Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
May 17, 2019

Propaganda Intensifies Trade War With China

The dwindling empires' main propaganda outlet, the New York Times, continues its anti-China campaign. It is now by blaming China's president for the failure of trade negotiations with the United States.

    How Xi’s Last-Minute Switch on U.S.-China Trade Deal Upended It:

China’s leader, Xi Jinping, seemed confident three weeks ago that a yearlong trade war with the United States could soon subside, handing him a potent political victory.

He even made a speech saying China would protect intellectual property, encourage foreign investment, and buy more goods and services from abroad — all changes the United States had been demanding as the countries tried to negotiate a deal.

But just a week after that speech, Chinese negotiators sent the Americans a substantially rewritten draft agreement, prompting President Trump to accuse Beijing of reneging on terms that had been settled.

As typical for U.S. propaganda the piece goes on to personifying the decision China made when confronted with overreaching U.S. demands. It is Xi personally, says the Times, who is to blame:

In China’s top-down political system, where President Xi has amassed formidable power, ...

... it is clear that Mr. Xi misjudged ...

Now Mr. Xi risks being backed into a corner, ...

For Mr. Xi, such a move could be seen ...

Mr. Xi’s frenetic schedule and highly centralized style of policymaking ...

“No doubt Xi has tightened the overall policy atmosphere ...

U.S. propaganda is always pointing to one person that solely cases everything and therefore deserves all the hate. It once was Saddam, Saddam , Saddam. Then Ghadaffi, Ghadaffi, Ghadaffi, Assad, Assad, Assad, Putin, Putin, Putin. Now it is Xi, Xi, Xi.

In the real word hardly any person leading a state has as much power as such villainizing propaganda tries to make one believe. Countries have interests that define their policies through processes that are often incomprehensible to the cursory observer. Whatever face is at the top is only representing the layers below. It should be the task of the press to untangle and explain the processes instead of demonizing their representing face. 

So what really happened?

The U.S. started a trade war with China by suddenly putting up high tariffs on Chinese products. China countered with tariffs on U.S. products, but was ready to negotiate  a fair deal. The negotiations about an agreement were held in English in the United States. The U.S. provided a written draft.

When that draft reached China and was translated to Chinese the relevant party and government institutions were aghast. The U.S. demanded that China changes several of its domestics laws. It essentially demanded a complete change of China's trade policies and, most infuriating, was unwilling to go back to the old tariff rates, even if China would comply. It wasn't Xi who rejected the uneven deal, it was the whole Chinese government.

The draft agreement was corrected and sent back to the United States. Trump responded to China's unwillingness to his capitulation demand by further increasing tariffs and by threatening to increase them even more. The trade war will escalate from here and metastasize in other relations.

Deep into the NYT piece, where the propaganda weakens and journalism sneaks in, we can learn all of this:

Several sources said the changes were discussed with other Communist Party leaders, which brought into focus worries that the proposed deal could make Mr. Xi and the party look as if they were bowing to pressure.
Mr. Xi may have belatedly concluded that changes to Chinese laws demanded by the United States would be an affront to national honor. Some said Mr. Xi might have felt he had to act after the clauses drew criticism from party leaders who had not been briefed earlier.
[T]he administration sought changes to cybersecurity laws that China’s national security establishment saw as interference.

These changes would require authorization from China’s national legislature.

“These conditions that the Americans raised for an agreement, at least from the political point of view, are extremely difficult to accept,” said Cui Liru, a former president of China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, a prominent state research group. “It is almost asking the change of China’s political system.
“It is very hard to think China will cave in or surrender to these pressures,” said Wang Yong, the director of the Center for International Political Economy at Peking University. “Public opinion definitely matters.”

So it is not Xi, Xi, Xi. China is not a "top-down political system" and Xi has not "amassed formidable power". China's president Xi is not an absolute king. It isn't he who can make such far-reaching decisions. There is the party, the security establishment and the government apparatus. There are industry interests that need to be taken care of. There is last not least the national public opinion the system has to take into account.

China does not want a trade war with the United States. But, unlike Trump and the NYT assume, it is likely China that will lose less from it than the U.S. will.

As Ambassador Chas Freeman lays out at length, Trump's (anti-)China policy has no strategy. It is one of chaos and will have echos in many other fields:

President Trump’s trade war with China has quickly metastasized into every other domain of Sino-American relations. Washington is now trying to dismantle China’s interdependence with the American economy, curb its role in global governance, counter its foreign investments, cripple its companies, block its technological advance, punish its many deviations from liberal ideology, contest its borders, map its defenses, and sustain the ability to penetrate those defenses at will.

