How Communist is China ?

We don’t want even one politically unqualified person sneaking into the Party, fishing for personal gain. Xi Jinping.

A billion Chinese have applied for membership in the Communist Party of China since 2001. 907 million of them were rejected, mostly on moral grounds. It seems that most Chinese adults would take the Party oath, to endure the people’s ordeals first and enjoy their fruits last[1], subject themselves to constant scrutiny, and be held to higher ethical and legal standards than non-members. Adultery is cause for dismissal. Rape is cause for execution. Nonetheless, ninety-four million members are honoring their oath pretty well.

Party People

Founded in 1921, the CPC became the ruling party in 1949 after 300,000 members gave their lives in the war. Membership rose from 4.5 million to 94 million today, or ten percent of the adult population. Membership is prestigious, as I saw while wandering Shenzhen with a French Communist. He had only to produce his Party card to draw an admiring throng, yet members see little financial benefit:

We estimate the returns to membership of the Communist Party of China using unique twin data we collected from China. Our OLS estimate shows a Party premium of 10%, but the within-twin-pair estimate becomes zero. One interpretation is that the OLS premium is due to omitted ability and family background. This interpretation suggests that Party members fare well not because of their political status but because of the superior ability that made them Party members. The estimates are also consistent with another interpretation that Party membership not only has its own effect but also has an external effect on siblings.

Twenty-eight percent of members are farmers, herders, and fishermen, and ethnic minorities are overrepresented but, because membership involves much volunteer work, only twenty-five percent are women. Their average age is thirty years.

The Party’s organizational skills are legendary. When Covid-19 broke out in Wuhan, a million local members were called to duty and forty-eight thousand more–mostly medical specialists–were flown in to contain the virus.

After a Shanghai high-rise fire killed fifty-eight people in 2010, Party volunteers coordinated twenty-five fire stations, a hundred fire trucks, and a thousand firefighters along with police, hospitals, finance, insurance, housing, donations, counseling, criminal investigators, and schools. Forty-eight hours later, insurers compensated families for property losses and wrote $250,000 checks for each death. Ten days later, Shanghai mayor Han Zheng confessed, “Our poor supervision of the construction industry caused the fire”. He fired or demoted thirty officials, and indicted twenty-two, most of whom went to prison–two for sixteen years–and implemented new building codes. The contrast with Grenfell Tower–still under litigation–is stark.

Structurally Communist?

I have appended my comments to Marx and Engels’ ten-point test, from their Communist Manifesto:

  1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. Land reform was completed in 1953. All land is owned in common. 98% of people own their homes.
  2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. Individual Income Tax runs from 3% – 45%, rates that will likely remain unchanged until a proposed property tax (currently meeting stiff resistance) becomes law.
  3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. There is no inheritance tax but, once a property tax is legislated, an inheritance tax might follow. Thanks to universal home ownership, the nation’s wealth Gini coefficient is low.
  4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. This was accomplished by 1960. Beijing is now the preferred domicile for most billionaires and most foreign investors.
  5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. Mao founded the world’s richest central bank, the People’s Bank of China. China’s Big Four retail banks are the world’s largest and most valuable.
  6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. China’s government-owned media are the most trusted on earth.
  7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of wastelands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. Soil improvement has been ongoing for seventy years and crop yields continue climbing steadily.
  8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. Used effectively in the early years, this has been phased out in favor of mechanised agriculture.
  9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the countryThe combination of agriculture and manufacturing was successfully implemented during the Cultural Revolution and the dispersion of manufacturing is still prioritized. Urban hukou are issued to those who want them to redistribute the population.
  10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c. The OECD says, “China’s PISA test results showed the resilience of pupils to succeed despite tough backgrounds – and the high levels of equity between rich and poor pupils”.

Control of the Means of Production

Control of the means of production is through collective ownership of all banks, insurance companies, media, health providers, and defense industries, ensuring that they act in concert, for the general good. There are now more hungry children, drug addicts, suicides and executions, more homeless, poor, and imprisoned people in America than in China

The Empire Strikes Back: China Back in Afghanistan

If you read the North American and European press, you will get the impression that the Chinese have, geopolitically, reached their westernmost geographical limit in offering themselves as the new patrons of Afghanistan.  It’s a bold strike against China’s NATO competitors, who have left, or who have been driven out of  Afghanistan by the Taliban.  And so, China is making the new government of Taliban rulers in Afghanistan its tributary, or client state.

The Taliban do not have money and look to the Chinese for aid and investment because the only shrewd and right thing the U.S. government did before its panicked retreat from Afghanistan was to ensure that the gold of Afghanistan and its currency reserves were safely in a vault in or around New York City.  From these funds, no doubt, the Biden administration is now offering its first sixty-four million dollars of “development assistance,” or perhaps ransom money, to that self-declared Islamic dictatorship.  We can be sure that the Taliban will use these funds to empower women and protect ethnic minorities.

Despite the hybrid and contorted Marxism of today’s ruling Communist Party of China, the Chinese and their leaders are a country and people with a long historical memory, at least 2,500 years of it.  It is common Chinese practice to look at the present through the lens of the past.  And so, Chinese people are well aware that they once ruled or at least lorded it over Afghanistan, for at least about one hundred years.

This was during the period of the Tang Dynasty, whose imperial rulers of the Tang Empire (618–907) controlled a landmass that began in the Pacific and reached the Hindu Kush in the west.  During that time, what is today Afghanistan, Pakistan, and much of Northern India was part of a series of sophisticated, urbane, and literate Buddhist cultures.

At the time, the area was a world center of Buddhist scholarship and teaching.  Its artisans and sculptors were the creators of the massive Buddhist rock sculptures of the Bamiyan valley in Afghanistan, which were blown up by the iconoclastic Afghan Taliban on the 21st of February, 2001.

During the seventh century A.D., a traveling monk from China knew that the texts and the teaching of Buddhism were purer in the Afghan and Indian monasteries, and so Chinese Buddhist monk and pilgrim Xuan Zang (602–664) walked from China to Afghanistan, India, and back, after having spent years studying Sanskrit and collecting Buddhist manuscripts, which he then brought back to China.

The emperor of China at the time welcomed him home, subsidized his translation work, rewarded him highly, and thus triggered yet another and one of the more substantial waves of Buddhist influence on the Chinese people, an imported religion that has waxed and waned there until the present day.

All literate Chinese know about Xuan Zang, and he is still a national hero.  So, from a Chinese historical and political perspective, they are not replacing the Americans in today’s Afghanistan.  They actually feel that they are simply and justly re-asserting their manifest destiny in a land they once ruled, just before the rise of Islam destroyed every vestige of Buddhist civilization in and around the Hindu Kush.

During the sixteen, seventeen, and eighteen hundreds, the Chinese empire began to shrink.  It suffered losses against the Russians to the west and northeast and to the Western Europeans, who occupied its eastern coast, where they created independent enclaves.

Nevertheless, in the late nineteenth century, the Chinese empire reasserted itself in eastern central Asia and conquered the Uighur Turkish-speaking Muslims who have dominated the Sinkiang region for centuries.  This became China’s unruly “Muslim wild west” and is a sore spot in the national consciousness and the foreign policy establishment in China.Read More

The Uighurs of Sinkiang have witnessed the successful disengagement from the Soviet Union (since the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991) of most Central Asian peoples and republics, who comprise Turkish- and Persian-speaking Muslim townspeople, farmers, and nomads.  They reasserted their Muslim identities and religious practices after the enforcement of Russian-dominated Marxist secular governments during the previous seventy years (that is, from the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 until the fall of the Soviet Union in 1990).

