Tag Archive for: China

Should America Dominate the World?

Forty years ago, during the final decade of the Cold War, nobody had any illusions about America being perfect. Without wallowing in the topic, we all knew our nation had ongoing social and economic problems, and that our history was filled with examples of oppression. But for most Americans, understanding the grim reality of life for people living in the Soviet Union provided clarity. It was understood that no country is perfect, and compared to the USSR, living in America was paradise.

The argument that America, by a wide margin, is the lesser of two evils, does not get the traction today that it got during the Cold War. But there is no justification for its diminished relevance. Despite alarming new challenges to the rights and freedoms of American citizens, the gap between America and its contemporary rivals, Russia and China, is as wide as it’s ever been. And in the case of China, the magnitude of the threat they now pose to American global leadership is far more than anything the USSR could have once posed.

These considerations give rise to a pair of sobering questions: First, is China an expansionist nation, committed to growing powerful enough to dominate the world and impose its vision of human rights onto all of humanity? Second, before we level well deserved criticisms on American foreign and domestic policies, shouldn’t we compare these policies to those practiced by the Chinese government? Forty years ago, those questions mattered. Today, we need to revisit these questions.

Does China Intend to Dominate the World?

China is committed to an expansionist strategy. In just the last century, an era during which Western powers were relinquishing their claims to foreign colonies, China has annexed Inner Mongolia, Tibet, and Xinjiang. The Chinese have absorbed Hong Kong, cracking down on human rights they had pledged to uphold. They have lopped off chunks of Indian Kashmir as well as the northern portion of Indian state of Assam. The Chinese openly declare their intention to absorb the independent nation of Taiwan. They’re even claiming virtually all of the South China Sea, in defiance of every other bordering nation.

China’s expansionist tensions with neighboring nations and Borglike assimilation of the occupied nations within its borders should provide clues to how it treats all its citizens. China’s population is over 90 percent comprised of the Han ethnic group, and they are probably the most surveilled, micromanaged population on earth. Any dissent that deviates from the collective is immediately suppressed.

One may go on endlessly about allegedly parallel encroachments on the rights of Americans to express dissent, but it isn’t remotely comparable to what Chinese people go through. The regime of Xi Jinping has turned China into the world’s biggest prison camp, with nearly 1.4 billion inmates. Law enforcement extends well beyond criminal behavior to “social behavior,” where not just what you do, but what you say, what you think, and how you worship are all strictly regulated.

China’s economic aggression is well documented and points to an unavoidable conclusion; nations that do business with China are going to be systematically robbed of their technological edge and their financial stability. According to Fortune, one in five corporations say China has stolen their intellectual property in the past year. Estimates of how much this costs the U.S. economy range as high as $600 billion per year.

China’s economic war with the United States has been unrelenting. Over the past 25 years the cumulative U.S. trade deficit with China is nearly 6.0 trillion. China retains some of its trade surplus with the U.S. in the form of debt, currently an estimated $1.6 trillion.

Another way China is expanding its economic reach and influence in the world is through the “Belt and Road Initiative,” a modern version of the ancient Silk Road connecting East to West. In theory this is a laudable series of infrastructure projects linking China with trading partners across Asia, Europe, Africa and beyond with a series of highways, railroads, and modernized seaports. But participating nations are realizing that Chinese investment carries a high price.

The way China intends to control the railroads and seaports being built across this new Silk Road is by using the so-called debt trap. This is a practice whereby China lends billions of dollars to an economically weaker country for them to construct infrastructure. Chinese firms then pour in materials and labor to build the project, which means the Chinese loan funds are repatriated right back into Chinese hands. Then when the debtor nation can’t afford to pay back the loan, the Chinese seize ownership of the project as collateral.

An article published by the Washington Post provides an extensive list of nations already victimized by China’s infrastructure debt trap. They include Malaysia, Laos, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Montenegro, Myanmar, Nepal, and Pakistan. Some of these projects involve debt nearly equal to the entire GDP of the host nations. In many cases, Chinese-only gated communities are constructed, sometimes entire cities, swarming with Chinese security forces.

China’s economic imperialism is also reflected in its global buying binge. Using the savings generated from their huge trade surplus, China is buying companies and real estate all over the world. The United States is one of the only nations in the world that allows foreign companies to purchase controlling interests in U.S. companies, and China has taken full advantage of that. Michele Nash-Hoff, writing for Industry Week, posed this question: “Did we let the USSR buy our companies during the Cold War? No, we didn’t! We realized we would be helping our enemy. This was pretty simple, common sense, but we don’t seem to have this same common sense when dealing with China.”

American Globalism – The Alternative to China

The evidence that China is an expansionist nation is overwhelming. In addition to China’s territorial aggression and predatory economic policies, there are the precedents of history. Throughout recorded history, expansionist empires have risen and fallen. Across all continents and through the millennia, regardless of geography or ethnicity, empires have fought wars of conquest. Today is no different. America will rise to the challenge of China, or China will dominate the world. And this gives rise to the second question: How do America’s foreign and domestic policies compare to China’s, and how can they be better calibrated to unite Americans and set an attractive example for people in the rest of the world?

Only in this context can the American government’s current cultural priorities and globalist ambitions be fairly evaluated. Most American conservatives will agree that a month-long display of gay pride flags in front of every government building in America and every embassy America has in foreign nations, is pushing the woke narrative to ridiculous extremes. But compared to what? Compared to the Iranian regime hanging homosexuals from construction cranes? The Ugandans making homosexual acts subject to the death penalty?

Conservative Americans have ample reason to criticize the way establishment institutions, certainly including the federal government, have pandered to the extremist wing of the LGBTQ+ lobby. That the cultural pendulum will swing back to some more universally tolerable position is quite likely, and soon would be better. But which is worse? Nations where homosexuals are executed, or nations where activist gender extremists are overly indulged?

America’s Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, meeting with Chinese diplomats in Alaska two years ago, was criticized for acknowledging American imperfections, saying “we have the humility to know that we are a country eternally striving to become a more perfect union.”

Blinken, and his boss, Joe Biden, may be leading America down a perilous path. But Blinken was right to acknowledge that America is “eternally striving to become a more perfect union.” The debates we are having in America over identity and equity may be tedious and threatening, and with good reason, but it’s a process at work in American society today that is unthinkable in China. America’s rival in the world is a fascist police state. For all of its flaws, and for all of its dangerous drift into decadence, America is a better place to live than China. The existential importance of that fact should not be lost on anyone, whether they are woke malcontents or appalled conservatives.

Moving towards a more perfect union will not be easy. Restoring colorblind meritocracy and reestablishing reasonable gender norms will take time, but is probably inevitable. The woke have simply gone too far. An even greater threat to a desirable Pax Americana, however, concerns how America’s establishment is responding to the “climate crisis.” Current policies, designed to stifle development of hydroelectric, nuclear, and natural gas sources of energy, are guaranteed to weaken America and alienate the world. They will impose a tyranny of surveillance and rationing in developed nations, and they will cause chaos, poverty and endless war in developing nations. They are outrageous, and will drive nonaligned nations into alliances with China.

It may be that the greatest test of American democracy in the 21st century will be whether or not the cabal of oligarchs that have hijacked America’s energy policy can be overcome by a media that has finally come to its senses and a population that awakens from its brainwashed stupor. Without adequate supplies of energy, civilization will falter and individual freedom will die. Claiming that adequate energy can be delivered worldwide exclusively via wind and solar power, without also relying on hydro, nuclear, and natural gas is a blatant, misanthropic, opportunistic lie. This lie, unchallenged, will fatally undermine the credibility of American leadership in the world.

Answering the question “should America dominate the world” requires recognition of an immutable prerequisite: If America does not, someone else will. And for all of its many flaws, some of them horrifically and even murderously misguided, when compared to empires of the past and rivals in the present, America’s empire is remarkably benevolent. That fact used to matter, and it still does. We would do well to embrace it, even as we work towards something better.

This article originally appeared in American Greatness.

COVID-19 Did NOT “Cure Pneumonia”

When it comes to memes, “COVID-19 Cured Pneumonia” is a good one. Its obvious implausibility immediately directs the reader to consider the underlying allegation, which is that pneumonia deaths are being deliberately understated in order for the CDC to reclassify them as COVD-19 deaths, thus fanning public panic.

When there’s a meme, there’s an image, and to support the phrase “COVID-19 Cured Pneumonia,” there is a graphic representation of CDC data that appears to show a precipitous drop in pneumonia cases at precisely the time when COVID-19 cases were precipitously rising.

Depicted below is the graph behind the assertion that “COVID-19 Cured Pneumonia.” On the surface, it’s awfully convincing. It references an official government source – https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/weeklyarchives2019-2020/data/NCHSData12.csv – and the data on the downloadable Excel spreadsheet is faithfully rendered in the graph. And wow, compared to the previous six years, this year far fewer people are dying from pneumonia.

The problem with this graph, and the accompanying meme, is that, as the CDC discloses on their Daily Updates of Totals by Week and State, “it can take several weeks for death records to be submitted to National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), processed, coded, and tabulated.” The first chart used data as reported to the CDC through March 25. The next chart, below, uses data gathered for an additional three months, through June 24. The differences are striking.