The message of hostility to China these efforts send is consistent and apparently comprehensive. Most Chinese believe it reflects an integrated U.S. view or strategy. It does not.

There is no longer an orderly policy process in Washington to coordinate, moderate, or control policy formulation or implementation. Instead, a populist president has effectively declared open season on China.

Currently each and every arm of U.S. policy is beating up China in any field it can. This hostility will soon become irreversible. China will response in kind and asymmetrically. It now restarts to buy oil from Iran. Ambassador Freeman sees no way how the U.S. could win the game.

China has long prepared for this conflict. Consider Trump's recent move against the Chinese manufacturer Huawei:

The White House issued an executive order Wednesday apparently aimed at banning Huawei’s equipment from U.S. telecom networks and information infrastructure. It then announced a more potent and immediate sanction that subjects the Chinese company to strict export controls.

The order took effect Thursday and requires U.S. government approval for all purchases of U.S. microchips, software and other components globally by Huawei and 68 affiliated businesses. Huawei says that amounted to $11 billion in goods last year.

Huawei currently uses U.S. made chips in many of its smartphones and networking products. But it has long expected the U.S. move and diligently prepared for it:

Huawei's chipset subsidiary HiSilicon said on Friday it will use backup chips it has independently developed for years to cope with the ban from the United States.

He Tingbo, president of HiSilicon, said in an internal letter to staff that Huawei has been preparing for a scenario of survival in extreme conditions when all the advanced chips and technology from the United States become unobtainable.
"Today, a historic choice has to be made. Our backup plan will be put into official use," according to the letter.

Soon U.S. chip companies will have lost all their sales to the second largest smartphone producer of the world. That loss will not be just temporarily, it will become permanent. At the same time Trump's tariffs on products from China will further hurt the U.S. economy. The voters already fear that:

By an 11-point margin, voters think increased tariffs on Chinese imports will do more to hurt the economy than help it.

The voters' hunch will soon be confirmed as Walmart and others announce that they will have to increase their prices. Economists also expect that the U.S. consumers will feel significant pain:

“[T]he cost to an American family of three would be about $2,200 if Trump’s full package of 25% tariffs on $500 billion of merchandise imports from China is implemented.

“In the case of the latest 15% additional tariffs on $200 billion, from 10% to 25%, that go into effect by the end of May … the direct cost is $30 billion and the likely indirect cost, through higher US producer prices, will be another $30 billion. Together, that’s $60 billion … about $550 per family.” China will absorb “no more than 5%” of the tariffs.

Few other countries will join Trump's anti-China campaign. It will further isolate the United States. That is quite an achievement for the MAGA man.

Some aspects of China's trade behavior can and should be criticized. But overall China sticks to the rules of the game, while the U.S. is now breaking these. It was not China that moved U.S. factories to its country. U.S. managers did that because the U.S. economic system is based on greed and not on the welfare of its citizens.

There are much better ways to get China to change its trade behavior than by bullying and ever increasing tariffs and sanctions. Ambassador Freeman's recommendable essay provides some of these.

Posted by b on May 17, 2019 at 18:30 UTC | Permalink

next page »

We've always been at war with East Asia./sarc

Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 17 2019 18:42 utc | 1

How do you win a trade war if you are utterly dependent upon the goods manufactured by the "enemy"?

Are Trump Tariffs the Wake Up Call China Needs to Stop Subsidizing the US, Unchain the Yuan, and Bury the Dollar?

"Trump tariffs are a blessing. China should stop chasing after dollars whose value Beijing artificially overinflates, and which in view of the budgetary demolition derby engaged in by Washington needs constant propping up by the Chinese. Instead China should simply allow the yuan to float and therefore appreciate in value to the dollar. This would instantly transfer over a great deal of purchasing power to the Chinese consumer market making it far bigger. For China this would cover any tariff-driven losses, while the US would find it is having to suddenly pay far more for its Chinese goods and components. First to pay for Trump’s tariff, and then to cover the dollar appreciation to the yuan.

The real bonus would be however, that a free-floating yuan would be a far more credible candidate for a currency of international trade. China has tried hard to internationalize yuan, but with little success, because the fact that yuan is not even a real market currency, but just a dollar copy has naturally hamstrung its efforts. To become accepted, yuan first has to prove its stability on the market as a free-floating currency decoupled from the dollar — which as a currency that is actually artificially undervalued it easily could."

Posted by: Perimetr | May 17 2019 18:44 utc | 2

From indispensable nation to superfluous nation. Soon the world has no use for the US. Exceptional only in the collective stupidity of it's leaders.