They are therefore sympathetic to their ethnic, linguistic, and religious Turkish-speaking cousins and co-religionists, the Uighurs of Sinkiang, who would like to break away from China and create an additional Central Asian Turkish-speaking state based on Islam.  At least four hundred thousand Uighurs have fled persecution in Sinkiang and have crossed over to neighbouring Kazakhstan so that they can live more freely.  The Chinese will have none of this.

The first thing the Chinese have done is drown the Turkish-speaking Uighur Muslims with secular, Christian, Buddhist, Confucian, or Taoist Chinese Han immigrants, which is the dominant Chinese ethnic group.  After the communist revolution in China in 1948, one year later, the Han population of Sinkiang numbered 300,000 people.  By the year 2000, of the 7.8 million people living in Sinkiang, more than 40% were Han Chinese, an increase of 2,200% over a mere half-century.

The local Uighurs have been treated to a carrot-and-stick approach by their Chinese overlords: increased investment in infrastructure, linking Sinkiang with its “Silk Road” initiative, alongside merciless persecution of any political resistance to Chinese domination.

In 2018, Human Rights Watch published a report on Chinese behavior in Sinkiang.  This paragraph distills the report:

Inside political education camps, detainees are forced to learn Mandarin Chinese, sing praises of the Chinese Communist Party, and memorize rules applicable primarily to Turkic Muslims. Those outside the camps are required to attend weekly, or even daily, Chinese flag-raising ceremonies, political indoctrination meetings, and at times Mandarin classes. Detainees are told they may not be allowed to leave the camps unless they have learned over 1,000 Chinese characters or are otherwise deemed to have become loyal Chinese subjects; Turkic Muslims living outside are subjected to movement restrictions ranging from house arrest, to being barred from leaving their locales, to being prevented from leaving the country. Inside, people are punished for peacefully practicing religion; outside, the government’s religious restrictions are so stringent that it has effectively outlawed Islam. Inside, people are closely watched by guards and are barred from contacting their families and friends. Those living in their homes are watched by their neighbors, officials, and tech-enabled mass surveillance systems, and are not allowed to contact those in foreign countries.

At the same time, the Chinese have established working groups such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which comprise China and most of the newly independent states of Central Asia.  The SCO has become one vehicle for aid, investment, diplomacy, and security, linking China’s stand against radical Islam in central Asia with its anti-terror metaphor for its suppression of the Uighurs.  This has, for example, included the Chinese National Petroleum company gaining ownership of  60% of gas-producing companies like Aktobemunaygaz in Kazakhstan.

Simply put, China is building roads, creating air links, flooding the central Asian markets with Chinese manufactured goods, and creating a security and intelligence network that ensures that its Central Asian neighbors will not challenge it in Sinkiang.  This is close to the kind of thinking of the Tang emperors who through trade (gifts/bribes), luxury goods, and military domination ensured Han dominance of Central Asia for a period.

The Chinese have done and continue to do all they can to offset the influence that NATO has created with the central Asian republics, slowly bringing them within the NATO umbrella, a policy until recently pushed most aggressively by the U.S., while also keeping Russia at bay, which conquered Central Asia during the 19th century until driven out in the 1990s after the fall of the Soviet Union.

And so, we must conclude that despite the new Afghanistan’s radical Islamic agenda, it is unlikely that the Taliban will engage in a jihad to free their “Muslim brothers in Sinkiang.”  Like the rest of their “brothers” in the Islamic world, they will gladly ignore the destruction of the Uyghur people and nation so that they may feather their own nests and increase their share in the China-driven Silk Road initiative.

The Chinese, who have been the off-and-on imperialists of Central Asia for centuries, will know how to insulate themselves from the Taliban through their Central Asian quid pro quo.

The Chinese Communist Party cadres are laughing all the way to the mineral riches of Afghanistan, which they will exploit mercilessly while sticking it to Russia and the West.  The empire strikes back.

Geoffrey Clarfield, American Thinker

| Print| Email


American Thinker on Facebook
American Thinker on Twitter
American Thinker on MeWe

Recent Articles

Blog Posts

Monthly Archives

nullAbout Us | Contact | Privacy Policy | RSS Syndication © American Thinker 2021

A Military Solution to a Commercial Problem

In pondering Washington’s new toy, a cold war against China, one sees a pattern. China’s approach to influence and prosperity is commercial and longsighted. This does not mean that the Chinese are warm and fuzzy, only intelligent. They advance their interests while turning a profit, which wars don’t. China invests heavily in the infrastructure, both physical and educational, that makes for current and future competitiveness. They are fast, agile, innovative, and imperfectly scrupulous. They seek trade agreements: The Comprehensive Agreement on Investment with Europe, The RCEP, Regional comprehensive Economic Partnership, the CPEC, China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, the huge Iran deal, the development with Russia of the NSR, the Northern Sea Route. They seem good at it, China now being the largest trading partner of something like 165 countries.

Washington’s approach is military, coercive, shortsighted, and commercially dimwitted. It forms military alliances: the Quad in the Indian Ocean, with Japan against China, puts missiles in South Korea, pushes Europe to buy more American weaponry, sends naval forces to the Indian Ocean, Taiwan Strait, South China Sea, Black Sea, and Persian Gulf to intimidate, without much success, China, Russia, and Iran. It wants to get the Ukraine and Georgia into NATO to threaten Russia. It makes as much sense as lug nuts on a birthday cake.

China’s major capital expenditures, as gleaned as best I can from pubs covering these: highways, dams, bridges, very-high-voltage power lines, airports, rail, new high-tech 360 mph rail, five-g implementation, reactors, and semiconductor catchup.

America’s major capital expenditures: the B-21, F-35, Virginia-class subs, , Ford-class aircraft carriers, SSN (x) attack submarine. Biden says he will build infrastructure but, if history is a guide, he will pander to the woke, fight systemic racism, promote LBGQXYZ, become mired in congressional infighting, and the whole thing will devolve into pork. Want to bet?

What are these weapons for? The B-21 is an intercontinental nuclear bomber. What does one do with intercontinental nuclear bombers? Engage in intercontinental nuclear war. Are we sure this is a good idea? There will be no such war unless America starts it. China isn’t going to since (a) its approach to power and influence is commercial, which is working well, and (b) America has so many, many nuclear weapons of all sorts that China would be obliterated. If the US launched a first strike, the bombers would get there hours after the war was over. What would be the point?

The point is to funnel vast amounts of money into a bloated, running-on-autopilot military business so large that it can’t be reduced or controlled. All of this send-money PR assumes that China thinks it needs a nuclear holocaust. Who can doubt it?

It is impossible even to leave the military budget as it is, much less reduce it.

Military industry is so pervasive, providing so many jobs in so many states with so many lobbyists, that the President and his party cannot control it

America sends troops (Africom, Africa Command) and builds drone bases. China builds rail lines and buys up resources. Did we say something about a pattern?

What is a Ford-class carrier good for? The Fords are versatile ships, having a three-fold purpose: Funneling lots of money into military industry, killing defenseless peasants, and sticking the Pentagon’s tongue out at China. Killing peasants and soldiers in third-rate armies of bedraggled third-world countries is what the American military does. Think Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Somalia. Getting into big wars with real countries is no longer practical despite the opportunities for profits because big countries depend on each other too much commercially. Even killing peasants begins to lose cache, as witness the comic opera defeat in Afghanistan..