As can be seen, what appears to have happened around week 10 of 2020, in mid-March, is completely different on the earlier chart compared to the more current one. On the chart that went viral, which purported to indicate what might even be deceit on the part of the CDC, deaths from pneumonia plummeted, dropping from around 3,100 during week 9 to only around 2,400 during week 10. On the later chart, using complete data, weekly deaths from pneumonia were averaging around 4,000 per week in mid-March, and by early April had surged to nearly 12,000 in a single week.

Further comparisons between the earlier chart and the later chart show that pneumonia deaths were not reported based on complete data on the earlier chart after around the beginning of the year. On the earlier chart, weekly deaths peaked in early January at around 4,000 and then began to fall. But on the later chart, using complete data, it is clear that pneumonia deaths remained at around 4,000 per week right up until mid-March, when they skyrocketed.

For this reason, it is premature to assume that much if any of the drop showing in pneumonia deaths later in April and onward is real. We don’t know yet.

Subjective Data, Subjective Conclusions

The COVID-19 pandemic is impossible to accurate dissect and analyze. Obviously the differing policy responses and differing media interpretations are evidence of differing political ideologies and agenda. But what happened with the “COVID-19 Cured Pneumonia” meme should remind everyone, regardless of their perspective, to dig beneath the surface. “COVID-19 Cured Pneumonia” is false both on its humorous surface but also in its clever insinuation. No matter how far you dig into the labyrinth of data surrounding COVID-19, it remains false.

When data is inherently difficult to parse, and the consequences of misinterpreting the data are so serious, it is imperative to dig beneath the surface of clever phrases and charts. It is imperative to rebuke what is clearly misleading, no matter how much it reinforces our preexisting opinions.

As it is, it appears even the CDC is unsure of how to characterize COVID-19. There have been allegations that deaths around the country are being reclassified as COVID-19 deaths, and that co-morbidities are present in almost all deaths. This however is why isolating and reporting just deaths from pneumonia is indicative. Clearly this year there are far more people dying from pneumonia than in previous years. In April 2020, pneumonia deaths were more than triple what they had been any of the previous six years.

Another way to get at the lethality of COVID-19 is to look at total deaths from all causes, a statistic that is rather difficult to cook. Here also, using CDC data, there is a definite trend. In the five weeks encompassing April 2020, there were 355,399 deaths from all causes in the United States. By contrast, in 2019 there were 276,887, in 2018 there were 273,205, in 2017 there were 272,089, in 2016 there were 265,612, in 2015 there were 261,623, and in 2014 there were 251,622. Deaths from all causes.

This is unambiguous data. Prior to 2020, the six year average deaths from all causes in the United States during the five week period encompassing the month of April was 266,839, with the largest deviation from that average in any year topping out at only 6 percent. This year, during the same period, deaths are up by 88,560 over the average, a 33 percent increase. Something horrible is going on.

It is important to debate the efficacy of masks, social distancing, hand washing, the whole shutdown. It is important to point out the rampant hypocrisy of encouraging riotous protests over social justice while condemning any crowd formed in favor of a conservative cause. It’s important to wonder why we’re locking down the healthy instead of just protecting the vulnerable. And it’s probably true that COVID-19 is reasonably easy for a healthy young person to beat. But this disease is a mass murderer, and all debates ought to acknowledge that context.

COVID-19 Exposes Inadequacy of Ideological Rigidity

When President Trump calls COVID-19 the “Chinese Virus,” he’s right. COVID-19 was spawned in the Wuhan “wet market,” a horrific public slaughterhouse where virtually any living cellular organism is for sale, ready on demand to be dismembered while still alive. The Wuhan wet market is a fetid, barbaric throwback that disappeared from developed Western nations well over a century ago.

But who can say so? Who can, with abundant justification, condemn these “wet markets,” in all their filth, squalor, and hideous brutality? Racists? Nationalists? Western chauvinists? White supremacists? Trump’s deplorable minions? Why is it appropriate to throw the U.S. Constitutional Bill of Rights out the window in the name of a health emergency, yet it is stigmatized as racist, and subject to online censorship, to unequivocally identify and condemn the source of this virus?

COVID-19 not only exposes some of America’s cultural absurdities. It challenges both the pieties of the globalist left, and the principles of the libertarian right. Because COVID-19, for all the havoc it is inflicting on this nation and around the world, could well be just a prelude.

For all we know, only a distant microbial ancestor of COVID-19 was spawned in the Wuhan wet market. There is evidence it was designed in a Chinese lab, ostensibly in an effort to experiment with vaccines and treatments. If so, was it released from this lab accidentally or on purpose? Mao used to boast that his nation could absorb hundreds of millions of casualties in war, and emerge relatively unscathed. So why not? And the Chinese, for their part, have accused the Americans of creating and spreading the virus.

One thing is certain. Viruses exist today that are capable of making COVID-19 look like a mild cold. Far more infectious, far more persistent on surfaces and in the air, and far more deadly, these designer diseases are stored in labs and military depots all over the world. Should any of them ever be unleashed, Americans will be glad they had a dry run, coping with COVID-19.

This fact should make everyone wonder as objectively as possible about how Americans respond to COVID-19. Maybe we shouldn’t have shut down the economy, this time. Maybe we’re going to be paying for that for many years. But what are we going to do when the big one comes? What sort of collective skills will we need to have as a nation?

To that question, libertarians, as is common, have no answer, because “collective” anything is anathema to them. Nationalists should recognize that next time could be different, much worse, and that what they perceive as an unconstitutional overreaction this time might be a condition of survival next time. And globalists, liberals, the whole woke mob, God bless ’em, will need to shut up when we have to shut the borders, and they will need to stop apologizing for our enemies.

This article originally appeared on the website American Greatness.

 *   *   *

China, Climate Change, Unions

AUDIO – In-depth discussion on the topics of China, climate change as it relates to energy policies and how that’s connected to population growth, with a bit of time left over to explain the difference between public and private sector unions. An always challenging one hour on the Andrew Schatkin Show.

http://schatkinshow.com/2020/05/podcast-with-edward-ring-2/

The Opportunity of the Emergency

How the global COVID-19 pandemic began is incidental to how it has instantly transformed the entire political landscape of the planet. And whether this pandemic was planned or accidental in no way changes the manner in which it suits the agenda of two mega-adversaries. One searing example from history offers dramatic evidence of how these sorts of arrangements work.

In the summer of 1944, Nazi Germany was down but not out. In Eastern Europe, Russian forces were massed on the banks of the Vistula, prepared to liberate Warsaw. In anticipation of promised aid from the Russians, the Polish resistance struck hard against the German occupation forces. But the Russians stayed on the other side of the river as the battle raged. For over two months they went toe-to-toe with the Germans, as the Russians did nothing to prevent the Germans from reinforcing their troops and liquidating the rebels. Only once the Polish resistance was crushed did the Germans withdraw, and the Russians moved in.

In this case, the mega-adversaries were German Nazis, fighting a war of mutual annihilation against Russian communists. But neither of them were willing to allow a democratic government to take control of post-war Poland.

The mega-adversaries today have different labels and employ different tactics, but the same basic dynamic applies. On one side there are ruling elites, and on the other side there are populist insurgencies. The elites rule a pair of superpowers, the USA and its Western allies versus China, that are locked in conflict that is gradually building in scope and intensity. And in both of these superpower spheres, populist insurgencies are themselves also building in scope and intensity.

The most obvious example of this is the ongoing momentum of Donald Trump’s populist movement in the United States, but throughout the West, there are other rising challenges to the elites. In France, the Yellow Vest Movement, united only by their opposition to globalization, had gripped that nation for over a year. In Germany, the new political party Alternativ fur Deutschland, committed to immigration reform, is now the second largest political party in that nation. In October 2019, Brexit was reaffirmed by voters in Great Britain in a stunning landside victory for the conservative party.

The list goes on; populist nationalism is on the rise in almost every nation in Europe. But in China, insurgencies pose equal challenges to the elites. The obvious example in China is their brutal repression of the Muslims living in the vast Xinjiang province to their northwest. The Chinese are also engaged in a decades-long project to repress the Tibetans, and less publicized but just as bad, they are erasing the indigenous culture of Inner Mongolia.

If that was all that China was doing, that would be quite enough, but China’s treatment of its own citizens has provoked insurgencies that have proven increasingly difficult to contain. For over a year, the Chinese were unable to stem the violent protests in Hong Kong. And across China, despite their brutal police state tactics, mass protests were escalating against the state’s blithe indifference to environmental protection. During the summer of 2019, one of the biggest protests rampaged across Wuhan, of all places, as tens of thousands opposed the proposed construction of a waste incinerator in that city.

There is no doubt that Western elites are on a collision course with China’s regime. But in the short run, they share a common interest: Suppressing populist uprisings, and making a few more bucks before a cold war (hopefully cold, not hot) descends again on the world.