Posted by: Symen Danziger | May 17 2019 18:45 utc | 3

Wow, great explainer article b! Gives me a much better idea of what's going on :-)

Posted by: Deschutes | May 17 2019 19:01 utc | 4

If this trade debacle does not wake up those dreaming of Trump the "three D chess player" - then nothing will. Stupid has no depths, it just is what it is.

Posted by: mike k | May 17 2019 19:21 utc | 5

The US objective is to sustain US tech prominence by stifling Chinese plans to advance its economy. Of course China will never agree to that.
from CFR..

The Chinese government has launched “Made in China 2025,” a state-led industrial policy that seeks to make China dominant in global high-tech manufacturing. The program aims to use government subsidies, mobilize state-owned enterprises, and pursue intellectual property acquisition to catch up with—and then surpass—Western technological prowess in advanced industries.
For the United States and other major industrialized democracies, however, these tactics not only undermine Beijing’s stated adherence to international trade rules but also pose a security risk. . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 17 2019 19:24 utc | 6

Good for Trump. I hope he burns the house down. The investment and salary classes have been screwing me since I was born. Now its time for all of us to feel the pain. And create a world that can benefit all of us.

Posted by: so | May 17 2019 19:29 utc | 7

A bit off topic, I thought b and barflies would find it in their wheelhouse...

French researchers have completed their Map of Neoconservative Networks. It’s interactive and gives links to each neocon/neocon group. Most of who you would expect feature prominently: Bill Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz, BHL, but it also connects neoconservatives to the Great Replacement theorists showing strong links between them and fascists.

Along similar lines, Swiss Propaganda Research released the Media Navagator earlier this year. b will be happy to know that MoA ranks in the hard anti-establishment camp alongside MintPress and the WSWS. There is also a European version

Posted by: Blooming Barricade | May 17 2019 19:32 utc | 8

This and other Escobar essays have foreshadowed this for awhile which led me to predict that Trump's Trade War is what will get him defeated in 2020 as he mimics Nero.

I know Trump always wanted to be better than Obama. Well, he'll be more hated than Obama when he's fired, and that's no easy accomplishment. Hopefully, the Sanders/Gabbard Camps will see this for the grand opportunity it is and make hay!

Posted by: karlof1 | May 17 2019 19:53 utc | 9

Good catch, b.

You forgot: "Chavez, Chavez, Chavez, Maduro, Maduro, Maduro..." and of course "Castro, Castro, Castro."

Needless to say we never got: "MBS, MBS, MBS" or "Bibi, Bibi, Bibi" or the like.

Posted by: KC | May 17 2019 19:54 utc | 10

When it comes to propaganda and trade war, there's an obvious pys-op going on, and growing, across Western countries. Namely the anti-5G movement. Since 5G is basically Eastern Asian if not downright Chinese-led, and Western, specially US, firms are lagging behind, it's quite clear that such fake grassroot movements are infiltrated if not downright created by US agents, and the oversized media exposure is ordered and coordinated from above, like many other hypes - gas attack in Syria, migrant crisis, Skripals. Not that there aren't legitimate concerns to have, but such concerns should also apply, and should've applied in the last 2 decades, to all previous mobile phone communication systems' effects on global health; cherry-picking just that one time when it's China that's in the lead, and not the West anymore, is quite a blatant admission of the real goal of those who pull the strings.

Posted by: Clueless Joe | May 17 2019 19:56 utc | 11

“It is almost asking the change of China’s political system.”

Yes, the true struggle of today is socialism vs capitalism, not whites vs yellows. Trump's "Clash of Civilizations" ideology is mere screensaver to deceive the masses. As Walter Benjamin once very well described: every far-right ideology (Nazism) depends on the aestheticization of politics.

Some aspects of China's trade behavior can and should be criticized.

Why? Because of that "intellectual property" stuff? Japan basically built itself from the ground up in the post-war through allowed and unallowed intellectual property theft. Canon and Nikon, for example, essentially fac-similed Leica during that period; after the transition to digital, they erased their theft past, but it doesn't change the objective truth both wouldn't exist without stealing technology from a defeated country (Germany). It did the same with missile reentrance technology it stole from the USSR after the Cold War.

Ah, but Japan is a "honorary Western" nation, i.e. a capitalist nation, I see...

Posted by: vk | May 17 2019 20:14 utc | 12

China is not burdened by corporate-financed "industrialized democracies," with corporations setting the national agenda, principally wars, but rather employs a state-led industrial policy with corporate activities dictated by the state in its national interests.

