies which they recruited from Estonia, Latvia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Croatia, Georgia, Ukraine and Russia. What he failed to mention was that the German Nazis also had Asian allies such as Arabs, Indians and Japanese. But the fact still remains that the political ideology of Nazi Germany envisioned creating a racially-pure Aryan Master Race to dominate and rule Europe much as like the political ideology of Imperial Japan which promoted the Japanese as the Yamato Master Race destined to dominate and rule Asia.

    The only country that closely resembles Nazi Germany today is the USA.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  167. Anonymous[721] • Disclaimer says:
    @antibeast

    The only country that closely resembles Nazi Germany today is the USA.

    I don’t know how deep in the weeds you have to be to believe this. Maybe you just have to be a paid Chinese shill who has a set script with certain parameters that can’t be crossed.

    • Replies: @antibeast
  168. anon[223] • Disclaimer says:

    Does anyone have a concise explanation for China’s Industrial Socialism policy might be? Because I feel like people don’t really know how to explain it or how it’s different from a Western System. I thought they were just a capitalistic society with some state owned enterprises for key things such as resources and electricity. Unlike America they don’t waste their productivity with foreign wars, and their IQ is quite high, but I didn’t really get the sense they have a novel system here. Having a meritocratic capitalistic system isn’t socialist, that’s just what the US had until 1970.

    Also, I have trouble disaggregating China’s success from its demographics, since aren’t the Chinese the poorest East Asian subgroup?

    • Replies: @antibeast
  169. @Ron Unz

    Notable how a virus came out of China, that totally disrupted the competition, and that ethnic Chinese have a high degree of genetic immunity to.

    Notable, but obviously not conclusive of anything.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  170. Ron Unz says:
    @Not only wrathful

    Notable how a virus came out of China, that totally disrupted the competition, and that ethnic Chinese have a high degree of genetic immunity to.

    No, that’s really not correct.

    (1) There seems zero evidence that Asians/Chinese are substantially less vulnerable to Covid-19 than whites of the same age, based upon the data from California and the rest of the US. This hypothesis came up last month in a long discussion thread, and was settled to my own satisfaction:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-covid-19-its-impact-and-origins-after-one-year/?showcomments#comment-4534949

    (2) Meanwhile, as I think I’ve demonstrated in several of my articles over the last year, there seems strong, perhaps even overwhelming evidence that the Covid-19 outbreak was actually an American biowarfare attack against China (and Iran):

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-covid-19-its-impact-and-origins-after-one-year/

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-our-coronavirus-catastrophe-as-biowarfare-blowback/

    • Disagree: Not only wrathful, Rdm
    • Replies: @Maowasayali
    , @Rdm
  171. antibeast says:
    @Anonymous

    The USA and Nazi Germany so closely resemble each other that they are like cousins. The German Nazis actually copied their political ideology of Aryan supremacy from the Anglo-American version of White supremacy which was based on the pseudo-scientific theories of Nordicism. Hitler’s dream of establishing the Third Reich was hardly original but was inspired by the Manifest Destiny of the Anglo-Americans who conquered the land now called America and exterminated the Indians. The only difference between the two lay in defining who the untermensch were: Indians vs Roma, Jews and Slavs.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  172. antibeast says:
    @anon

    Also, I have trouble disaggregating China’s success from its demographics, since aren’t the Chinese the poorest East Asian subgroup?

    The top ten percent of the population of the PRC has a higher standard of living with a better social quality of life than the entire population of Japan. The next twenty percent has a good standard of living with a good social quality of life. The rest are the low-income population which China is now trying to uplift so they can join the property-owning ‘middle-class’ in the top 30 percent of the population.

    • Replies: @anon
  173. anon[223] • Disclaimer says:
    @antibeast

    Interesting point, but I doubt it. China’s per capita gdp is either 10k or 14k, whether you go by nominal or PPP per capita, and Japan is 45k, so with a bell curve it would be difficult for 10% of China population to be richer than Japan.