In the effort to suppress populist uprisings, it is hard to imagine a better crisis than a pandemic. Travel, everywhere, is banned. Even small gatherings of individuals are prohibited. Elections everywhere, the U.S. presidential election in particular, are severely disrupted. Across America, Freedom of Information Act requests are stopped in their tracks, and background checks for firearm purchases are delayed.

And with the impact of the pandemic and the response to the pandemic dominating the news cycle – as it should – there is no room for any political agenda that challenges the status-quo.

How long will this last? Trump’s legendary mass rallies are now a thing of the past. Expect zero mass demonstrations from far-left activists at the Democratic convention; it’s unlikely they’ll even physically convene. Around the world, God given human rights are suspended. Was it necessary? For the most part, most would say yes. But for elites from the Beltway to Beijing, it’s also mighty convenient.

Follow the Money to See the Full Opportunity of the Emergency

If human rights are a casualty of the pandemic, everywhere, for central planners and multinational monopolists, they’re the opportunity of the century. At the global level, America’s central bank is set to pour something like six trillion dollars into the economy. That money will bail out banks and big corporations; it will also bail out small businesses and, in the form of actual direct payments, it will provide assistance to individual American households. But that’s not all.

In a process that calls to mind Gollum’s first, ill-fated journey south into Morder, hundreds of billions of these magically materialized dollars, if not literally trillions, will find their way into China. Because unless America’s roughly $400 billion dollar annual trade deficit with China disappears overnight, that’s where our currency ends up. And then what happens?

Here’s where the identity of interests between American elites and the Chinese regime becomes explicit. Because China has used the dollars earned via years of trade surplus with the U.S., which cumulatively now amounts(not plural) to over $5 trillion, to come over here and buy everything in sight. That not only includes whatever intellectual property they can’t just steal, but the hard assets of corporations, along with prime real estate which drives prices out of reach for ordinary Americans.

China not only buys up America’s tangible and intangible assets from American citizens who are only too happy to accept boatloads of cash, it induces companies to relocate to China. This mutually profitable enterprise allows wealthy American business owners to take advantage of a cowed workforce, enslaved by Western standards, to push out products at a fraction of what it costs in America to hire free workers. Worse yet, China is buying influence in America.

There’s a reason that the American press isn’t calling for sanctions or worse against China, when every time Vladmir Putin so much as sneezes, they have a conniption. It’s because with notable but rare exceptions, China has bought the American media, and Russia has not. It ought to shock American sensibilities that our media could be so crass, so for sale, but they are, and it isn’t just because the Chinese buy ads in American newspapers and air on American television networks. It’s because American companies that are doing business with China – at the expense of the American worker – are also buying ads in the American newspapers and air on American television networks. In other words, there are plenty of American companies whose interests align with China’s.

What’s happening next shouldn’t be hard to imagine. America will continue to log catastrophic deficits with China, and China will turn around and buy American assets at prices depressed by the recession. This will go on until China, and the American sellouts who cater to China, have wrung all profit out of this game.

China has been engaged in hybrid war with the United States for a very long time. They have bought or stolen our critical assets and bribed our elites. They have flooded the nation with fentanyl to wipe out hundreds of thousands of American lives. They have repeatedly bought diseases of increasing severity to our shores. As this latest economic cataclysm plays out, expect them to use their massive stockpiles of gold to attack America’s weakened currency. In that, they may not succeed, but they will further their ongoing goal of disrupting and dividing us.

Like the Nazis and the Communists in WW2, America’s elites and China’s elites are locked in a clash of civilizations. But it suits their common purpose today to displace the populist uprisings in their respective nations. In America, government at all levels will become more expansive and more authoritarian than ever before. From an accelerated transition to energy micromanagement (think Green New Deal) to mandated medicine (think mass vaccinations and immunization passports), things are never going to be the same again.

At least for now, we still may bellyache to our heart’s content, confined, Matrix-like, within our socially distant cocoons of cyberspace.

This article originally appeared on the website American Greatness.

 *   *   *

Carbon Fundamentalists and War With China

Throughout America and Europe, there are now fanatical millions who believe CO2 emissions are an existential crisis of planetary proportions. This terrifies them. What is frightening to the rest of us is how easily they are manipulated.

Witness the ease with which opportunists direct the passions of this mob. Examples are endless and span the political spectrum, from corporate and financial special interests reaping obscene profits via mandated “green” products and “carbon emissions trading markets,” to stone cold communists riding through the gates of Western Democracies inside the Trojan Horse of environmentalism.

Could climate fanatics be motivated to support World War Three in the name of saving the planet? Why not? Wouldn’t you do whatever it takes to stop the people who are causing the end of the world? These climate crusaders already consider people who question the “climate emergency” to be “deniers,” and tens of thousands of them are already militants, willing to move beyond rhetoric. Meanwhile, filthy rich establishment grandees (example: Al Gore) nod and wink, and cash in on the madness.

The origins of “carbon fundamentalism” can be traced back to the end of the Cold War. In 1995, writing for International Affairs, Deepak Lai may have been the first to coin the term “Eco-fundamentalism.” Lai characterizes this “secular religious movement” as attempting to “impose constraints upon non-Western countries’ economic development in the name of environmental protection,” and claims this could eventually lead to a bloody conflict between the West and the rest of the world’s nations.

In 2006, The Globalist published a very brief critique entitled “The New Religion of Eco-Fundamentalism,” identifying three dangers of passionate environmentalism: First, the rhetoric had become extreme – even back then! Second, the movement is “hostile to capitalism and the market economy.” Third, and most profound, this is “the worst time to abandon our own traditions of reason and tolerance, and to embrace instead the irrationality and intolerance of eco-fundamentalism, where reasoned questioning of its mantras is regarded as a form of blasphemy.”

It wasn’t until 2008 that “carbon fundamentalism” was specifically called out as a dangerous new form of extremism. Appearing in Greenbiz and entitled “The Dangerous Rise of Carbon Fundamentalism,” the author expressed reservations about the reframing of climate change debate, wherein “academics who disagree about interpretation of data are [now] compared to Hitler or to Holocaust deniers.” As he put it, “one does not debate Hitler.”

Nor, moving to the present, can anyone who questions “climate change” be allowed public debate. For example, in September 2018, the BBC announced their intention to censor any reports by climate skeptics. Similarly, search Google under the term “climate skeptics.” Instead of finding “climate skeptics,” all you’ll find are websites “debunking” climate skepticism. These conscious attempts to stifle debate are terrible mistakes. More than ever, now should be the time for people to look for hidden agendas and ignored evidence on both sides of this debate over climate change; the scope, the causes, and the proposed policies we support as a result.

Carbon Fundamentalists and Chinese Expansion

By now the tactics of the carbon fundamentalists and the eclectic gang of political and corporate puppeteers who manipulate them are well established. Massive indoctrination in school, persistent attempts at fomenting panic in the media, protests and “direct action” around the world. We could be one big weather event away from seeing violent physical attacks on outspoken “deniers.” But what about the biggest offender of all, the entire nation of China?

China’s total CO2 emissions overtook the U.S. in 2007. By 2018, China’s total CO2 emissions became greater than the U.S. and Europe’s combined. The American press has taken notice. In between their alarmist coverage of hurricanes and tornadoes and their obsession with the Trump administration’s inadequate response to the climate crisis, they cover China. Sometimes the coverage is only obliquely holding the Chinese responsible, but other reports are becoming more critical.

In August 2019, Reuters circulated an article entitled “China CO2 emission targets at risk from U.S. trade war,” with the implication being that China is trying to cut their emissions, but we’re making that difficult because we’re finally challenging their corrupt trade practices. In February 2020, Bloomberg Green published an article entitled “China’s Virus Clampdown Is Cutting Emissions, But Not for Long,” focusing primarily on the virus, but making ominous reference to China’s rising CO2 emissions.

And then there’s the Belt and Road Initiative, China’s effort to build infrastructure around the globe, while simultaneously sinking financial and military hooks into the nations that participate. Notwithstanding the fact that America’s half-trillion dollar per year trade deficit with China is paying for this, there has been a flurry of articles bemoaning the impact all this infrastructure may have on the climate. From the Yale Press, February 2020, “The potential climate consequences of China’s Belt and Roads Initiative.” From Eco-Business, September 2019, “China’s Belt and Road Initiative could lead to 3°C global warming, report warns.” From Brookings, April 2019, “The critical frontier: Reducing emissions from China’s Belt and Road.”

As tensions with China rise, these articles will make their way from academic journals and green trade publications into the New York Times and ABC Nightly “News.” And when that happens, will it really be about the climate? Or will it merely be the next turn of the ratchet, as two civilizations prepare to collide?

You can believe, as many informed skeptics do, that more atmospheric CO2 is actually a net benefit to both planetary ecosystems and human civilization. But even so, this doesn’t excuse China’s shameful failure to regulate all the rest of the filth pouring out of their smokestacks and polluting the world around them – CO2 may be good, it may be bad, but atmospheric SO2, NO2, CO and O3 are all bad.

A geopolitical reckoning with China is inevitable. China’s regime isn’t smiley face fascism, or soft fascism. Hiding behind deception and a blizzard of money to buy positive press, China today has a full blown fascist regime of the German Nazi variety; racist, nationalist, militaristic, expansionist.