This has been good for the Chinese people.
from CSIS

Over the past several decades, China’s economic development has lifted hundreds of millions of Chinese out of poverty and resulted in a burgeoning middle class. Middle class households typically have enough income to satisfy their primary needs – food, clothing, and shelter – with some disposable income left over for additional consumption and savings. In 2002, China’s middle class was only four percent of its population. A decade later, this number had climbed to 31 percent, constituting over 420 million people. . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 17 2019 20:18 utc | 13

It was always going to end thus. There is no way that the US could subsidize the growth of a larger population base forever. In truth there has been an ongoing war between the US and China for 40 years. China is ahead. The US middle class can't afford not to have high tarrifs.

Posted by: ponderer | May 17 2019 20:27 utc | 14

This article titled 'Face' by Walrus over at SST is well worth a read alongside b's piece.

Also this Sputnik Article

Both these articles give a very clear picture of what the drunken louts 'Team Trump' are up against in their so called trade war. Very much like a drunken spectator climbing into the ring thinking he can take on a professional boxer.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | May 17 2019 20:33 utc | 15

And speaking of propaganda:

Posted by: jared | May 17 2019 20:47 utc | 16


- demanded concessions on trade
- banned Huwei
- made military [plans with Taiwan
- saber rattled in the China Sea

Trump wants improved trade conditions for improved economic climate in the U.S.
But there are others in the admin who want something else.

But still: "backup chips it has independently developed"
That's a good one Mr Moon.

Posted by: jared | May 17 2019 20:55 utc | 17

The US attack on China did not start with Trump. This is what Obama's military "Pivot to Asia" was about, as was the TPP, which explicitly was designed to develop an economic alliance that left China out.
Capitalist trade wars are also not new, as are hot wars.
They are part of capitalism.
"Intellectual property" is a laughable assertion, an audacious attempt by the US to corner all human advances and claim them as the property of US capitalists, to be only used for their profits.
As if!

Posted by: wagelaborer | May 17 2019 21:05 utc | 18

What an appalling ruling elite in the USA. Blamers and punishers. Never take any responsibility for their murderous acts.

Rise up people, these are dangerous,stupid leaders and elites.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 17 2019 21:12 utc | 19

B says: Whatever face is at the top is only representing the layers below.

Yes, this is the case when complex governmental systems are functioning properly. In this case power is distributed throughout the system, based on the role each individual within the system. People must have a collaborative culture for complex systems to function properly.

People of an authoritarian nature hate complex systems and distributed power, as such systems limit the freedom of action of the authoritarian leader. The corollary to this is that systems must be kept simple to accommodate authoritarian leaders. And simple systems are much less powerful and effective than complex systems.

My observation is that, in the U.S., authoritarianism is the dominant culture, as opposed to a collaborative culture of the Chinese that is implied by B's comment.

Indeed we see many signs in these negotiations that the U.S. is operating based on a culture of authoritarianism, whereas China is operating based on a culture of collaboration. Among the signs:

1. The tendency that B. noted of Americans to assign all power to the leader.
(This is not the first time, and in fact it is a common mistake of the U.S. and one of the reasons that their regime change efforts almost never achieve a result that is favorable for the U.S.)

2. The U.S. talks about winning and losing. China talks equity.

3. The U.S. talks about pressuring China until they give in. China talks about a solution that respects the dignity of each party.

The principle behind negotiations for people of a collaborative culture is 'Win-Win or No-Deal'

For Authoritarians, Win-Win is a compromise, and compromise is the equivalent of a loss.

My conclusion is that there is only a very low probability that the U.S. and China will successfully negotiate a trade deal. The cultures of the authoritarian Americans and the collaborative Chinese are too divergent. China will only accept Win-Win and the U.S. cannot accept Win-Win.

Posted by: dh-mtl | May 17 2019 21:13 utc | 20

Classic US empire strategy.
Build up a supplier and when they start to be serious a competitor take them down.
Asian Tiger crisis,forcing occupied Japan into the Plaza Accord etc.
They left it too long with China,way too long.
China has not recycled its trade dollars surplus into USTs since 2014.
No replacement suppliers like Vietnam or Indonesia etc will do either,no more vendor finance
for the US.It will have to live within its means,no wonder the neocohens are going insane.
We are watching the death of the $ as GRC first hand.

Posted by: Winston2 | May 17 2019 21:18 utc | 21

jared | May 17, 2019 4:55:50 PM | 18

NO jared, Trump is in charge, fully responsible and yet totally irresponsible. He hires and fires, he barks the orders, Trump is not captive. You may desperately wish to believe that but NO, Trump wants it like this and NO dissent.

This is Henry Kissinger's plan implemented by Trump. A war criminal implementing a sociopath war criminal's plan. Trump is a killer and an oligarchs stooge and he like the rewards.