    Additionally, China has a median IQ of 105, and 1.5 billion people. So the top ten% probably have an iq of like 120ish, which ofcourse is an unfavorable match up to the Japanese. So even if living standards are better for the top 10% of the Chinese, the point would still go to Japan.

    • Replies: @antibeast
    , @Chinaman
  174. antibeast says:
    @anon

    You’re talking about the GDP per capita of China which is $10K for the ENTIRE population of 1.4B. But I am talking about the TOP TEN PERCENT of the population which has a GDP per capita close to that of Japan at $40K. Those Chinese have a HIGHER standard of living (bigger space, more houses, foreign travel) and a BETTER social quality of life (family, friends, leisure) than the Japanese salaryman. Remember that the TOP TEN PERCENT of the population of China is 140M which is about the size of the ENTIRE population of Japan.

    The rich people in China are entrepreneurs who own their own businesses. I’ve met lots of tuhaos who don’t have any college diplomas but who’ve made their fortunes in manufacturing industries and property investments in the past three decades which saw China’s GDP rise by 4000% or FORTY times since 1990!!!

    To be sure, there are still lots of low-income people in the bottom 70% of the population as I’ve pointed out in my last post. What China wants to do is to uplift those bottom 70% to become part of the property-owning middle-class in the coming decades. The rate of wealth creation is happening at a faster rate now than in the past as China moves into higher value-added technology and services industries with projections that China will double its GDP by 2035. If the income distribution is skewed to the top ten percent of the population, then the rich Chinese will have a GDP per capita much higher than that of Japan by that time. This is the main reason why all the luxury brands in the world are rushing into China to tap into the Chinese luxury market which is set to become the largest in the world by 2025.

    • Agree: showmethereal
  175. @Maowasayali

    Just for the record – it was the KMT government that lost mainland China and fled to Taiwan – who received assistance from the Nazi’s. They also learned some things from Imperial Japan and the Soviet Union…. Then the United States. They were in bed with everyone.

  176. Anonymous[721] • Disclaimer says:
    @antibeast

    There is no “White supremacy” in the United States. Ron is 100% on the money about how bad a job your little clique of Chinese shills does here. Maybe it’s more visceral for you Asian males if you’re in America, since you may run in some similar suburban neighborhoods or universities with White men and you develop your mental complex there. It’s understandable, certainly.

    But in everywhere else that doesn’t involve Asian men getting laid in the US, there is no White supremacy at all. The entire society is organized at every level to make Whites a minority, to deny them employment, to deny them places in university, to deny them decent learning environments.

    I really think your little clique is projecting out from your own, uh, “inadequacies”.

    • LOL: antibeast
  177. @Ron Unz

    … I’ve demonstrated in several of my articles over the last year, there seems strong, perhaps even overwhelming evidence that the Covid-19 outbreak was actually an American biowarfare attack against China (and Iran):

    Now I know why you have been ‘un-personed’ by Google and banned on Facebook. This also explains why you haven’t been contacted by the pro-China vloggers for interviews; otherwise you would be a major celebrity in China today.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  178. @Anonymous

    The Chinese see Jews as “White”… with big noses. lol

  179. Chinaman says:
    @Astuteobservor II

    The fact that USA is doing everything it can to slow down China before finding a replacement supplier shows desperation.

    China is inreplaceable. There are only a few countries in the world with enough STEM human resource to build iPhones and computers. You need a population of Germany to have enough 130 IQ guys to create semiconductors. Because Asians have higher average IQ and a STEM bias, you can make do with 20 million people.

    Japan and Korea is too expensive. Only China have to scale and industrial base to satisfy global demand. It is also the largest market now.

    India have an average of IQ of 85. The rule is that if you mess up COVID, you can’t make consumer electronics or any form of high-end manufacturing.