A list of examples from Ohio. When military industry wants to produce a new weapon, it makes sure that components are produced in as many states as possible. But some things should be obvious. A big-ticket carrier creates a huge number of jobs for years at Newport News as well as jobs all over America for parts. When the carrier is completed and sails off to kill its peasants, the town goes into depression and stockholders lose dividends. The Pentagon then discovers an urgent need for another carrier. Congress shares this sense of urgency. Surprise, surprise.

What do I mean in saying that America is “short-sighted”? Try this:

  • Oregon Governor Kate Brown quietly signed a bill last month that removed the requirement for graduating high school children in the state to be proficient in reading, writing, and math, in an effort to aid “students of color.”

Wowee, that must terrify them over in China’s engineering departments, where students are years ahead of American in mathematics. This sort of thing goes on across America.

Number of Chinese overseas military bases: 1 (Djibouti) American: Hundreds. Number of Chinese military conflicts: One, a minor border clash with India. American: You know the list as well as I do, with Iran perhaps being groomed for the next war. Which country spends more on the foregoing? What has America gained?

This is long and kind of techy but makes the point that China is leaving the US far behind in five-g. While many think of Five-G as being for use in smart phones, this is actually of negligible importance. Where it counts is in industry, robotics, smart cities, mining with nobody underground, on and on. The United States, unable to compete with Huawei, consigned itself to primitivism by excluding the Chinese. Then it failed in its attempt to prevent China from rolling out five-g within its own borders. So much for bringing manufacturing back to America.

And whose fault is this?

Here is a point worth noting. The Chinese have the engineers, the numbers and the focus to do pretty much anything. They do not always have the machinery. AI takes more brains than machinery.

  • CATL goes all in on next-gen sodium-ion EV batteries

CATL Goes All in on Sodium Ion Batteries

Not a game-changer, and other countries look at the same thing but, as so often, China is right up there with the other big boys.

  • “Last month, during high-level talks in Honolulu, the US Indo-Pacific Command and the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) agreed to build a new base in the island nation.” To contain China.

Military, military, military, military. The assumption in the Five Sided Wind Box seems to be that China is about to come roaring into the Pacific like the Japanese Imperial Naby in full flood, to conquer it. China is more likely to buy it.

  • Associated Press: “The politically sensitive goods deficit with China rose to $27.8 billion in June, up 5.8% from the May level. So far this year, the goods deficit with China, the largest that the United States runs with any country, totals $158.5 billion, an increase of 19.2% compared to the same period in 2020.”

Some economists predict America’s first overall trade deficit of a trillion dollars.

“China’s state-owned Shanghai International Port Group (SIPG) grabbed the Haifa port contract in 2015 which allows it to operate the commercial shipping facility for 25 years.”

Commercial, commercial, commercial, commercial.

  • Moscow Bothered by ‘Uncontrolled, Unrestricted Expansion’ of US Military Biolab Network Near Russia

And here in Mexico, where I live, people swear they see Chinese electric scooters and mini-electric which, they also swear, can be bought online from Alibaba and such. Meanwhile the narcos get assault rifles from the US.

Chronicles of a wild life in biker bars and the fleshpots of Bangkok, of years of solo hitchhiking across America, of a Southern boyhood of drag racing in old wrecks and guns and beer, of Marine Corps boot camp and Moon’s strange church, of scuba diving the deep walls of the Caribbean and cave diving in Mexico, of life on staff at Soldier of Fortune magazine and nine years as police reporter for the Washington Times in the weird, sad, and often unbelievable urban Petri dishes of the big cities. Politically incorrect and evilly funny, Fred takes no prisoners. He skews with murderous wit things he doesn’t like, which are many: pols, talking heads, officious do-gooders. He has a soft spot for things he does like, such as dogs, drunks, bar girls, and ambulance crews, of all of which he has known many. His work has appeared in Playboy, Harper’s, the Washington Post magazine an op-ed pages, and such like stations of the literary cross.

George Soros’ Dream: to Turn China into a Neo-Liberal, Grabitation Opportunity

In a Financial Times op-ed, “Investors in Xi’s China face a rude awakening” (August 30, 2021), George Soros writes that Xi’s “crackdown on private enterprise shows he does not understand the market economy. … Xi Jinping, China’s leader, has collided with economic reality. His crackdown on private enterprise has been a significant drag on the economy.”

Translated out of Orwellian Doublethink, the “crackdown on private enterprise” means cutting back on what the classical economists called rent-seeking and unearned income. As for its supposed “drag on the economy,” Mr. Soros means the economy’s polarization concentrating wealth and income in the hands of the richest One Percent.

Soros lays out his plan for how U.S. retaliation may punish China by withholding U.S. funding of its companies (as if China cannot create its own credit) until China capitulates and imposes the kind of deregulation and de-taxation that Russia did after 1991. He warns that China will suffer depression by saving its economy along socialist lines and resisting U.S.-style privatization and its associated debt deflation.

Mr. Soros does recognize that China’s “most vulnerable sector is real estate, particularly housing. China has enjoyed an extended property boom over the past two decades, but that is now coming to an end. Evergrande, the largest real estate company, is over-indebted and in danger of default. This could cause a crash.” By that, he means a reduction of housing prices. That’s just what is needed in order to deter land becoming a speculative vehicle. I and others have urged a policy of land taxation in order to collect the land’s rising site value, so that it will not be pledged to banks for mortgage credit to further inflate china’s housing prices.

Warning about the economic consequences of China’s falling birth rate, Soros writes: “One of the reasons why middle-class families are unwilling to have more than one child is that they want to make sure that their children will have a bright future.” This is of course true of every advanced nation today. It is most extreme in the neoliberalized countries, e.g., the Baltics and Ukraine – Soros’s poster countries.

Soros gives his game away by stating that “Xi does not understand how markets operate.” What he means is that President Xi rejects rapacious rent-seeking, exploitative free-for-all, and shapes markets to serve overall prosperity for China’s 99 Percent. “As a consequence, the sell-off was allowed to go too far,” Soros continues. What he means is, too far to maintain the dominance of the One Percent. China is seeking to reverse economic polarization, not intensify it.

Soros claims that China’s socialist policies are hurting its objectives in the world. But what he really is complaining about is that it is hurting America’s neoliberal objectives for how it had hoped to make money for itself off China. This leads Soros to remind Western pension fund managers to “allocate their assets in ways that are closely aligned with the benchmarks against which their performance is measured.” But the tragedy of financializing pensions is that fund managers are rated on making money financially – in ways that hurt the industrial economy by promoting financial engineering instead of industrial engineering.

“Almost all of them claim that they factor environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) standards into their investment decisions,” Soros writes. At least, that’s what their public relations advisors advertise. Exxon claims to be cleaning up the environment by expanding offshore oil drilling in Guyana, etc. As for “social standards,” the neoliberal mantra is trickle-down economics: by making our stock prices rise, by stock buybacks and higher dividend payouts, we are helping wage-earners earn a pension, even though we are offshoring and de-industrializing the economy, de-unionizing it and “freeing” the economy from consumer and workplace protection laws.

Soros has a radical solution, which he suggests “should obviously apply to the performance benchmarks selected by pensions and other retirement portfolios: … The US Congress should pass a bipartisan bill explicitly requiring that asset managers invest only in companies where actual governance structures are both transparent and aligned with stakeholders.”