See the fabulous Aaron Mate discussion previously linked in the last thread.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 17 2019 21:19 utc | 22

thanks b... ditto peter au recommendation @16 on the article from walrus on face..

Posted by: james | May 17 2019 21:32 utc | 23

I'd be curious to know what other MoA barflies think of the US tendency to personalise other countries' governments and political systems and reduce them all to monarchies of one sort or another, and what this says about the American psychology generally. So much of the US slather and accusations against Russia and China and what those nations are supposedly doing look like psychological projection of the US' own sins and malevolent behaviour.

I was in hospital nearly 20 years ago for a major operation and some of my recuperation there was spent watching a few old "Star Trek: Next Generation" episodes. Watching those shows, I was struck by how much "power" the Star Trek captain Jean-Luc Picard appeared to wield. Every one of his subordinates deferred to his decisions and very few challenged him.

I know this is an old TV show with scripts that emphasise individual action over collective action and delineating a whole culture on board the Starship fleet (this is a long time before "Game of Thrones") but I had the sudden realisation that US politics is essentially monarchist in its nature, for all the complicated legal and constitutional structures that have been built around it over the past 240+ years. US politics and culture are fixated on one individual with extreme powers; the superhero obsession in Hollywood is one symptom of that.

In a way the US now resembles the Ottoman empire during that empire's Sultanate of Women period (late 1500s to mid-1700s) when sultans' power was dominated by their mothers, viziers and sometimes the janissaries who became a hereditary class during that period.

Posted by: Jen | May 17 2019 21:47 utc | 24

@ dh-mtl 21
You provided an excellent analysis of two very different kinds of people, westerners and Asians (Chinese). Americans who believe that Chinese are pretty much like them, and respond to people, to pressures and and to situations in the same way, are badly mistaken.
I would add another: Westerners want instant results and quick profits whereas Chinese take the long view. Heck, they've been around for five thousand years so why not.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 17 2019 21:55 utc | 25

I'm glad you raise the issue of increased prices for US consumers, b. I have been looking in vain for a mention of this even in alternative media. Nobody appears to be talking about it.

If I can go off track for a moment the events surrounding Boeing are highly significant and a parallel to what is happening generally in the US. Here is a something I wrote for naked capitalism but did not send - Yves is too fierce and I don't trust her. A bit like a feminine Colonel what's his name Laing...

Because of the prestige of Boeing Wall Street left its dimantling until quite late - 1997. GE and Ford had already produced their versions of the 737 Max in the 1960s with the Corvair and the Pinto respectively as finance people started to take over the running of US companies. There is something very sad in watching a once magnificent company reduced by bankers to a shadow of its former self.

Posted by: Lochearn | May 17 2019 21:56 utc | 26

There has been a trade imbalance for quite a while but it didn't seem to matter much. The Chinese raised their standard of living, Americans got cheap stuff, surplus dollars went into treasuries to fund the deficit.

It all worked pretty well until Trump and MAGA. Somehow he thinks he'll bring the jobs back but no Americans are going to make sneakers and circuit boards for $2 an hour.

Posted by: dh | May 17 2019 21:59 utc | 27

GE - that should be GM - I always get something wrong...

Posted by: Lochearn | May 17 2019 22:06 utc | 28

@25 jen.. it seems to me by and large that americans are ignorant of the rest of the world and they have it in their head they are '''the greatest''.. i think this predates the concept of ''exceptional nation'' status, but it is much the same thing..this doesn't apply to all americans obviously, but those who remain inoculated in the usa culture 24/7 which fortunately isn't everyone.. william gruff wrote a very good post on this in the previous thread - see trump admin @114 for his post...

@ 27 loichearn.. indeed it is quite sad when companies that actually made products are turned into some type of financial company like ge and etc. etc.. this is what happens when financiers run things... everything is based on money, not on quality of being built to last.. boeing is just the last example in a long list of examples.. it makes this joke about MAGA the real con it is and has been since trump mouthed it.. could have been that con kissinger saying much the same thing.. the amount of fake bs that substitutes for reality never ceases to amaze me.. trump personifies it too - all about making a buck the sleaziest, cheapest, cutthroat way possible... it has now become the american way.. if that doesn't work, bully others with financial sanctions or literal wars.. at some point this has to end and badly for the usa..

Posted by: james | May 17 2019 22:16 utc | 29

@ Lochearn 29
Point of interest, GM sells more cars in China than in the US.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 17 2019 22:17 utc | 30

Jen | May 17, 2019 5:47:54 PM | 25:
Idolatry is universal. People always gravitate towards Alpha personalities.

dh | May 17, 2019 5:59:06 PM | 28:
Trump knows those manufacturing jobs aren't coming back and automation is the future. He's just parroting what his base wants to hear for votes.