The litany of repressive evil and high-tech enslavement practiced by the Chinese regime is well documented. None of the nations surrounding China welcome its growing influence. The people who support China, or apologize for China – from universities in America to political forums in the Philippines  – are almost invariably getting paid by China.

There is a great irony at work here. On one hand, America’s embrace of carbon fundamentalism undermines everything that makes America great – economic freedom, economic growth, land development, energy development, expansion and upgrades of critical infrastructure, and even freedom of speech and tolerance for diverse opinions. This benefits China, since none of these concerns slow them down. But on the other hand, it might eventually be carbon fundamentalism that drives Americans to support a blockade of China, rationing its access to fossil fuel. Needless to say, this would not benefit China.

How fascinating that carbon fundamentalism might actually be the latest expression of Western imperialism, relentlessly thwarting the aspirations of non-Western nations, allegedly to save the planet. But when it comes to relations with China, carbon fundamentalism merely adds additional moral vigor – misplaced or not – to the case for Western Imperialism to counter Eastern Imperialism. With China, the options are containment, capitulation, or war.

This article originally appeared on the website American Greatness.

 *   *   *

The South China Sea of the Moon

If you want to control maritime traffic between the most populous nations on earth, you have to control the South China Sea. Over one-third of all global shipping passes through the South China Sea, transporting raw materials, fuel, and manufactured goods to and from the great economies of Asia, China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan. The South China Sea is also resource rich, with abundant fisheries and vast reserves of oil and gas waiting to be tapped beneath its shallow waters.

On the surface of the New World of the 21st century, the Eighth Continent, otherwise known as the Moon, there is another area of even greater strategic significance than the South China Sea – the water-rich polar regions of the moon. Controlling this portion of the Lunar surface could be a prerequisite to more quickly establishing a permanent presence in space. Confirmed less than a year ago, these water resources are frozen in the shadows of the craters, especially around the lunar south pole.

Much has been made of the potential for humans to colonize Mars. With abundant water, a thin atmosphere, a 25 hour day, and mineral resources, it certainly is feasible to eventually colonize Mars. But in our enthusiasm to launch a Mars mission, we risk overlooking the strategic imperative to establish bases that can access water resources on the moon. Here are benefits of such a moon base:

  • Only four days from Earth vs a minimum of 90 days to reach Mars.
  • Only one-sixth Earth’s gravity vs Mars having one-third Earth’s gravity, meaning far less fuel required to lift payloads off the lunar surface.
  • No atmosphere, meaning landing on the lunar surface requires less complex spacecraft engineering and less maneuvering payload.
  • Strategically located with military benefits including platform to launch killer satellites in retrograde orbits around Earth.
  • Land based which creates ability to establish a harder target, far less vulnerable to attack compared to space stations orbiting Earth or the Moon.
  • Water and minerals sufficient to generate habitat atmosphere, rocket fuel, and raw materials for base infrastructure.
  • By virtue of the polar location, it is possible to set up solar power collectors on the lunar peaks that can generate continuous power.
  • Capable of becoming self-sufficient base from which to launch robotic mining expeditions to asteroids, as well as shipping lunar-sourced finished goods back to Earth or to build a Mars colony.
  • Potential to become source of materials with which to build satellite solar power stations in Earth orbit, along with limitless other manufacturing possibilities.

Where the South China Sea has strategic archipelagos of islands, the polar regions of the Moon has strategic archipelagos of water rich craters. Principle among these, with the lunar south pole forming a bullseye almost dead center inside it is the Shackleton Crater, named after the Ernest Shackleton, the first human to explore Antarctica. Sprinkled around Shackelton are other strategic craters, Sverdrup, Haworth, Shoemaker, and Faustini.

As the image below shows, surface ice is concentrated at the Moon’s south pole. Because portions of the craters in the Moon’s polar regions are in permanent shadow, ice is able to form without getting burned off. There is also surface ice detected on the Moon’s north pole, although surveys so far show much less of it by comparison.

When talking about strategic risks and opportunities, it is important not to get mired in the technology of our time and ignore the unknown unknowns, those unforeseeable technological breakthroughs that will leapfrog existing economic and military barriers. The islands of the South China Sea are now fortresses, occupied by the Chinese military. But these fortresses cannot withstand a surgical strike using hypersonic projectiles, or particle beams, or a swarm of attack drones, much less from systems we can’t yet imagine.

Meanwhile, however, possession is nine-tenths of the law. The Law of the Sea, much like the laws and treaties currently governing development in outer space, is just words. When an international tribunal at The Hague ruled against China in 2016 with respect to their illegal occupation of the islands of the South China Sea, the Chinese shrugged their shoulders, and deployed another missile battery.

Notwithstanding technological breakthroughs that surely will occur in the next fifty years, the presence of water on the moon means that the primary resources necessary for rocket fuel, along with water and atmosphere for human habitats, do not have to be lifted off of earth. In the here and now, these craters have compelling strategic value.

Not only is the South Pole of the Moon a strategic site because of its water resources and potential to generate uninterruptible solar energy, it is near the location of Moon’s South Pole-Aitken basin, a massive crater stretching 1,240 miles across the far side of the moon. Scientists have recently determined there is a deposit of extremely dense material buried in the moon – possibly the remnants of a massive asteroid that crashed into the moon to form that crater. The potential mineral riches in this crater offer additional motivation to establish bases on the South Pole of the Moon.

China has taken notice. It is not coincidental that their recent, and first, successful Chang’e 4 moon landing was in the center of the Aitken basin, also only a few hundred miles from the Moon’s South Pole. China’s not alone. India intends to land a rover on the Moon’s South Pole this September. Even a private spacefaring company, Blue Origin, owned by Amazon titan Jeff Bezos, has announced its intention to send its Blue Moon lander to the lunar south pole.

The technological spin-offs that accrued to America’s space programs of the 20th century are well documented. America’s investments in the Apollo program, in its heyday exactly fifty years ago, hastened the development of the integrated circuit, dramatic advances in rocketry, “remarkable discoveries in civil, electrical, aeronautical and engineering science,” complex software, lightweight and incredibly durable composite materials, and, for a few specifics—everything from CT scanners to liquid-cooled garments to freeze-dried food.

Surely an accelerated program to establish bases on the moon would help ensure American technological preeminence in the 21st century. But that’s not the only reason to do it.

Bases on the South Pole of the moon are a critical towards establishing a military and economic presence in outer space. They are the source of raw materials for exploration further into the solar system; they also constitute the high ground in the great game back here on Earth. NASA has announced plans to send astronauts to the lunar South Pole by 2024. Hopefully that will not be too late.

The space lanes of tomorrow, like the sea lanes of today, will have choke points, ports, supply chains and trading hubs. The South Pole of the Moon is the South China Sea of Earth. And just like the South China Sea, it will be stealthily and deceitfully occupied and militarized by a foreign power, a fait accompli, unless we get there first.

This article originally appeared on the website American Greatness.

 *   *   *

How America Will Stop China’s Long March to Rule Earth and Space

Over the past two weeks the streets of Hong Kong have been racked with protests on a scale rarely seen. By some accounts, over two million people participated, over a quarter of Hong Kong’s population of seven million.

The cause of the massive unrest was a proposed law that would allow accused criminals to be extradited to China. Protesters knew what that meant. Anyone in Hong Kong who was critical of the Chinese regime would end up in Chinese prison camps, instead of having a chance at what remains of due process within Hong Kong.

On the surface, China’s response to the protests in Hong Kong has been mild. This should come as no surprise. The regime knows that sending in the tanks, the way they did after losing patience with the occupiers of Beijing’s Tiananmen Square in 1989 will not work in Hong Kong. Over 150 years of British rule over Hong Kong gave the residents a familiarity with democracy and respect for individual rights, and an intolerance for tyranny. When Hong Kong was turned back over to China in 1997, the expectation was that these rights would be preserved under the concept of “one nation, two systems.” But as ever, the Chinese are playing the long game.

The Chinese regime has operatives embedded in Hong Kong’s police and security services. They have control over local gangsters. They have installed pervasive surveillance technology. Hong Kong’s Chief Executive, Carrie Lam, is a puppet of the Chinese regime, and while her political career may not survive the current unrest, Hong Kong’s Legislative Council is full of Chinese puppets. Slowly but relentlessly, China’s regime will identify and silence dissidents in Hong Kong. It may take decades, but China has implacable resolve. Their goal is to turn Hong Kong into just another Chinese city. So what does it mean to be Chinese in the 21st century?

For most of the 2nd half of the 20th century, China was asleep. Under Maoist communism, their people were enslaved and their economy was stagnant. But starting in the 1980’s under Deng Xiaoping the Chinese Communist Party slowly introduced economic reforms. “Special economic zones” were authorized, starting in 1980 in the southern city of Shenzhen, where the regime could experiment with more flexible market policies. In 1990, the Shanghai Stock Exchange was opened. In 1996 China allowed the Yuan (Renminbi) to be convertible with foreign currency, enabling the growth of their export industry. In 2001 China joined the World Trade Organization. The rest is history.