Wow. Such a bill would block Americans from investing in many American companies whose behavior is not at all aligned with stakeholders. What proportion: 50%? 75? More?

“If Congress were to enact these measures,” Soros concludes, “it would give the Securities and Exchange Commission the tools it needs to protect American investors, including those who are unaware of owning Chinese stocks and Chinese shell companies. That would also serve the interests of the US and the wider international community of democracies.” So Mr. Soros wants to block the United States from investing in China. He seems not to see that this is President Xi’s objective also: China doesn’t need U.S. dollars, and is in fact de-dollarizing.

George Soros is obviously upset that President Xi is not Boris Yeltsin, and that China is not following the kleptocracy dependency that warped Russia’s economy. Soros thought the ending of the Cold War would simply let him buy up the most lucrative rent-yielding assets, as he has aimed to do in the Baltics and Ukraine. China said “No,” so it is not deemed to be a “market economy,” Soros-style. It has not made its social organization marketable, and has avoided the financial dependency that makes “markets” a vehicle for U.S. control via sanctions and foreign buyouts

XI Puts on Mao Suit and Flies Many Jets in Honor of 100 Years of 中国共产党

It must be nice to live in a country where your leaders encourage you to be proud of your race and history.


China’s Mighty Dragon J-20 stealth fighter jets flew over Beijing’s historic landmark in their largest display yet – a show of might to commemorate the founding of the Communist Party 100 years ago.

Beijing showcased the power of its air force during centenary celebrations for the Communist Party of China (CPC) on Thursday. The 15-strong fighter jet fleet flew in three V-shaped formations, with five planes forming each arrow.

In an interview with the Sina news outlet, J-20 pilot Cao Cheng detailed the symbolism of the demonstration and explained how the fleet flew in uniform precision: “Each wedge team has five fighter jets organized into three squadrons … which symbolizes that the People’s Air Force is invincible and has invincible courage.”

He added that all the members of the People’s Liberation Army Air Force had practised tirelessly to pull off the feat.

The number of fighter jets that took part in the air show is unprecedented, the largest number having previously been five. Those aircraft had been taking part in the National Day military parade in 2019, which was also held in the Chinese capital.

And what a fleet!

The helicopters flying in the shape of “100” is also impressive.

Very lovely.

Much happiness for tender family affairs.

I think this issue of “Chinese communism” should be addressed at length, again. I’m not going to do that right now, because I’m exhausted.

But I will say: China is not a communist country, and the so-called “Chinese Communist Party” is not a communist party.

Mao Zedong tried to do communism.

Then he backed up on it. Then he died in 1976, and China became a beast of productivity.

China is the most futuristic country on earth. While American smart meters are turning off the air-conditioning in 100 degree weather in Texas and New York is sending notices to turn off the microwave so the power doesn’t go out, everyone in China is rich and living in luxury.

Elon Musk recently said it. I check his Twitter account obsessively and the memes are horrible (literally the worst I’ve ever seen), but he’s right about this.

You have to go to China to really understand that this is an ultra-futuristic society of tremendous wealth and prosperity, as well as national pride and sense of national identity.

Obviously, China could not have undergone the massive project of modernization that they’ve undergone since the death of Mao if it was a communist system. Communism, as we are aware, leads to mass starvation and general doom.

The Chinese system is called “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics.” The number one “Chinese characteristic” is “mercantilism,” which is basically the opposite of communism.

I doubt that even one in twenty Chinese people could explain to you any of the basic concepts of Marxist-Leninist theory. And they are well educated. The Chinese education system purposefully doesn’t teach about it, because everyone has a grandparent that has a horror story about the 1960s and the attempts at collectivization. This is not considered by the nation to be a definitive aspect of their society, but rather a weird experiment that went sideways.

As of right now, Xi Jinping is effectively the Emperor. There is really no difference between his role and the traditional role of the Emperor. He is following the Confucian ideal of “philosopher king,” even.

Every Chinese bookstore has books of his sayings on display, and every week he makes new philosophical statements about how you should love your family and be respectful to women and your co-workers.

The only relationship that China has to “communism” is some of the wholesome and cutesy aesthetics here and there.

Like this picture from the celebration:

(Note the lack of masks!)

But you say “what about the fact that it’s called the communist party????”

Well, actually, if you think it is called that, then you don’t understand the Chinese language.

It’s not really called that.

It is called: “中国共产党.”

Those are characters. Not letters and not really words. The entire structure of the language is totally different.

“中国” means “China” and “共产党” is translated as “communist party” in English. The word is “Gòngchǎndǎng.” That is “gong,” “chǎn” and “dǎng.” A direct translation, as it would be spoken in Chinese, would be “The Party of People Working Together to be Productive.” That is how it sounds in Chinese, and that is how people hear it in Chinese. In the Chinese mind, there is no reference to Marx, collectivization, abolition of property, or anything else that is associated with Marxist communism.

To give an example of how Chinese translations are manipulated – back in the 1950s up through the 1990s, the leader of China was called a “Chairman” in the English media. Then, when the West thought China was going to become a “democracy,” they all of a sudden changed the word to “President.” The word in Chinese, “主席,” remained the same. It means something like “the seat of the lord.”

But by changing the word from “Chairman” to “President” in the translated English media, it gave the impression that there was some massive political shift in China, that they had somehow rearranged their entire governmental system, and were no longer alien to us.

Now that China is an enemy again, I wouldn’t be surprised if they started calling Xi “Chairman” again. Of course, if they did that, people might ask if he’d changed his title, and then people would maybe start to figure out the way this translation issue is manipulated.

You should remember this fact every time you see one of these assholes on TV saying “CHINESE COMMUNISM.” They are purposefully trying to confuse you by dragging up imagery of boogiemen from the 20th century.

I hope that helps.

Andrew Anglin

The Vanishing Hong Kong…China’s Latest Casualty

Over the past nine months, China’s Communist Party rulers in Beijing have launched a wholesale transformation of nearly every aspect of life in this prosperous territory – in the schools, the courts, the civil service, the media, the elected legislature, and even the relatively powerless local neighborhood councils. Only the local business community has been largely spared – but not untouched – by the changes.

As a result, in less than a year, this once freewheeling city known for its frenetic energy, lively debates, rambunctious local media, and long tradition of street protests has become hardly recognizable. This longtime British colony which once embodied the perfect blend of East and West now resembles every other sprawling megacity on the Chinese mainland, marked by soaring skyscrapers and impressive infrastructure, but stifled by repression and fear.

The vehicle for Hong Kong’s rapid transformation is the new draconian national security law (“NSL”) imposed by Beijing and handed down last year. Hong Kong’s China-appointed local government was supposed to draft and implement its own version of the national security law immediately after the ’97 handover, but successive leaders repeatedly demurred in the face of intense local opposition.

Finally, Beijing’s leaders decided to step in and do it themselves. The proximate cause was a series of large-scale and often violent anti-government protests that erupted here in June 2019 and continued unabated for the next seven months, until the arrival of the coronavirus pandemic early last year brought a ban on all public gatherings.

The demonstrations were sparked when the city’s Beijing-appointed administrator, called “Chief Executive,” Carrie Lam, introduced an ill-conceived criminal extradition bill that would have allowed suspects arrested in Hong Kong to be shipped over the border to stand trial in China’s opaque and unjust legal system. In the face of government intransigence and increasingly brutal police tactics, the demonstrations soon morphed into a broader movement that began to challenge China’s sovereignty over Hong Kong.