    • Replies: @antibeast
  180. Chinaman says:
    @anon

    China is not as homogeneous as you think. Nordic whites have a higher IQ than Mediterranean whites. Average IQ of Shanghainese is 115. Uighurs and the other 50 odd minorities have a 85-90 IQ. Further West from Shanghai you go, lower the IQ. This is actually true all the way to Israel.

    • Replies: @antibeast
  181. antibeast says:
    @Chinaman

    He was confusing income distribution with IQ distribution which is patently false. The income distribution in China is skewed to the top ten percent of the population which makes their GDP per capita closer to that of the entire population of Japan. That’s the problem of socio-economic inequality that China is now trying to solve.

  182. @Anonymous

    “There is no “White supremacy” in the United States”

    Are you talking about in 2021- or overall?? “the yellow peril” never existed either right? when did the Chinese Exclusion Act end?
    Believe it or not – I don’t mind racists. Their hatred eats them alive – but at least I know where they stand. But people who pretend there is no racism?

    “The entire society is organized at every level to make Whites a minority, to deny them employment, to deny them places in university, to deny them decent learning environments”

    That is false… The war in the west is against whites… It is against men. From there it goes by shade. Western society seeks to boost all females above males – or to make males behave like females.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  183. antibeast says:
    @Chinaman

    Japan and South Korea are projected to lose 25% of their population in the next 30 years while their technical workforce is projected to decline by half as their population ages. Same case with Taiwan. China is expected to supply the shortfall of STEM workers for the tech industries in East Asia which would likely migrate to China.

  184. antibeast says:
    @Anonymous

    Sorry but I don’t know what you’re talking about and I don’t think you know what I am talking about either. Now, be a good boy and stop watching too much gay porn, OK?

  185. Anonymous[416] • Disclaimer says:
    @showmethereal

    If we had a White supremacist society, the Chinese Exclusion Act — which is noble, right, just, and desirable — would still be in effect. We live under an anti-White occupation regime. It is the job of dusky dimwits like you to play dumb about it here.

    • LOL: showmethereal
    • Replies: @showmethereal
  186. If we had a White supremacist society, the Chinese Exclusion Act — which is noble, right, just, and desirable — would still be in effect. We live under an anti-White occupation regime. It is the job of dusky dimwits like you to play dumb about it here.

    Indeed, in North America, you live under an occupation regime but the occupiers are whites, who are, in fact, Europeans!!!

    Shouldn’t “anti-white”, therefore, be “noble, right, just, and desirable” then?!!!

    And I want to say it again: The whites have this very, very funny “what belong to them belong to them and what belong to others ALSO belong to them” mentality!!!

    “dusky dimwits like you” simply refuse to see the obvious truth.

    Enjoy:

    The next to go?

    https://www.gettyimages.hk/%E5%9C%96%E7%89%87/mt-rushmore-national-monument?phrase=mt%20rushmore%20national%20monument&sort=mostpopular

  187. @Anonymous

    “If we had a White supremacist society, the Chinese Exclusion Act — which is noble, right, just, and desirable — would still be in effect”

    Well the Act was only rescinded when pressured by the KMT for their help with fighting Japan… Then when immigration was opened to Asians it was only really because European migration slowed. So do you think the US can make do with no immigrants at all? Or do you think Europeans can be enticed to migrate to the US again? That might be a problem since birth rates for white Europeans is very low…

    But hey – I don’t mind people like you. It’s the phony pretend ones that I don’t like. Feel free to send all Chinese back. Do you want to send back the Indians too? Or just the Chinese? Just the Chinese is a good chunk of the US tech force. Sending back the Indians too though would pretty much decimate Silicon Valley. Who will you get to replace them? Or you don’t care as long as the US is white again??

    Then what happens with the feminist movement? That is the real problem – but I see you can’t acknowledge that…

  188. Anonymous[721] • Disclaimer says:
    @showmethereal

    Or you don’t care as long as the US is white again??