Today China’s potential is being realized. To be Chinese today is to be part of an irresistible collective, a rising hyperpower, destined to rule the earth and the heavens. China’s population has soared to over 1.4 billion; they are the world’s 2nd largest economy, and the world’s number one exporter. In 2017 China’s exports totaled $2.4 trillion, and their trade surplus was $873 billion.

China is wide awake, and moving the world. But is China ready to move the world?

In a word, no. For all its demographic clout and economic dynamism, China fails to meet basic standards of international civility and internal stability. It is a rogue mercantile nation, an expansionist superpower, a racist ethnostate, and a human rights hellhole. The United States does not face a cold war with China, it is already in a cold war with China. How that cold war ends – hot like 1939, or peacefully like 1989 – and who wins, may define the destiny of humanity for centuries to come.

China is no longer communist, nor have the Chinese become capitalists. They are fascists. That is, capitalist financial incentives now motivate their entrepreneurs, but the Chinese regime exercises top-down absolute power. The virtue of fascism, if you want to call it that, is the elimination of gridlock. In less than ten years, the Chinese regime built the Three Gorges Dam, which now turns the hydropower of the fabled Yangtze River into 22 gigawatts of electricity. For a large dam to be built in America today, ten years wouldn’t be enough time to do a feasibility study, much less acquire permits, settle lawsuits, and begin construction.

But is gridlock the price of America’s freedom? Is tyranny the prerequisite for China’s national resolve? And which system will prove stronger; which will attract the rest of the world?

From the safe haven of liberty and prosperity that America remains despite the wails of its excitable Left, it is easy to forget just how different life is in police state China. To put the comparison into stark perspective, imagine if one of China’s biggest movie stars, say, Deng Chao, in his first remarks to the audience at the Golden Rooster Awards (mainland China’s equivalent of the Oscars), were to say “f— Xi,” and then, after a brief pause, were to say “it’s no longer ‘down with Xi,’ it’s f— Xi.” Or imagine if the news anchors on CCTV (mainland China’s preeminent news network) were to engage in news coverage of President Xi that was “93 percent negative.”

In China, how long would that last? Yet American superstar actor Robert De Niro, along with dozens of his counterparts, can fearlessly taunt the American president with obscenities, and it’s just another publicity stunt cum political statement. Cable news juggernaut CNN, along with nearly every other major media property, can spend years spewing nonstop slanderous lies about the American president, and it’s just business as usual.

The fact that such behavior is the norm in the United States is rightly condemned by Americans who don’t agree with Hollywood group-think, or leftist media bias. But it is vastly preferable to the reality in China, where if Deng Chao, or any other Chinese celebrity, or news anchors on CCTV, or commentators on any other Chinese media property, were to engage in criticism so caustic, or so relentlessly biased against the regime, they would be silenced immediately and forever.

American tolerance for dissent, and capacity to absorb polarized opinions, is utterly foreign to China. This fundamental weakness is one big reason that the more China attempts to spread their growing influence, the more the nations of the world will resist.

China may be a burgeoning superpower, but nobody wants to live under their political system. And at the same time as China’s soft power is ineffective, due to their intolerant culture and tyrannical regime, China is actively using their financial and military power to alienate virtually every nation on earth. A quick gallop around the globe offers evidence aplenty.

Tension With Neighboring Nations

Among China’s neighbors, their only reliable ally is North Korea, a 46,540 square mile dungeon housing 25 million slaves. North Korea, as a client state of China, only serves to make China’s problematic relationship with other Asian nations even worse, as its military lobs missiles into the Sea of Japan and digs tunnels under the demilitarized zone. Someday, with or without regime change, North Korea may break away from China and embrace South Korea and the West. In the meantime, whatever enlightened wishes its ruling thugocracy might harbor are suppressed beneath the shadow of Chinese hegemony.

Every nation on China’s perimeter has had to cope with Chinese territorial aggression. A giant chunk of northeast Kashmir has been lopped off and annexed by China, as the Indian and Chinese military face off across the glaciers. Across India’s northeast frontier, in the Indian state of Assam, China has crossed over the Himalayan peaks supposedly dividing the territories of the two nations to lop off the northern region of Arunachal Pradesh. The tensions from the war India fought in 1962 with China to defend its territory still simmer. China has even recently began calling Arunachal Pradesh “South Tibet.”

Vietnam has also had to contend with Chinese aggression, most recently in the war they fought against China in 1979 to defend their northern border. If anyone thinks tensions between Vietnam and China have calmed down, consider the situation today in the South China Sea, where both nations claim the Spratly Islands. The South China Sea is an expanse of ocean over 1.4 million square miles in area, bordered by the mainland nations of China to the north and Vietnam to the west, and at sea, surrounded by the island nations (clockwise from north) of Taiwan, the Philippines, the portion of Malaysia on the northern shore of the island of Borneo, and Indonesia. Every one of these nations objects to China’s claim that nearly the entire South China Sea is Chinese territorial waters. A glance at the map illustrates the preposterous nature of China’s claim.

Despite being overruled in international courts, for the past 20 years China has steadily moved to occupy and militarize the South China Sea. They have blasted apart coral reefs and dredged the relatively shallow waters around them to build island fortresses, where they are now positioning military assets including ships, planes and missile batteries. The Chinese have also deployed thousands of paramilitary “fishermen” that patrol and intimidate the commercial and naval forces of all these nations. China’s actions in the South China Sea have alienated every bordering nation, with no end in sight.

What about Japan? First of all, the Japanese harbor no illusions regarding China’s memory of Japan’s occupation of their territory that began in 1931 and didn’t end until their defeat in 1945. But China’s announcement of an air defense identification zone over expanses of the East China Sea that include Japanese territory in the Senkaku islands didn’t send a message of reconciliation. Neither, as mentioned, did the North Korea’s 2017 test launches of missiles that ended up splashing down in the Sea of Japan; in two cases, the flight path took the missiles directly over Japanese territory, landing in the ocean just east of their northern island of Hokkaido.

Even if China were to behave itself today, its history of conflict with its neighbors would put it at a disadvantage. In the battle between China and the West for Asian hearts and minds, it’s interesting what language is overwhelmingly accepted as the lingua franca for dialogue between these nations; English.

Ah, but what about Russia, that colossal nation to the north that even in its post Soviet truncated state still covers 6.6 million square miles, or one-eighth of the world’s land surface? Russia has aligned itself with China these days, but simmering border disputes linger. In 1969 these border tensions exploded into war, with a formal treaty not signed until 1991. But another conflict may be inevitable.

First of all, between 1840 and 1911, during what China still calls its “century of humiliation,” China lost control over vast chunks of territory along its northern border. From Central Asia to outer Mongolia, to outer Manchuria, lands controlled by China that were neither indigenous to the Chinese nor to the Russians were annexed by Russia. With this dubious claim to ownership, the Russian Far East is particularly vulnerable today, with only seven million Russian inhabitants, facing hundreds of millions of Chinese immediately to the south.

For now, the partnership between the Russians and the Chinese in the Far East seems to be working. By some estimates nearly a half-million Chinese now live in Russia, leasing farms, laboring in mines and lumber operations, or building infrastructure – largely with Chinese financing. Russia exports to China primarily natural resources, China exports to Russia manufactured goods. But is this sustainable? At what point will Russians become alarmed by growing Chinese influence in their eastern provinces? At what point will the Chinese drop the pretense of respecting Russian sovereignty in lands they deem were taken from them during a time of weakness, then scarcely populated by Russians? One telling anecdote is the ascendance of Chinese Triads in Vladivostok, taking over the reins of organized crime from Russians.

Erasing Other Nations Within China

Within China’s borders, entire separate and independent nations ought to exist, but don’t. Most notably, Tibet, East Turkestan, and Inner Mongolia. Together, these three occupied nations cover nearly 1.6 million square miles of northern and eastern China. Their story offers the world ample evidence of how China would behave were it ever to become a global hegemon.

What is today known as Xinjiang in China’s northeast, used to be the Uyghur Kingdom of East Turkestan. This 642,000 square mile nation was independent until the Chinese Empire conquered it in 1884 after eight years of brutal conflict. According to the Uyghur American Association, since 1949 when the communists took control of mainland China, the deliberate transmigration of Han Chinese into Xinjiang has reduced the proportion of native Uyghurs from 94 percent of the population to barely 60 percent. At the same time, there has been increasingly harsh “repression of political dissent and any expression, however peaceful, of their distinct identity.”

You can say that again. Xinjiang, a land of rivers, grasslands, forests, deserts and high mountains, is now used by the Chinese for nuclear testing, military bases, and prison labor camps. Very little information about human rights abuses makes its way out of Xinjiang. The suppression of the Uyghur language, culture, and religion has provoked a predictable backlash, but the Chinese regime has no qualms about upping the ante.