The 2019 protests saw unprecedented scenes of masked, black-clad demonstrators armed with rocks, slingshots, Molotov cocktails, and even bows and arrows battling riot police who fired tens of thousands of rounds of tear gas, water from a spray cannon, rubber bullets, and live ammunition. High-end shopping malls, subway stations, university campuses, and even the upscale financial district of Central came to resemble a single fluid and shifting battle zone. Thousands were arrested under the charge of “rioting,” which carries a lengthy prison term.

At first, China’s Communist leaders tried to ignore the protests. In the early days, there was almost no mention of the riots made in the tightly controlled, heavily censored state-run media. When stories eventually did begin to appear, it was almost always to depict the demonstrators as a small band of “rioters.” But when protesters attacked the Beijing central government’s main office in Hong Kong and provocatively defaced the Chinese emblem with black paint, defiantly tossed the Chinese flag into the harbor, and began targeting China-affiliated banks and mainland-owned restaurants, authorities in Beijing decided enough was enough… And the result is the new NSL.

The national security law is actually somewhat a misnomer. The new law is much more an Internal Security Act of the kind commonly used in Britain’s other former colonies like Malaysia and Singapore, which is aimed at crushing internal dissent, not deterring an attack from abroad. China’s version of the law, imposed on Hong Kong with no local input or debate, defines four broad categories of offenses: terrorism, secession, subversion, and collusion with foreign forces. Those sweeping categories are left deliberately vague, meaning the NSL can proscribe virtually anything police, prosecutors, or the Chinese government wants it to.

Under the law, singing “Glory to Hong Kong,” the anthem of the 2019 protest movement, or chanting the movement’s slogan, “Liberate Hong Kong, Revolution of Our Time,” can now be deemed a national security offense. Carrying a banner, wearing a T-shirt, or posting a social media text advocating Hong Kong independence can lead to arrest and a lifetime prison sentence. Under the new law, inciting hatred against the local government, the Communist authorities in Beijing, or against the Hong Kong police is now a national security crime.

The law is so broadly written that even criticizing the NSL itself is a crime against national security.

Keith Richburg

America: An Appreciation

America, know there are countless people in the world who would gladly trade places with you.”

chose to be an American. What did you ever do, except for having been born?” —Ayn Rand

I was born under the flag of the People’s Republic of China, a country that remains under the absolute rule of the Chinese Communist Party to this day. I have very few memories of my early childhood in mainland China, save for a visit to the Forbidden City—a brief tourist stop when my family traveled to the American consulate in Beijing to apply for a visa.

While Deng Xiaoping’s economic reforms eliminated the worst economic collectivization from the Mao era and gradually opened China to the outside world, political and social freedom were never fully embraced. Nevertheless, the limited opening allowed my family the opportunity to explore options for a better life. In 1993, under the kind sponsorship of an American physician, my mother left for a research position in the United States with less than $200 in her pockets. My father and I followed her a few months later, and, from the moment we landed on American soil, we put down our roots in our new adopted country.

Like the countless waves of other immigrants who came before us, my family and I arrived as strangers in a new land, found freedom and opportunity, gradually assimilated into our adopted country, and eventually worked ourselves into the upper middle class. In a time when vast swaths of the population are losing faith if not outright rejecting American founding principles, history, and institutions, I wish to provide a counternarrative for my fellow citizens and international allies who still believe in the fundamental goodness of this country and its people. Let my family history and personal experiences living in America be that story.

As long as I can remember, I despised those who sought to dominate and coerce others, whether they be the playground bully, a frenzied mob, or a tyrannical government.

My childhood growing up in Ohio was relatively carefree (as long as I met the demanding academic standards set by my parents), and I learned as much as I could about American life. Star Wars: A New Hope was the first movie I can remember watching in English. It left me completely mesmerized with ideals of heroism, adventure, and epic battles between good and evil. As a total bookworm, I made the local library my second home and frequently maxed out the limit of books a kid’s library card could check out. Although I read widely across genres, I especially enjoyed reading about the accomplishments of great individuals. Whether they were mythical heroes of ancient Greece and Rome, the American Founding Fathers, brilliant scientists, trailblazing entrepreneurs, intrepid explorers, or our modern astronauts, I was awestruck by those who left their mark in history. If there was one common theme I learned from my reading, it is that anything is possible for free peoples with free minds and the courage to use their freedom.

There was never a single political awakening moment for me. A nerd at heart, I saw myself in the spirit of freethinking scientists like Richard Feynman, Charles Darwin, and Carl Sagan, all of whom pushed the boundaries of human knowledge, refuted superstition, displaced ignorance, and carried the beacon of the Enlightenment. Long before I ever learned the intricacies of the First Amendment, I treasured the values of free speechopen debate, and unfettered inquiry. (Becoming exposed to South Park in elementary school probably helped. My culturally-ignorant immigrant parents remained blissfully unaware.) I grew up in a world where all ideas—good, bad, and ugly—were freely available (my friends quickly introduced me to those ideas the adults wanted to censor or hide) and where everything was shared nonstop. It was an eye-opening experience for this young Chinese-American boy.

As long as I can remember, I despised those who sought to dominate and coerce others, whether they be the playground bully, a frenzied mob, or a tyrannical government. I knew from the examples of my early heroes that these were the enemies they fought. Even if I had never read a single page of F. A. Hayek, Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, and gained a deeper understanding and appreciation for free market economics and conservativelibertarian philosophy, as I did later in life, nothing could have stopped me from becoming a civil libertarian in the mold of Christopher Hitchens, Ira Glasser, and the old-guard ACLU.

As I grew up, my parents gradually revealed more details of their former destitute life in Maoist China, which made me grateful that I never had any experience remotely comparable here in the United States. For my parents—after starting life anew in a foreign country, establishing themselves as respected medical professionals, working their way into the upper middle-class, becoming naturalized citizens, and raising two healthy, successful children (my sister and me)—the American Dream was real as it can be.

My story is an extension of theirs. Many children of first-generation immigrants struggle with reconciling parallel lives in two worlds: the traditions and values from their ancestral homelands versus the liberal culture of America. It was not always easy, but I would like to think I have found the balance over the years. I accepted that my Chinese heritage and upbringing is a fundamental part of who I am, but I also fully embraced my identity as a full-blooded American and the limitless opportunities of this country.

This background, I believe, has provided me a unique perspective on the American political scene.

Although I hesitate to embrace political labels, I consider myself a classical liberal or libertarian and, above all, an individualist. Throughout my life, I never felt that I truly belonged to a single social clique, tribe, or political party. In the words of Rudyard Kipling, “The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you’ll be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.”

Kipling was right. Being one’s own man is a very difficult path to walk, but I am proud to say that I have kept my intellectual independence and integrity and still found acceptance and success in my professional and personal life. And this was only possible in the United States of America.

But this kind of freethinking and independence is being threatened by a new form of collectivism represented by social justice ideologyintersectionalityidentity politicscritical theory, and postmodernism. Many excellent commentaries have already identified the roots and core beliefs of these ideologies and movements. Their central tenets can be summarized as follows:

  • There is no “you” as an individual. Your identity is constructed by race, gender, and class.
  • You exist only as part of a collective group. These groups are in zero-sum conflict with each other.
  • There is no objective truth, only subjective interpretations and narratives. “Truth” is only a cover that allows dominant groups to exercise power over others.
  • Scientific knowledge and even science itself is a social construct.