    Correct. WOGS OUT.

    • LOL: showmethereal
  189. Rdm says:
    @Ron Unz

    For all the theory you put forward, Ron.

    Election rigged and cheated? You sure did a comprehensive study and I dare say it will stand the test of time. I agreed with that. Virus planted by American athletes? I passed this theory.

    • Replies: @Not only wrathful
  190. @showmethereal

    Judging by the names on much research that takes place in the USA, expelling Chinese would further weaken US technology and science.

    • Replies: @Malla
    , @showmethereal
  191. @Maowasayali

    What Unz said was immediately apparent. China hit by a virus, after numerous other bio-warfare attacks in recent years ie African Swine Fever and several avian ‘flus, decimating fowl numbers. At New Year, in Wuhan, the transport hub. The USA with the vastest bio-warfare establishment on Earth, and active programs working with coronaviruses. The ‘Gain of Function’ research in coronaviruses, ‘halted’, allegedly, in 2014, recommenced by order of ReichsKommander Pompeo in 2017. Then Iran hit, and a tsunami of filthy lies by the Western fakestream media little Streichers. QED.

  192. @Rdm

    It was funny. The “US athletes did it” crowd were all “but look how poorly the US team did” by way of “proof”; not bothering to check if the US did just as poorly at previous competitions, Dunning-Kruger times 10,000!

  193. Malla says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    And thus would weaken the USA. And how would that be a bad thing? A weakened USA would be able to bully the World much less.

  194. Malla says:
    @showmethereal

    Just the Chinese is a good chunk of the US tech force. Sending back the Indians too though would pretty much decimate Silicon Valley.

    Wouldn’t that be a good thing? You among many prat all the time about American Imperialism, would the decimation of Silicon Valley not make the USA weaker? This would mean, Silicon valley would move to Asia. Returning Indians would lead to the growth of Silicon valley in India and would weaken Imperialism America.

    • Replies: @showmethereal
    , @antibeast
  195. @Malla

    Well see I am not against the US being powerful… I am against domination of others. When it relates to science – the world is better when there is collaboration. I like to see all nations and people’s to be prosperous. Of course – not all nations have the capabilities and capacity as others. But nations should work together for the betterment of all humanity. Doesn’t mean everyone has to be friends and live among each other if they choose not to…
    From what I have read – many Indian entrepreneurs are starting to go back. Is that not correct? Not as much as Chinese – but enough. I think it would be a good thing for Indians. Why have to migrate for opportunities? All countries should have their opportunities for their citizens to prosper at home.
    My point to the guy above was simply that if he wants a white only nation – he would lose a huge part of the tech force. He said he doesn’t care… So hey – fine by me.
    My point is always the hypocrisy. Don’t import millions of people you don’t like as slaves and then complain their descendants don’t contribute to society. If the US wants to ban all immigration that’s perfectly fine though. Banning certain groups and races would be an evil. That’s why I asked him to specify if he only wanted to ban Chinese or including Indians. Since he said all – I honestly have no problem with his viewpoint. I don’t think he understands what would happen….

    • Replies: @Malla
  196. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    True indeed… But that’s on him… I wonder if he wants to ban the Chinese Americans that help the US win the Math Olympiad too – LOL. Again – I don’t mind his type. It’s the hypocrites I don’t like.

  197. antibeast says:
    @Malla

    Asia’s VC funding has almost reached parity with North America, as shown in the graph below:

    Methinks a massive reverse-migration from Silicon Valley to Asia is currently underway as anti-Asian hate crimes and anti-immigrant sentiments become endemic in the USA. Asians better start fleeing the burning house on fire unless they want get caught in the coming firestorm that will engulf the USA.

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  198. Malla says:
    @showmethereal

    Well see I am not against the US being powerful

    Ya right, I will believe you.

    Well see I am not against the US being powerful… I am against domination of others.