An April 2019 New York Times “interactive” article entitled “How China Turned a City Into a Prison” describes the pervasive repression imposed on the Uyghurs. The authors toured Kashgar, an oasis city of over 500,000 residents in the extreme western part of Xinjiang. Located on the ancient silk road, and integral to China’s new “belt and road” initiative, the Chinese regime has implemented pervasive surveillance. The NYT writes:

“Every hundred yards or so, the police stand at checkpoints with guns, shields, and clubs. At big checkpoints, they lift their chins while a machine takes their photos, and wait to be notified if they can go on. The police sometimes take Uyghur’s phones and check to make sure they have installed compulsory software that monitors calls and messages. Neighborhood monitors are assigned to watch over groups of families. And army of millions of police and official monitors can question Uyghurs and search their homes. They grade residents for reliability. A low grade brings more visits, maybe detention. Surveillance cameras are everywhere.”

This same NYT report claimed there are 13 “indoctrination camps” just in the city of Kashgar, covering over 1 million square meters (about 250 acres). Just one of these camps houses over 20,000 people. Incarceration can occur for offenses that Americans would not consider remotely criminal, such as reading the Koran.

The situation in Kashgar is not unique. According to Radio Free Asia, the Chinese have now sent over 1.5 million Uyghurs to re-education camps in Xinjiang and elsewhere in China – more than 10 percent of the population. Most of these inmates have committed no crime, but have been accused of harboring “strong religious views” or “politically incorrect” ideas. An October 2018 report by the BBC provides satellite photos of this burgeoning network of prisons. China is building concentration camps; their own gulag archipelago.

Estimates of the number of Uyghurs imprisoned in China range as high as 2 million. According to Business Insider, to further their control over the population, the Chinese authorities are collecting DNA, fingerprints, iris scans, blood types, and voice samples from every Xinjiang resident between 12 and 65. Xinjiang is a testing ground for surveillance technologies being introduced throughout China.

Tibet’s story is better known than Xinjiang’s (or East Turkestan), and just as tragic. Tibet’s existence as a unified nation dates back to the 7th century, maintaining its culture and independence despite encroachments by Mongols, Chinese, Nepalese, and Europeans. In 1949, the same year the Chinese communists took control of China (and Xinjiang), Mao Zedong threatened Tibet with “liberation.” Over the next ten years, China slowly increased its control over Tibet, eventually provoking an uprising by the Tibetans in 1959. Following the Chinese suppression of the revolt, the Dalai Lama fled to India along with around 80,000 other Tibetans.

China’s strategy in Tibet is the same as in Xinjiang, flooding the nation with Han Chinese. Tibetan exiles allege the population of native Tibetans has fallen to 50 percent, and accuse the Chinese regime of understating the figure because the migrants are not officially registered residents. The Dalai Lama has said China’s migration policy is  “demographic aggression,” and will result in “cultural genocide” in Tibet.

Tibet may be the rooftop of the world, a stunning wonderland of Himalayan peaks and magical plateaus covering nearly a half-million square miles, but how the Chinese are treating the Tibetans today is ugly. A 2017 report by Human Rights Watch included a “glossary of repression,” that “explains and illustrates a dozen terms that appear benign or even positive but are in fact used to ensure total compliance and surveillance by officials of ordinary Tibetan people. The glossary includes terms that relate to political and social control, such as ‘comprehensive rectification,’ ‘no cracks, no shadows, no gaps left,’ and ‘every village a fortress, everyone a watchman.’ ‘Orwell himself would be hard pressed to invent a better vocabulary of totalitarian management,’ said Sophie Richardson, China director at Human Rights Watch. ‘But ultimately the message of the Chinese authorities’ terms for Tibetans is clear: political nonconformity will be punished, severely.'”

The U.S. State Dept. issued a human rights report on Tibet in 2017 that claimed the situation is deteriorating. The report notes that “ethnic Chinese CCP members hold the overwhelming majority of top party, government, police, and military positions” in Tibet, and goes on to describe “disappearances; torture by government authorities; arbitrary detentions, including political prisoners; and government curtailment of the freedoms of speech, religion, association, assembly, and movement.”

If the would-be nations of Tibet and East Turkestan are well publicized victims of Chinese repression, that doesn’t mean Inner Mongolia doesn’t belong on the list. Denied in 1949 the right to unify with their northern neighbor, the independent nation of (outer) Mongolia, the southern Mongolians have begun to clamor for the rights of “autonomy” that the Chinese regime supposedly grants to their province.

Inner Mongolia, like Xinjiang and Tibet, is big. Over 450,000 square miles, it contains an estimated 25 percent of the world’s coal reserves, and nearly 80 percent of the world’s total reserves of rare earth metals. China isn’t about to loosen their control over this rich province, and their development of its resources is fueling rising resentment. As reported by CBS in 2015, “Over the last decade, many Mongolian-language schools have been shuttered; nomadic herders have been driven off their land; and government policies have continued to encourage Han Chinese immigration. Rampant mining has ravaged the grassland environment.”

Unlike Xinjiang and Tibet, Mongolians are already a minority in their homeland, now numbering only 20 percent of the population of 23 million. One Mongolian activist, a writer named Hada who was imprisoned by the Chinese for 15 years and is now under house arrest, has accused the Chinese of decades of ethnic cleansing. According to Radio Free Asia, earlier this year, one of the few remaining Mongolian language schools in Inner Mongolia raised a stir when it hung up the national flag of Mongolia.

Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang, and Tibet consume 1.6 million square miles, but have a combined population of only 50 million people. They represent only 3.7 percent of China’s population, yet they occupy a whopping 42 percent of China’s land. China’s claim to govern these three provinces is of questionable legitimacy, based on events within the memory of millions of people who are still living. In response to the aspirations of these distinct peoples for self governance, the Chinese regime has cracked down. They have employed the tactics used by invaders since the beginning of history – ethnic cleansing and mass incarceration – married with the most invasive surveillance techniques modern technology can deliver.

The 1.3 Billion Man Prison Camp

China’s expansionist tensions with neighboring nations and Borglike assimilation of the occupied nations within its borders should provide clues to how it treats all its citizens. China’s population is 92 percent comprised of the Han ethnic group, and they are probably the most surveilled, micromanaged population on earth. Any dissent that deviates from the collective is immediately suppressed.

For a while, there was reason to hope that with increasing prosperity, human rights and press freedom would also increase in China. In 2007, a CIA report entitled “The Chinese Media: More Autonomous and Diverse–Within Limits,” described how during the previous two decades China’s print and broadcast media had expanded, diversified and commercialized. The report listed “a general decline in the influence of political ideologies and systems of belief; growing Chinese popular skepticism toward authority; increased contact with the West; greater competition in the media market; ebbing government resources; improved professional training for journalists; and new communication technologies.”

Today, hopes for a free press in China have been dashed. As reported in China Journal, “China’s authoritarian regime has become increasingly repressive in recent years. The ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is tightening its control over the media, online speech, religious groups, and civil society associations while undermining already modest rule-of-law reforms. The CCP leader and state president, Xi Jinping, is consolidating personal power to a degree not seen in China for decades.”

The consequences of China’s government controlled press extend well beyond suppression of dissident journalists covering the independence movements in Tibet, East Turkestan (Xinjiang), and Inner Mongolia. China’s abysmal fouling of its land, air and water, devastated wildlife, and poisoned citizens are also forbidden topics. As are any unsanctioned criticisms of its internal or foreign policies – any of them. Radio Free Asia reports “News and information providers who don’t toe the official line are increasingly subjected to censorship, surveillance, arrest, and arbitrary detention. Many detainees are mistreated and some are tortured.”

The intensifying crackdown on religion offers examples of just how pervasive and intolerant China’s police state has become. A recent and wide-ranging interview in the Daily Signal with China scholar Olivia Enos characterized China’s new policy towards religion as “sinicization,” or making religion serve the Chinese communist party’s ends. This policy expresses itself in ways unimaginable to a Westerner. Christian churches are being closed down, bibles are burned, pastors are imprisoned. For China’s Tibetan Buddhists and East Turkestan’s Muslims, in addition to these tactics, there is a “grid-style” social management, with surveillance everywhere, extending to the point where Chinese Communist Party officials are moving into the homes of individual families.

Even China’s homegrown Falun Gong, a variant of Buddhism with Taoist influences, became the target of repression after it grew to attract over 70 million adherents. China’s persecution of the Falun Gong has reached the point where critics not only allege that thousands of practitioners have been executed, but as reported by CNN and others in 2014, internal organs have been harvested from the victims and sold for transplants.

Whether or not China still harvests organs from their executed criminals and dissidents, China’s government executes more people each year than every other nation in the world combined. Estimates range from 2,000 official executions in 2016 to over 12,000 people killed in 2002. According to Amnesty International, the “true extent of the use of the death penalty in China is unknown as this data is classified as a state secret.”

The regime of Xi Jinping has turned China into the world’s biggest prison camp, with nearly 1.4 billion inmates. Law enforcement extends well beyond criminal behavior to “social behavior,” where not just what you do, but what you say, what you think, and how you worship is all strictly regulated. By now, most anyone watching China has heard of the “social credit score” the government tracks for all citizens. To create these scores, as reported in Forbes, “In China, government agencies and private companies are collecting enormous amounts of data about e.g. an individual’s finances, social media activities, credit history, health records, online purchases, tax payments, legal matters, and people you associate with in, addition to images gathered from China’s 200 million surveillance cameras and facial recognition software.”