In sum, this new collectivism rejects the foundational principles of the Enlightenment. It is not surprising, then, that most social justice activists are hostile towards free speech, due process, and the very concept of individual rights—exemplified in our current “cancel culture.”

There is a difference between “cancel culture” and honest criticism. Jonathan Rauch prepared a thoughtful guide distinguishing the two. The latter is about finding truth, moral persuasion, and, most importantly, an attitude of good faith. The former is distinguished by punitiveness and the goal to “make the errant suffer”:

“Canceling…seeks to organize and manipulate the social or media environment in order to isolate, deplatform or intimidate ideological opponents. It is about shaping the information battlefield, not seeking truth; and its intent—or at least its predictable outcome—is to coerce conformity and reduce the scope for forms of criticism that are not sanctioned by the prevailing consensus of some local majority.”

As early as 2015, when I first encountered social justice ideology for the first time, I was unnerved by its authoritarian undertones. Knowing the history of modern China and my family’s experiences, it was not the first time I saw the dangers and potential for tyranny when self-righteous egalitarian activists tear down institutions and run roughshod over individuals in the name of the greater good. More often than not, they proved themselves to be nothing more than humanitarians with guillotines. I cannot help but suspect people who cloak their lust for power and domination using the same rhetoric and rationales.

And I am not alone in this. As social justice ideology and its offshoots continue their long march into schools, universities (even STEM fields), corporations, professional societies, and now mainstream American life, I cannot help but notice that people who push back against groupthink and mob rule tend to be first-generation immigrants from former or current communist countries who are familiar with the collectivist tactics and propaganda from their native homelands.

Mobs invaded private neighborhoods and demanded home owners take down their American flags.

While most of this summer’s racial justice protests were peaceful, there were notable cases where activists went too far. Mobs invaded private neighborhoods and demanded home owners take down their American flags. In another high-profile incident, mobs surrounded innocent restaurant patrons and tried to force them to raise their hands in solidarity. However, what disturbed me the most were the ritual self-flagellations. Appalling videos showed white people kneeling to black organizers, confessing to racism, begging for forgiveness, and, in some cases, even washing  their feet. Similar behavior was observed in Democratic politicians—despite their actual records—who profess to be sympathetic to racial justice.

Knowing the sorry tales from my own family history, these degrading acts were eerily reminiscent of the struggle sessions from China’s Cultural Revolution. During that decade of nonstop chaos, ideologically-possessed mobs would surround victims and then verbally and physically abuse them (if not killing them outright) until they completely broke down and confessed to imaginary crimes.

These acts to coerce free human beings—to make them believe, say, and do things against their sincere conscience—crossed the line for me. Whether they take place in the United States, China, or any other country, these exercises of raw political power on the unwilling are flat-out wrong, no matter the cause or pretext.

Take it from a first-generation immigrant from a current communist regime: Forcing people to live a lie is a hallmark of tyranny. As a public service to our fellow citizens, immigrants like me have no choice but to speak out when we see the parallels. Free Americans and any self-respecting human being should resist participating in the Great Lie.  

Let me be clear: I am not blind or deaf to injustice, which existed historically and continues to exist in this country. There are deep, serious flaws with the American criminal justice system. For far too long, African Americans and other minorities have been denied the full freedoms and privileges that most white Americans enjoy and take for granted. Clark Neily at the Cato Institute had nothing but the harshest words for our present reality:

The United States’ criminal justice system is fundamentally rotten, but the effects of its dysfunction are not felt equally by all Americans. Instead, it is the marginalized and politically disenfranchised who bear the brunt of that injustice, including particularly communities of color. Although both the root causes and the significance of racial disparities in our criminal justice system are debatable, the existence of those disparities is not. And when people perceive—correctly in my judgment—that some lives are counted by the system as less sacred than others, they are going to be angry about it. And they damn well should be.

The killings of George Floyd, Breanna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, Eric Garner, and too many other black Americans were heinous crimes. I supported (as did the vast majority of Americans across ethnic groups and the political spectrum) the initial protests for accountability and justice.

In the case of George Floyd’s killing, all four officers responsible were quickly fired and charged. Public outcry made an impact and the world witnessed in America that no one was above the law. Under the American political system, We the People are the true sovereigns and can ultimately force the government to deliver accountability and respect and to expand our rights, or dissolve outright. Our track record of success is undeniable.

In a real authoritarian country, none of that would have happened. In ChinaRussiaIranSaudi ArabiaVenezuelaCuba, and other tyrannical regimes, agents of the state routinely murder, torture, rape, imprison, and violate human rights with impunity on a mass scale, and there is absolutely no recourse.

That is why comparing America’s ills to any of these is grotesque and factually wrong. For all its flaws, the United States remains a beacon of freedom and hope to the world’s oppressed peoples.

It does not stand for racism and bigotry. And this adopted son of liberty will not give it up to those who do.

We can empathize with those who suffer without being bullied into accepting the sins of others. We can stand against injustice without forsaking independent thinking and personal dignity. We can include historically-marginalized perspectives into curriculums without throwing out the best of Western canon. We can have a nuanced look into our past without being ashamed of our history.

Contrary to the claims of the 1619 Project and other revisionists, the United States was founded in 1776 on individual liberty and unalienable rights, not slavery. The American flag stands for the proposition “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” It does not stand for racism and bigotry. And this adopted son of liberty will not give it up to those who do.

The fundamental principles of America—embodied in the Declaration of Independence and secured in the Constitution—belong to everyone. The promise and limitless potential of this country also belong to everyone. We will always struggle to live up to our highest ideals as long as flawed human beings continue to exist.

Americans will continue to have heated debates on the continued relevance of those principles, where we fall short, and just about every other issue one can imagine.

But to me, actions speak louder than words. When immigrants risk everything to come to the United States, they do so under the sincere belief that its ideals and promises are real. For my family and me, the American Dream is real. And I know many others share (and will share) this sentiment.

The American Dream will endure as long as we keep alive its fundamental principles and resist the current climate of entitlement, victimhood, and collectivism.

If I could offer some advice to future immigrants and to my fellow American citizens: Remember the country owes you nothing but a chance to be free. Use that freedom wisely.

No matter how frustrated or aggrieved you may be with your current life in America, know there are countless people in the world who would gladly trade places with you.

Take advantage of the myriad opportunities that are part of America’s core social fabric and run with them. Do not capitulate to bitterness and pessimism when you encounter setbacks and failure. This country offers unlimited chances to reinvent yourself.

Speak out against injustice. But do not succumb to hate and envy. Regardless of their intentions, do not let anyone exercise arbitrary power. And remember: Despite all the attempts to pigeonhole people into identity groups, in the end, there are only individual human beings.

Do not be afraid to be an individualist.

The world you desire can be won. It exists. It is real. It is possible. It is yours.

Aaron Tao, The Atlas Society

In Our Hearts We Know Trump Won

Now that we know that the Supreme Court includes seven weak lily-livered cowards, we can’t expect it to recognize the full impact of the Deep State machinations. To many Americans, what is happening today smacks of high treason with a coup in place to remove a sitting president. They regard the definition of treason as giving aid and comfort to the enemy, but it is way more complicated than that. At the time of the founding of our nation and the drafting of the Constitution, we were at war with England and there was no doubt exactly who our enemy was. But the United States has only declared war five times, the last being in WWII.