    If the USA becomes less powerful its ability to dominate others go down as well. And as diversity increases further, the USA would be forced at times to interfere further in global affairs. Because via votebanks and lobbies, immigrant groups would try to steer Western countries in the direction they want. For example when the Sri Lankan war on the LTTE came to a completion, Tamil groups in the UK made noise and using vote politics, noise and lobby forced the British government to interfere in Sti Lankan affairs on the Tamil issue. Sri Lanka responded that such interference reeks of colonialism. So we see multiculturalism actually encouraging colonialism. Just like the Jewish lobby leads to American and Western interference in the Middle East.
    Similarly Punjabis living in Canada because of their voting power as well as lobbying, forced the Canadian Government to interfere in the latest farmer protests in India. For India, this was blatant interference in internal affairs by a foreign government. Justin Trudeau was stuck in between an arrogant Indian Government and the Punjabi community back in Canada.

    Is that not correct?

    Not sure about that.

    My point to the guy above was simply that if he wants a white only nation – he would lose a huge part of the tech force.

    Would China lose by being a Chinese (Han plus minority) only nation? Does India lose by being an Indian only nation? Does Nigeria lose by being an Nigeria only nation? If White America do lose workforce,they would have to train locals to take up those jobs.

    Don’t import millions of people you don’t like as slaves and then complain their descendants don’t contribute to society.

    Slaves? you talking about blacks? Those decisions were taken hundreds of years ago by a tiny minority of Whites in the South. Most Whites did not own slaves, Whites who migrated later after Slavery was banned had nothing to do with Slavery. native Americans owned black slaves, blacks owned black slaves, there were even White slaves. The whole topic is complicated.

    Banning certain groups and races would be an evil.

    How so? Many countries do not give citizenship to people of other races.

    I don’t think he understands what would happen….

    He understands very well, The USA would become more self sufficient and thrive. Lot of problems would disappear. However Chinese and other East Asians are not a big problem if you ask me and most White Nationalists rarely talk about East Asians much for being problematic. Maybe they would want to kick out East Asians too but that would be very down in their lists of expulsions, probably the last in the list.

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  199. @antibeast

    Also of note is those comparisons are almost always in US dollars. We know a US dollar goes further in Asia than it does in the US.

    • Replies: @antibeast
  200. @Malla

    “He understands very well, The USA would become more self sufficient and thrive. Lot of problems would disappear. However Chinese and other East Asians are not a big problem if you ask me and most White Nationalists rarely talk about East Asians much for being problematic. Maybe they would want to kick out East Asians too but that would be very down in their lists of expulsions, probably the last in the list.”

    His original reply to me was because he said he wished the Chinese Exclusion Act was still in effect as it was in the past. In those days there was no real Asian population in the US yet. So I wanted him to clarify.
    I’m not sure what is stopping whites from being in STEM fields now… But hey – if he feels that local whites could do the research and tech/health jobs of the Chinese and Indians and replace all the Filipino (and Caribbean) nurses – then fine. I just don’t see it being possible – but hey… If there are enough people like him then they can vote in Congress and stop all non white migration (Europeans stopped migrating in large numbers to the US decades ago)… Not sure how he will increase the birth rates of white Americans either since it is below replacement rate (like in much of Europe). China has that issue too – which is why it is pushing even harder than Japan at automation.

  201. antibeast says:
    @showmethereal

    Also of note is those comparisons are almost always in US dollars. We know a US dollar goes further in Asia than it does in the US.

    Silicon Valley startups outsource most of their software development, product manufacturing and customer service functions to Asia. That means much of their VC funding also flow to Asia while their top management, marketing and engineering teams remain in the USA. That’s only because the USA is their biggest market for their technology, products or services which is no longer the case for emerging industries such as AI, 5G, electric vehicles, fintech, e-commerce, robotics, etc. where the biggest market is China.

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 have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Michael Hudson Comments via RSS