Supposedly, China’s rollout of of a social credit score for all citizens is a way to “allow the trustworthy to roam freely under heaven while making it hard for the discredited to take a single step,” as if that weren’t bad enough. In practice it represents astonishing intrusions on individual freedom and dignity. According to the New York Times, “In some cities, billboard-size displays show the faces of jaywalkers and list the names of people who don’t pay their debts. Facial recognition scanners guard the entrances to housing complexes. Such efforts supplement other systems that track internet use and communications, hotel stays, train and plane trips and even car travel in some places.”

Behind the scenes, developing the enabling artificial intelligence technologies is a top priority for the Chinese government, either through state funded “start-ups” within China, or via whatever they can purchase or steal from the West. Bitter Winter, a magazine covering religious liberty and human rights in China, summed up China’s high-tech surveillance state accurately, calling it “digital despotism.”

Economic Aggression – China vs the World

China and the United States waging an escalating “trade war” has been a prominent news story over the past several months, but this trade war has been going on for years, if not decades, and is just one part of China’s undeclared war against America. An excellent summary of just how China has engaged in economic aggression against the United States was provided by Steve Bannon in a Washington Post guest op-ed on May 6th. Bannon correctly asserts that China has been “waging economic war against industrial democracies ever since China joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001.” Bannon explains how this economic war is being waged, taking the form of “forced technology transfers; intellectual property theft; cyber-intrusions into business networks; currency manipulation; high tariff and nontariff barriers; and unfair subsidies to state-owned enterprises.”

China’s economic war with the United States has been unrelenting. Over the past 25 years the cumulative U.S. trade deficit with China is a staggering $4.9 trillion. China retains some of its trade surplus with the U.S. in the form of T-Bills, to the tune of $1.2 trillion. The other $3.7 trillion? That’s been used to purchase American assets.

Changing China’s state sponsored mercantilism is probably impossible. Options are limited. America’s manufacturers compete domestically with Chinese imports that are cheaper because of state subsidies, an artificially low value for China’s currency, and in the case of high-tech products, less amortized costs for research and development because the technology was stolen or even just given away. American exporters are required to turn over their intellectual property to the Chinese in exchange for access to the Chinese market.

This economic aggression is well documented and points to an unavoidable conclusion; China is not going to play by the rules that govern members of the World Trade Organization and as a result, nations that do business with China are going to be systematically robbed of their technological edge and their financial stability. China is simply too big to not constitute such a threat. According to Fortune, one in five corporations say China has stolen their intellectual property in the past year. Estimates of how much this costs the U.S. economy range as high as $600 billion per year.

A recent report describes how the Chinese steal American industrial secrets: In some cases, China bribes engineers working for American companies to turn over proprietary data. In other cases, Chinese nationals, spies, have broken into American manufacturing plants and stole material. Sometimes, Chinese agents steal industrial secrets during legitimate visits to American labs. Chinese agents are continuously attempting to steal American technology via cyberhacking.

Another way China is expanding its economic reach and influence in the world is through the “Belt and Road Initiative,” a modern version of the ancient Silk Road connecting East to West. In theory this is a laudable series of infrastructure projects linking China with trading partners across Asia, Europe, Africa and beyond with a series of highways, railroads, and modernized seaports. But participating nations are realizing that Chinese investment carries a high price.

The motivations for China promoting a 21st century Silk Road are logical enough. It provides additional avenues for them to export products, including cement and steel for the infrastructure projects, which their factories are now overproducing. It channels the excess savings generated by China’s trade surplus. The land based road and rail connections bypass maritime routes over which American and other Western navies might potentially hinder traffic. Finally, these physical connections, controlled by China, will further China’s goal to eventually see global trade conducted using the Chinese Renminbi, instead of the American dollar.

The way China intends to control the railroads and seaports being built across this new Silk Road is by using the so-called debt trap. This is a practice whereby China lends billions of dollars to an economically weaker country for them to construct infrastructure. Chinese firms then pour in materials and labor to build the project, which means the Chinese loan funds are repatriated right back into Chinese hands. Then when the debtor nation can’t afford to pay back the loan, the Chinese seize ownership of the project as collateral. Viola. Strategic railroads and seaports, owned by China, are established around the world.

An article published by the Washington Post entitled “China’s debt traps around the world are a trademark of its imperialist ambitions” provides an extensive list of nations already victimized by China’s infrastructure debt trap. They include Malaysia, Laos, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Montenegro, Myanmar, Nepal, and Pakistan. Some of these projects involve debt nearly equal to the entire GDP of the host nations. In many cases, Chinese-only gated communities are constructed, sometimes entire cities, swarming with Chinese security forces.

China’s economic imperialism is also reflected in its global buying binge. Using the savings generated from their huge trade surplus, China is buying companies and real estate all over the world. The United States is one of the only nations in the world that allows foreign companies to purchase controlling interests in U.S. companies, and China has taken full advantage of that. Michele Nash-Hoff, writing on this topic last year for Industry Week, posed this question: “Did we let the USSR buy our companies during the Cold War? No, we didn’t! We realized that we would be helping our enemy. This was pretty simple, common sense, but we don’t seem to have this same common sense when dealing with China.”

Probably the most dramatic manifestation of China’s global buying binge is its drive to acquire and exploit natural resources, anywhere on earth, and do so in a manner heedless of its environmental impact. China has an insatiable appetite for iron, manganese, gold, aluminum, copper, other minerals, along with fish, cattle, soybeans, and other farm commodities, along with oil, gas, and coal. To secure a supply for these vital commodities, China is scouring the globe to identify sources and buy them, investing hundreds of billions in these strategic investments, and, quoting from Mining.com, “assuming a position of world dominance in the commodities markets.”

China’s economic aggression is characterized by a strategic focus that eludes its competitors, an unparalleled access to cash because of its trade surplus, combined with an unrelenting determination to ignore the rules that have governed international trade for over seventy years.

Military Aggression – The Long March to World Domination

Sanguine observers are fond of pointing out that the U.S. military budget, $649 billion, is more than then the next seven countries combined, $609 billion. This ignores currency disparities and the cost of labor. A more sobering assessment conducted by Breaking Defense uses purchasing power parity analysis to peg China’s defense spending at $434 billion, more than two-thirds that of the U.S. By this measure, China’s military spending approaches parity with the U.S.

There’s more. The U.S. defense budget currently supports the permanent deployment of over 150,000 service personnel on over 800 overseas military bases in more than 70 countries. In addition, the U.S. is involved in ongoing, costly conflicts in Afghanistan and Syria/Iraq, along with expensive counter-terrorism and containment missions all over the world. To be sure, China’s military is no match at this time for the U.S., but the U.S. military is spread thin around the entire planet, whereas China’s military, land based and behind interior lines, can be fully utilized to achieve specific regional objectives.

That objective, above all others, is to conquer the island of Taiwan, the “breakaway province” that China’s nationalist armies retreated to after the communist victory on the mainland in 1949. Taiwan, with 24 million people living on a relatively small island of 14,000 square miles, is one of the most prosperous nations in Asia, with a vibrant democracy and thriving economy. But China considers Taiwan to belong to them, and “reunification” is one of the top priorities of the Chinese regime.

The Taiwanese, however, are well aware of how China’s “one country, two systems” promise to the people of Hong Kong back in 1997 is being slowly, systematically broken. They are not inclined to “reunify.” As reported by the New York Times, an August 2018 poll found that only 3 percent of the Taiwanese wanted unification with China. Nonetheless, in a January 2019 speech, Chinese President Xi Jinping said the people of Taiwan have to accept that their nation “must and will be” reunited with China.

Taiwan will not make reunification easy for the Chinese. An excellent summary of how a Chinese invasion attempt could fail is found in Foreign Policy, arguing that it would be virtually impossible for the Chinese to mount a surprise attack, which means the Taiwanese would have time to “move much of their command and control infrastructure into hardened mountain tunnels, move their fleet out of vulnerable ports, detain suspected agents and intelligence operatives, litter the ocean with sea mines, disperse and camouflage army units across the country, put the economy on war footing, and distribute weapons to Taiwan’s 2.5 million reservists.”

The challenges China would face if they invaded Taiwan underscore many disadvantages they face as they attempt to become the regional hegemon. Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea all possess modern, high-tech militaries. Presumably, in a conflict with China they would be playing defense, which requires fewer resources than offense. And it is extremely unlikely Taiwan would face China alone. The U.S. would support Taiwan, and other likely allies would include Japan, Australia and the U.K.

This same challenge faces China everywhere they operate. The island fortresses they’ve constructed in the South China Sea have offended every nation bordering it. And the para-military aggression they’ve conducted with Chinese “fishermen” harassing, for example, their Vietnamese, Philippine, and Indonesian counterparts have caused increasing tension with those nations.

Despite being outgunned, for now, and despite tensions with most of their neighbors which could create a united front against them, the Chinese are undaunted. They are playing the long game. China is able to focus its military spending on cutting edge technologies, without the tremendous costs of labor, worldwide deployments, and ongoing conflicts that drain U.S. resources.