In my last column, I quoted an interview in the Wall Street Journal with a Viet Cong colonel who admitted that people like Jane Fonda gave the Cong the confidence to keep fighting: “We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.”

So why wasn’t Fonda tried for treason for giving aid and comfort to our enemy? Since we have never declared war on Vietnam, Iraq, Iran or China, it would be much more difficult to charge her than it was for convicting Iva Toguri D’Aquino aka Toyko Rose who was pardoned by President Ford. In addition, the Constitution requires at least two witnesses or a confession to proceed.

Right now, however, it is quite clear that we are battling a most cunning and malicious enemy — the Deep State. Our freedoms given to us in the Constitution have been targeted by an enemy within. Marcus Tullius Cicero said it best:

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.”

The Deep State has many accomplices against the United States in the mainstream media, and the social media organizations that censor truth and spew out lies to a public too gullible to recognize it’s been had.

Donald Trump was never fooled and in the 2016 campaign, he vowed to clean out the swamp. What no one expected was the level of extreme and unwarranted hatred that has followed him ever since he came down that escalator to announce his entry to the presidency race. The Trump derangement syndrome (TDS) has infected Hollywood celebrities so badly that former favorites have been reduced to blithering, noxious, foul-mouthed spewers who seem unconcerned that they have lost a very wide audience.

Most of Trump supporters, myself included, did not have him as our first choice when the primaries began. We all had our favorites. Mine was former Texas governor, Rick Perry. Most of us, however, were definitely against Hillary Clinton and the idea of Bill Clinton ever being in the Oval office again. Clinton was the first president I’ve ever regarded as treasonous. It was very clever of the Democrats to frame his impeachment as due to an improper sexual incident rather than one of high treason.

According to David Horowitz of Front Page Magazine, as president, Bill Clinton essentially wiped out any strategic advantage the U.S. had by selling advanced U.S. missile technology to our enemy, the People’s Republic of China. His administration took in millions from the military and intelligence services of at least one hostile foreign power. All of this was done in exchange for illegal campaign contributions from a massive totalitarian country determined to eclipse the U.S. as a world superpower. Don’t take my word for it. Google the word China Gate 1996 or read about Johnny Chung and his many visits to the White House. “One of the key technological breaks China received, without having to spy to get it, was the deliverance of supercomputers once banned from export for security reasons,” writes Horowitz.

What about our global warming expert V.P. Al Gore who oversaw the Clinton amnesty program, Citizen USA which naturalized 986,000 immigrants bypassing regular security checks? Consequently about 50,000 were later found to have criminal records but they were naturalized just in time to vote for the Clinton/Gore 1996 reelection. Didn’t matter since the DOJ was headed by Democrat Janet Reno.

So what? Now Clinton is an elder statesman befriended by the Bush family and his wife Hillary Rodham, we find, is just as crooked and venal as he is. Ho Hum.

The Trump supporters or the Deplorables as we are called, love our president for what he has achieved in the last four years and we don’t give a whit for what he was before. What we do know is that everything he has done has been for all Americans and to save our great nation from the enemy within. What we all believe is that Trump won reelection in a landslide. This is the only fact that makes sense. Compare the millions that attended all his rallies to the empty parking lot Biden events that were held when he infrequently left his basement. What happened on November 3rd, Election Day was that the counting stopped and the Deep State minions had to switch to Plan B. Why? The original theft was supposed to be confined to the Dominion computer program switching Trump votes to Biden but the algorithm was set to handle fewer votes than the Trump landslide. Plan B depended on the phony mail in ballots that would be counted as valid because Democrat election officials had unconstitutionally changed the rules to allow massive voter fraud. We know this because there are videos, hundreds of signed affidavits by witnesses, many patriotic whistleblowers and yet the Never Trumpers, Rinos, the SCOTUS and the lamestream media are “the none so blind, they will not see.”

I pray daily for our president to prevail but I now call in the big guy to fight for us.

Michael the Archangel, 
defend us in battle. 
Be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the Deep State
May God rebuke them all, we humbly pray, 
and do thou, 
O Prince of the heavenly hosts, 
by the power of God, 
thrust into hell Satan, 
and all his evil minions
who prowl about our nation 
seeking the ruin of America.


Alicia Colon, American Thinker

 Parler65 Comments| Print|sponsored contentFrom the WebPowered by ZergNet

The Sad & Dirty Life Of Old Chimney Sweeps

The Truth About Powell’s Claim Of A ‘Broken Algorithm’

This Odor Could Be a Warning Sign for Coronavirus

Vanessa Trump’s Stunning Transformation Since She Left Don Jr.

Dog Brings Her Owner a Chilling Gift While Playing in the Woods

Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Stunning Net Worth Revealedsponsored contentnull



American Thinker on Facebook
American Thinker on Twitter
American Thinker on Parler

Recent Articles

Blog Posts

Monthly Archives

sponsored contentFROM THE WEBby ZergNet

Kyle Rittenhouse Attorney Leaves Criminal Case

Bill Gates Just Said What No One Wanted To Hear

Here’s Why Trump Is Hunkering Down At The White House

Things Men Surprisingly Actually Found Attractive 50 Years Ago

The Truth About Baron Trump Is Clear To See

Congress Hits An Unfortunate Snag In The COVID Relief BillAbout Us | Contact | Privacy Policy | RSS Syndication © American Thinker 2020…%26type%3Darticle&csi=undefined&rev=v8.28.8-wp&ct=1&xld=1&xd=1

Read more:
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook


Will it another Pearl Harbor to make us understand we are at war with China ?

I wasn’t around on December 7, 1941. I’m not quite that old. But I live in Hawaii and I have paid respects at the USS Arizona Memorial in Pearl Harbor many times. President Trump and First Lady Melania have also done so. I often see Pearl Harbor as I drive on the H-1 freeway from West O`ahu toward downtown Honolulu. I have watched the old black-and-white newsreels of the attacks by the Japanese zeros on that Date That Will Live in Infamy. Today Japan is no longer our enemy in the current era. But, the Chinese Communist Party is our enemy today. Note that I did not say that nearly 4.5 billion Chinese in China and many more around the world are our enemies because they absolutely are not. My dear wife from the Philippines has some Chinese ancestry. So do many of our closest friends. But the blood-thirsty and power-hungry regime of Xi Jinping is the most deadly foe which the United States of America has faced since the Revolutionary War.

In this ersatz age of technology and self-indulgence, most of my fellow countrymen have a very short attention span. They are also guilty as charged of being very provincial and geographically illiterate. As one who loves maps, I can guarantee you that most of them couldn’t even point to Hawaii on a world globe. That would include quite a number inside the DC Beltway! While it is 6,921 miles from Beijing to Washington, DC via the Pacific route, the Chinese Communist Party is already here permeating our entire American homeland. They are in our educational institutions. They are most definitely the controlling factor behind our mainstream media. They have subordinated our economy. If you want to buy a baseball cap with the name of your hometown on it, the chances are overwhelming that it was made in China.