Posted by: Ian | May 17 2019 22:21 utc | 31

Jen 25
I have just replied to Karlof1 in I think the previous thread and I link into this. In looking into US culture and why it gives rise the type of leadership it has, I think it may be the belief in exceptionalism. Exceptionalism may also carry with it the belief that all other peoples want to be like them and all they (Americans) have to do is free those peoples from the nasty dictators ruling over them.
Patrick Armstrong in one of his articles has said that in his dealings with US officials as Canadian ambassador or diplomat, is that American officials genuinely believed that all they had to do was overthrow the evil dictator and the people would welcome Americans or willingly join the US system.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | May 17 2019 22:23 utc | 32

All the economic momentum is in Eurasia, centering on China, India, and Russia.

China is spearheading this drive and re-assuming its historical status as the richest land in the world. Instead of resisting, Washington should be working with projects like the BRI that help enrich everyone.

(Indeed, why doesn't Washington announce a BRI for North/South America, perhaps a Yellow Brick Road? But that's an aside...)

And concerns about Chinese spying through their companies should be equaled with internal reflection about the practice in the United States. Perhaps it would be wise for both countries to develop and practice international standards that respect human rights in an Everything's Connected world.

Given how the US and China frequently treat "different" people with disdain, that's a lot to ask. But no country or people is spotless regarding abusing human rights and some wisdom with power would be welcome from both governments.

Posted by: OutOfThinAir | May 17 2019 22:29 utc | 33

Jen @25. Americans are good at Doublethink.
You point out that our entertainment industry focuses its plots on strong leaders, and Good Guys vs Bad Guys, and we definitely internalize that, especially when our overlords want to demonize another country, and use our entertainment-induced perspective as a shortcut.
They tell us that the leader of the targeted country is a Bad Guy and we must kill the people in order to save them. And Americans nod and comply. Except for the 5% that prefers peace, and they argue that the leader is not a Bad Guy, so we shouldn't kill the people to save them.
No American ever thinks to argue international law or basic morality, we just argue about the plot lines.
But, at the same time, on another level, Americans understand that the president is a puppet and must obey orders, or have his brains blown out in bright daylight, in the town square.
We hold both these views simultaneously, hence, as Orwell called it, Doublethink.

Posted by: wagelaborer | May 17 2019 22:33 utc | 34

China has succeeded because it does not honor copyright and patent monopolies.. Western civilization is failing because it imposes the feudal monopoly by rule of law system.. the state will make sure a few fat cats are lords and the masses are their slaves.

The investment and salary classes have been screwing me since I was born. Now its time for all of us to feel the pain. And create a world that can benefit all of us. so @ 8 <== I agree..
It is almost asking the change of China’s political system.” <= no its not, the struggle today is freedom, human rights and the right to self determination not socialism vs capitalism.. it the struggle today is capitalism vs monopolism.. because monopolism aims to make every single human being alive its slave to a very few monopoly powered corporate giants.. China is a clear example of what can be if the masses are allowed to compete without the shackles of copyrights, patents and other thin air monopolies.

Some aspects of China's trade behavior can and should be criticized.
Why? Because of that "intellectual property" stuff? Japan basically built itself from the ground up in the post-war through allowed and unallowed intellectual property theft. Canon and Nikon, for example, essentially fac-similed Leica during that period; after the transition to digital, they erased their theft past, but it doesn't change the objective truth both wouldn't exist without stealing technology from a defeated country (Germany). It did the same with missile reentrance technology it stole from the USSR after the Cold War.

< Technology is a product of the human mind.. copyright and patents are thefts of the products of the human mind.. and human mind assets do not belong to anyone, to any country.. Instead, copyright and patents (intellectual property) are and should be in the public domain (but the scum that write the laws have created from thin air; rights which do not exist, and given the rights they fabricated to their feudal lords and the corporations owned by such lords. So the lawmaking scum have made it possible for a few (feudal lords) to establish and maintain a monopoly in the good life, over the masses in the world. .. Just as in the in England, France and Switzerland, where only the rich, corrupt politicians, and criminal few hung out and traded copyright and patent monopolies in the coffee houses, (much like stocks and bonds are traded today, monopoly trading was a game between fat cats (today's the fat cats are wall street barons), ..monopolies allow rich and wealth to support their royal life styles at the price of enslaving the masses to poverty. Luckily a court in England, threaten by an angry crowd of the masses, denied the wealthy their perpetual lifetime patents and copyright demands, no longer could the fat cats squeeze ownership of an intellectual creation from its creator, convert it to intangible property, and use the intellectual property to monopolize the world. The British court said, no patent, no copyright and no monopoly can last longer than 7 years. that was 1787-89, and it explains the for a short time clause in the USA constitution.