US/China Confrontation is Inevitable

In every area – trade, competition for resources, human rights, territorial disputes – China challenges the United States. Areas of concern are so numerous as to defy description. The battle for 5G leadership, where China’s state supported Huawei competes against America’s Qualcomm, besieged by its own FCC. The scourge of Fentanyl, where Chinese labs continue to ship this deadly drug to criminal distributors in America despite government promises to crack down. The undermining of the academic independence of universities throughout the West, as China funds these institutions in exchange for their quiescence. China’s even got its sights on the moon.

Not content with occupying the 1.3 million mile South China Sea, or calling itself a “near Arctic nation” in order to claim a share of mineral rights on the top of the world, China is in the thick of the race to establish the first permanent moon base. Aptly being now called “the eighth continent,” and more accessible than the continents of the New World were 500 years ago, the Moon now offers humanity 14.6 million square miles of resource rich high ground.

In January 2019 China landed unmanned craft on the Moon’s far side. It is possible they will send astronauts to the moon before the U.S. manages to get back there. With only around a half-million acre feet of frozen water discovered so far on the lunar surface, mass colonization may never occur. But these water rich craters in the polar regions of the moon are now strategic targets, because they can support military bases and mining colonies.

When you’re playing the long game, the mineral wealth of the near earth terrestrial objects – the moon, Mars, and the asteroids – is tantalizing beyond description. Within the lifetime of people born today, they will be commercially exploited. The nation to win that race could win the world. The Chinese see this clearly. Most Americans do not.

Some of those who diminish the threat of China do so on the basis of their demographics. They point out that the “population pyramid” of China is inverted as a result of the their “one-child” policy that lasted from 1979 until 2015. This argument ignores important factors, starting with the fact that China, with a population of 1.4 billion, will always have plenty of working age citizens despite having a higher percentage of older people. It ignores the rising irrelevance of human labor in favor of robots, a trend China will embrace without ethical constraints. It ignores the possibility that in a crisis, China will sacrifice their nonproductive citizens, certainly including the aged, without hesitation.

Most chilling, it ignores the fact that China is a nation that will, without any ethical inhibitions whatsoever, develop and implement transhuman technology as part of their drive to dominate the world. Wars of the future will not be fought by humans. They will be fought by robots and drones running on AI, they will be fought in cyberspace and outer space, and to the extent humans are involved, they will probably be enhanced. China will not hesitate to genetically engineer humans to have superior intelligence, nor will they hesitate to use cyborg technology to augment them physically.

The Clash of Civilizations

Chinese fascism, fully realized and ruthlessly applied, provides more than a reality check to the “anti-fascist” ideologues who claim America is under an imminent threat of itself becoming a fascist regime. Because not only is America’s mainstream, traditional culture the precise opposite of fascist, but it is the anti-fascists themselves, and their broader community of American leftists, who are the ones who are becoming fascist. Across almost every segment of American life, this reality plays out.

The fascist essence of the American Left finds expression in the proliferation of rules throughout society regarding what topics are acceptable for debate, what subjects are permitted to be humorous, and what terms must be used or avoided when describing race or gender. The scope of their ambition is terrifying. For the American Left, every significant issue of our time has a correct position and a forbidden one, from climate change and energy policies to immigration and affirmative action. Despite the seismic consequences of getting these policies wrong, debate is not only stifled, but dissenters are despised, silenced and banished.

If the American Left were a fringe element, their agenda would be laughable. But America’s sleek and smiling equivalent of China’s surveillance state is a cartel of communications corporations – Google, Disney, Comcast, Fox, Facebook, Viacom, CBS – who control virtually all public dialog. The ability of these corporations, online and offline, to mold public opinion – and silence public dissent – is stronger today than it has ever been. And on the toughest issues facing America these corporations are aligned with the Left.

This weakens America at a critical time. The Left’s inexplicable embrace of “free trade” has damaged the American economy while it furthered the globalist, and very short-term, profit taking on the part of multinational corporations. The Left’s moral insistence on mass immigration of unskilled workers has stressed our social welfare system, but it has furthered the profit taking ambitions of multinational corporations who want to drive down the cost of labor. The foreign investment stimulated by trade deficits, combined with the mass migration of additional millions of new residents pushes property values into bubble territory, furthering the profit taking goals of wealthy investors.

Whether it’s a cynical, eyes wide open symbiosis, or an unwitting, catastrophic error, America’s Left today is firmly allied with America’s wealthiest multinational corporate elites. The result is a hollowing out of America’s middle class, its manufacturing base, its technological edge, its financial strength, and its cultural unity. At a time when Americans need to unite and confront a genuine clash of civilizations, which is China’s long march towards global domination, America’s left has manufactured a clash of civilizations within America itself. Some have called it a cold civil war. If so, the timing could not be much worse.

What the American Left offers, if it weren’t so extreme, is a vision of a world where all peoples, wherever they’re from, are able to achieve whatever dream they’re willing to work for, free of discrimination based on their national, ethnic, gender, or religious identity. The Left’s vision also includes a world where the environment is protected no matter what the cost, where people and wildlife are free from harmful pollution, and ecosystems are healthy and managed sustainably. While the American Left has gone too far in their policies and their rhetoric, their loudly proclaimed good intentions are attractive to the peoples of the world.

What the American Right offers, notwithstanding the handful of extremists that the American Left uses to discredit traditional America’s entire historical legacy and contemporary society, is a vision of the world where every person is judged on their individual merit. A world where, notwithstanding the unavoidable hazards and rewards of luck and caprice, any person with sufficient talent and resolve can achieve their dreams. While the American Right is as concerned about the environment as anyone, they understand that cheap energy remains the surest path to global peace and prosperity. This vision is equally appealing to everyone in the world.

One of America’s greatest strengths and greatest appeals is its capacity to peacefully process the tension between Left and Right, and tolerate diverse viewpoints and political agendas. The growing political intolerance in America, coming mostly from the Left, may eventually undermine that appeal. But conversely, China’s inability to tolerate diverse viewpoints and political agendas is its greatest weakness. It alienates the world.

Americans today are more polarized than usual, but from afar America remains a place with an irresistible culture – music, food, fashion, art, sports, television, movies – from lowbrow to highbrow, that captivates the world. The American people are not seen as Right or Left by the people of the world. They’re seen as Americans: fearless, honest, spontaneous, almost childlike in their enthusiasms, likeable, fair minded, gregarious, accessible, down-to-earth, optimistic; dreamers, inventors, eccentrics, leaders, creators. This is the American soft power that is undiminished and indescribably potent. It is a power that China cannot hope to match; not today, not a hundred years from now.

Nonetheless the danger is great. The Chinese people have not yet experienced the suicidal paroxysms of nationalism that, for example, caused Germany to turn out the lights in Europe twice in the 20th century. What if over the next few decades they succumb en masse and without reservations to the tribal, racist, expansionist exhortations of their despotic leaders and become a unified, fanatical collective? What if at the same time, the segregationist, divisive tribalism of America’s Left succeeds in completely fragmenting our culture? What if other powerful nations join China in a drive to break American power, out of fear, pragmatism, or because their people are experiencing a similar tribal frenzy? Because China’s soft power is as tone deaf as its foreign policy is alienating, a global populist alliance of nations favoring China is unlikely. But in the face of American external weakness and internal conflict, it is not unthinkable.

For this reason, even the most high minded pacifism of the American Left, which didn’t stop the USSR in the 1980s, will not stop China in this century. Back in 1991, it wasn’t the leftist mantra of fewer weapons, more welfare, and a “nuclear freeze” that dismantled the USSR. It was the fact that during those waning years of the last cold war, America’s navy was too powerful to be challenged in the open ocean. It was because our F-18s could shoot anything out of the sky. It was because Pershing II missiles and a few squadrons of A-10 Warthogs could have turned Soviet Armor in the Fulda Gap into a stinking pile of scrap metal. The Chinese know those stories, and are investing accordingly. Are we?

Today’s cold war is against a stronger adversary, and America’s extreme Left is far more powerful. To effectively cope, American nationalism, patriotism, whatever you want to call it, requires an attenuated version of Leftist idealism to merge with an uncompromising but compassionate version of Right wing realism. That synthesis already exists in the cooler heads in Washington, as does a growing consensus that China could become the most significant threat America has ever faced.  To contain China, America – most definitely including its corporate elites – must support and adapt to a permanent trade war, redouble investments in strategic military technology, pursue an all-of-the above energy strategy, and restrict most immigration to new arrivals who will add valuable technical and scientific skills to the workforce.

The good news: Today, the Chinese regime is feared and mistrusted by virtually everyone on earth. The nations they’ve exploited economically, the neighboring nations whose land and maritime borders they’ve encroached upon, the nations within their borders they’ve illegitimately occupied, and their own restive, captive people.

China is big. China is awake. But China is not bigger than the rest of the world. It is most likely that in the ongoing battle to contain China, apart from a handful of rogue nations ruled by despots, the entire world is on America’s side.

This article was originally published on the website American Greatness.

 *   *   *