But the most insidious penetration of America by the CCP is within our entire federal as well as state/local political infrastructure. Not everybody is as foolish and as brazen as Congressman Eric Swalwell whose zipper was more active than his brain. But the pandas’ claws sink deep into the flesh of not only U.S. Representatives, U.S. Senators, members of the Administration and possibly even the U.S. Supreme Court, they also control governors, state legislators, mayors, police chiefs, sheriffs and other local officials. Much of the technology that we use even within our government and law enforcement systems was, you guessed it, made in China. Made in China doesn’t just mean manufactured in China. It also means maintained by China and monitored by China. That’s why I refuse to even do Zoom calls. Xi Jinping is welcome and invited to read this article if he’s so inclined, but I really don’t want his regime listening in whenever the local GOP or other organization is discussing what they think are just internal matters.

That’s just a suggestive rather than exhaustive look at what China is doing in America today. But my question is what would they have to do to get your attention that they are attacking us on every front possible? Hopefully not bomb Pearl Harbor. Hopefully not launch a nuke at Washington, DC or New York City. That would be just a wee bit too late for us to respond effectively. So what is the threshold to be considered an Act of War with an appropriate response?

We have had naīve diplomats for as long as I can remember which would definitely include Henry Kissinger & Zbigniew Brzezinski [“Polish-American diplomat and political scientist who served as a counselor to President Lyndon B. Johnson from 1966 to 1968 and was President Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor from 1977 to 1981”]. Yes, I am old enough to remember those two feckless Democrat Administrations along with those of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. So, you can add Madeleine Albright as well as Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to that list of useful idiots who subjugate American interests to those of our avowed enemies abroad. I can guarantee you that Mike Pompeo does not fall into that category!

Secretaries of State are both a source and a reflection of the understanding [or lack thereof] of the President and Commander-in-Chief whom they serve. Here late in the first term of President Donald Trump, our current Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller and National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien do all understand the threat. But, do you? Joe Biden and Kamala Harris don’t! Their political appointees, some of whom they have prematurely named, would be a recipe for disaster.

So, since we’re not waiting for Pearl Harbor 2020, what exactly are we waiting for?


Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe has inexplicably delayed this report required by President Trump’s executive order issued two years ago which was due yesterday, December 18th. Last I heard, he says sometime in January. Is he thinking perhaps of January 21st so he can hand it to “President” Joe Biden who will have fraudulently taken the oath of office the day before? If so, Mr. Ratcliffe is in the wrong job. If not, what the heck does he think he’s doing by not submitting this crucial report on time? Sometimes, I think these people’s brains just don’t work right. Either that or their hearts are just in the wrong place. More likely it’s a combination of both factors.

Either way it’s time for Donald Trump to clean house. Attorney General William Barr is already leaving. Former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper was replaced in a timely manner by Christopher Miller. But, why is Gina Haspel still at CIA? Why is John Ratcliffe being allowed to delay a report which is needed right now, not just next month?

We can all hope that President Trump has a plan of action that just isn’t ready to be revealed. I’m not old enough to remember FDR’s Fireside Chats during World War II. Candidly, I’ve never even heard an audio recording or read a transcript of one of them, if such exist. But as a precocious child born during the baby boomer era, I was very alert and very inquisitive of my parents’ generation about what they had gone through. That was an age in which there was just the ubiquitous living room radio, but no television and no inkling there would ever be such a thing as the internet or social media. But President Franklin Delano Roosevelt kept the American public informed during very dark days. We know now that there is such a thing as VE day and VJ Day. But there was a time in the early 1940’s, when there wasn’t such an assurance. So, here we are in 2020 with no assurance that our constitutional republic will survive into the next Presidential Administration. That’s why we need to hear from President Trump on a regular basis, without revealing sensitive information to the enemy, assuring us that there is a plan, even if he cannot specifically outline the details of that plan.

That erroneous headline that blared “Dewey Defeats Truman” was superseded by the inauguration of President Harry Truman for a full term of his own. That’s where we are today, folks! The media and the world want us to believe that Joe Biden is President-Elect. With U.S Supreme Court cases still pending and the U.S. Congress yet to count votes and verify the winner of this election, we are not ready for 20/20 hindsight.


I didn’t even mention earlier how China is conducting cyber warfare against many of our governmental and military agencies. This is nothing less than part of an attempt to overthrow the legitimate government of the United States and install a subservient puppet regime with Joe Biden or Kamala Harris as its titular head. So I challenge you, in all due respect, to tell me if that is not an Act of War, what is the threshold as you define it? While I haven’t watched his Fireside Chats, I have seen the old black-and-white video of FDR standing before Congress asking for a Declaration of War. That was just over 79 years ago. Since then we have fought wars which we did not carry through to a conclusion such as Vietnam, in which many young Americans of my generation gave their all and perished to do their duty because our leaders did not have the guts, the gumption or the decency to finish what they started. Yes, it’s obvious now that the Domino Theory didn’t hold up and that we did not have a true national interest. But we needlessly sacrificed American patriots for no reason at all. When an actual attack on our homeland occurred on 9/11/2001, George W. Bush probably would have wanted to declare war, but there was no nation state that he was able to identify responsible for the act.

So, now today we have a hostile Act of War by a nation state, the People’s Republic of China [a misnomer if there ever was one] which is controlled by and under the bloody thumb of the Chinese Communist Party. As I previously stated, the vast majority of the Chinese people are not our enemy, but they are being persecuted by their own evil regime in Beijing. So, what are we going to do about it?


I have authored 149 previous articles for NOQ Report since February of 2019. As a veteran and retired federal officer, most of them understandably have to do with national security and foreign policy. Those written before early January of 2020 were hit by a cyber attack from the Middle East shortly after NOQ Report provided timely coverage of the assassination of Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force General Qasem Soleimani. Some have been reformatted with graphics restored, but many others have not yet been. If there is a particular article you’re interested in, it can be reformatted upon request. If you seek, for instance, those relating to China, here is the link.


First, I call upon President Trump to inform the American public, not only the probably 80 million of us who voted for him, but perhaps more importantly the few who actually voted for Joe Biden, as to what we are dealing with. Forget about Hunter Biden’s laptop or the scandal in Ukraine for the moment. Just focus on the fact that China used covert means to change votes away from Trump toward Biden in this election. Cases filed by Sidney Powell in Georgia and Michigan are docketed for the Supreme Court, but they are being slow-walked to the point of not being able to either prevent the stealing of this election in a timely manner or to defend us from further acts of aggression by the CCP. President Trump needs to clearly outline in no uncertain terms what the CCP has done, is doing and still intends to do. He doesn’t have to signal what he is going to do to retaliate at this point.

Second, or actually simultaneously, President Trump needs to demand that DNI John Ratcliffe submit that required report by next Monday, December 21st. Give the President what he has and then augment and supplement it to the degree necessary as a follow-up. It is inexcusable, repeat inexcusable, as well as indefensible of the DNI to try to put this off until some unspecified date in January. If Ratcliffe can’t or won’t do the job, fire him and get his Deputy or the most qualified person to finalize that report this weekend.

Then, with that documentation in hand, Donald Trump as President and Commander-in-Chief will be able to fully justify to Congress and to the American public, even if not to the demented mainstream media or to equally demented Joe Biden, what he is ordering to be done to counteract China immediately. President Trump knows whom he can trust and whom he cannot. That small cadre has undoubtedly already been apprised and the gears of retaliation already set in motion. Those who need to be ready are ready for action. XI Jinping and the CCP must be the last to know!


The attack on the U.S. Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor could not be ignored! Neither can the very deliberate kinetic attempt of the Chinese Communist Party to overthrow the legitimate government of the United States of America! We won that war and our national survival depends upon winning this one, too!

David Ware, NOQ Report