Posted by: snake | May 17 2019 22:37 utc | 35

I don't think the US sees the world's nations as commanded by their senior politician. Far from it, but to keep the US public locked in a child's mentality, the govt and its MSM present every political event/action/reaction as between personalities. Can't have reason and logic breaking out among the minions can we?

As for Trump being in charge, I rather doubt it, no US president has been "in charge" of any thing except possibly what is for lunch since Washington.
Too many policies Trump began, such as negotiations with NK, have been trashed by his "teams" who I believe are actually his minders put in place by the Deep State.

Is Trump a great guy? A NY developer by their very nature is not a great guy. But I do think he wants to be seen as a great president. To do that he has to pull off some deals that will be remembered which is why he wanted the deal with NK, that Pompeo blew up.

I also think that the govt is preparing for the time when the dollar is no longer the reserve currency. And to do that you need to pull manufacturing back from abroad (from China), seize critical assets (from Venezuela),break any and all treaties that require you to spend money you won't have (making NATO (pay as you go).

All things the govt is doing, admittedly with the most horrific management team since Taft's. But they are moving on all fronts to circle the wagons of US commerce.

They know what is coming, some of them may see war as the way to bilk a few more trillions out of the treasury, but I don't think the military will let them. For they know that if they go up against a nation that Russia and China support and botch it, that R&C will go for the throat and that, more so than the currency crash would be the end of the US.

These moves we see are very serious because the end game is for the continued existence (or death)of the US. And many of these tactical moves are very high risk because they hasten the end of the dollar. I give the dollar five years more, tops. Then it will be just one in a basket of currencies until the yuan makes its way to the top.

And where that strange UN Agenda 21 fits in this I don't know, its plan for the US is for drastically reduced population (70% loss, from what?)the remaining population in mega cities and truly vast areas of no go set aside for the "environment." It reads like a National Parks program on crack with a side of Hunger Games.

The next five years are going to be really critical and I personally think the US will only make it by the skin of its teeth.

Posted by: frances | May 17 2019 22:42 utc | 36

Per Reuters, Huawei spends $11b on US components, and its ability to withstand this hit will vary by segment:

“Huawei being unable to manufacture network servers, for example, because they can’t get key U.S. components would mean they also stop buying parts from other countries altogether,” said an executive at a Huawei chip supplier.

“They can relatively better manage component sourcing for mobile phones because they have their own component businesses for smartphones. But server and network, it’s a different story,” the executive said.

Are there any articles on how dependent Apple and Boeing are on Chinese components? This strategy seems incredibly short-sighted.

Posted by: Schmoe | May 17 2019 22:45 utc | 37

@ Jen. Another thought. The era in which the current state of America was conceived. British colonies in a war of separation or independence against the British. Europe and Britain at that time mostly ruled by hereditary monarchs nobles and lords ect.
Americans which I take it at that time would have been mostly British ancestry had done away with hereditary monarchs and so forth. It would have been somewhat exceptional at the time. In the targeting of the leader of a nation as the source of all evil, I wonder if that relates back to doing away with hereditary leadership especially monarch.

the grand chessboard. checkmate the king.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | May 17 2019 22:54 utc | 38

President Trump has declared a national emergency due a threat to the US from "the ability of foreign adversaries to create and exploit vulnerabilities in information and communications technology or services, with potentially catastrophic effects, and thereby constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States," so various actions and prohibitions have been stipulated here.

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 17 2019 22:55 utc | 39

I particularly like this line: "where the propaganda weakens and journalism sneaks in"

Posted by: Lord H | May 17 2019 23:07 utc | 40

China has outspent the US on R&D since 2009 and now invests three times as much each year. That's why it's ahead technologically and scientifically.

By 2028, if current ratios hold, China will also outspend the US on defense. Won't that be interesting?

Posted by: Godfree Roberts | May 17 2019 23:30 utc | 41

Remember the “Asian pivot”?

Did Huawei and other critical tech companies start making independent chips back then? Or before?

When were the tariffs planned?

Speculation, anyone?

Posted by: oglalla | May 17 2019 23:34 utc | 42


I dont mean to make excuses for Trump.
It all happens on his watch.

We will have other/better option soon - hopefully not too late.

Posted by: jared | May 17 2019 23:37 utc | 43

I think war reporting rules are in place with China, and Trade war has started.
Every month that passes without a crisis is a success for China right now as it over takes US in GDP, tech, and trade links.
Key issues are bringing Europe in - the Huawei ban extended to Europe is battlefield #1, Northstream (gas link to Russia) is #2.
First get Europe on board, the US can up things a lot further.
If Trump gets this right, he can delay outright defeat by China under well beyond his 8 years are up. (Bush or Obama early on could have won, or could have found a peaceful solution).

Posted by: Michael Droy | May 18 2019 0:09 utc | 44

" Not that there aren't legitimate concerns to have, but such concerns should also apply, and should've applied in the last 2 decades, to all previous mobile phone communication systems' effects on global health; cherry-picking just that one time when it's China that's in the lead, and not the West anymore, is quite a blatant admission of the real goal of those who pull the strings."

Can't agree with this. The red flags and warnings have been very prominent regarding cell phone use, microwaves, excessive exposre to any kind of screen, smart phones carried too close to either brains or balls, etc. etc. If you haven't noticed this, you have not been looking. I am very concerned about the health effects of 5G technologyo and it has nothing to do with china. If the China flag is what finally gets this topic into the mainstream, I am, actually, fine with that. It is not only human brains that 5G threatens to scramble: the functioning of all living things, especially all animals, will likely or could strongly be affected. WE DO NOT KNOW. No testing of this technology has taken place. I do not doubt that for many the Chinese element is the only reason to attack 5G at this time. But many, many others are questioning its introduction for the right reasons, as they have questioned the wisdom of our growing exposure to waves, streams of electrons, and what have you for decades. And then there is BlueTooth.

Posted by: Really? | May 18 2019 0:12 utc | 45

The issue with these chips highlights just how ridiculous the American position is. The chips referred to are Intel processors they use in servers and qualcomm (arm core) processors in cell phones. Funny thing is, these processors are not even made in the US, and their replacement isn't that much of an issue, not for a company with the resources Huawei possesses. Huawei already has its own arm based soc's it uses in it's high end phones and they can replace processors in it's low end phones with lesser versions of these. The intel processors will be tougher to do for the commercial market because of software compatibility issues. For government and other high security uses China has options like the mips based Loongson but that wouldn't work in the commercial environment so hopelessly devoted to x86 and windows. Probably the best solution would be to make an x86 analog like amd markets, and it wouldn't take that long to do.

Posted by: Indrid Cold | May 18 2019 0:15 utc | 46

A president doesn't have to obey the orders of the powers that be just because they threaten to kill him otherwise. A brave president would defy them to do their worst. If they went ahead and killed him, he would still have accomplished something important. By exposing the nature of the system, he would have robbed it of its legitimacy and brought a revolution much closer.

Posted by: lysias | May 18 2019 0:15 utc | 47

You've all been trained very well to ignore the class warfare.

China's "peaceful rise" was convenient when it enriched the Western elite.

But when China makes a play for equal footing, the must be smacked down.

In each case (rise, smack-down) ordinary people (like yourselves) get f*cked.

Kissinger's NWO? It's for the children.... No, not YOUR children.

Welcome to the rabbithole.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 18 2019 0:32 utc | 48

Best example of a country stealing foreign inventions and protecting its 'uneconomical' industries with tariffs is the USA.
It was notorious that in the C19th American publishers pirated authors and musicians from Europe, particularly of course from Britain where the intellectual properties of Dickens and his contemporaries laid the basis for many an American publishing fortune.
Among the primary victims were American authors who couldn't compete against stolen imports.

Posted by: bevin | May 18 2019 0:32 utc | 49

lysias: A president doesn't have to obey the orders of the powers that be ...

Well, that's why they select the President beforehand to ensure there are no inconvenient difficulties with a new President. In fact, our President's have generally had a connection to CIA: Bush Sr. was CIA, Clinton is said to allowed their flights into Arkansas, GW Bush was son of CIA, Obama is said to have come from a CIA family (grandfather and probably mother), and some have pointed to Trump's first casino deal as a possible CIA tie (related to money laundering of CIA drug money)

Pretending otherwise furthers the democracy works! narrative. Isn't it already clear that the West is feudal and Empire First (aka globalist) - despite Trump's faux populist pretense? US foreign policy has been remarkably consistent for over 20 years. US congressmen takes oaths to Israel. Western propaganda sing the Deep State tune.

Welcome to the rabbithole.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 18 2019 0:54 utc | 50

I am not so sure the conclusions of the article are correct. Tariffs on Chinese factories will force production to other countries in the area like Vietnam where costs are not going to be much higher than China.

Granted, the US may be pissed off that Huawei is placing back doors in their systems but I suspect that they are only copying what the US has done for years with US companies like Microsoft.

My daughter managed 5 factories located in China of a clothing manufacture based in the US some years ago. She said there was constant chaos as the workers were continually on strike. Bad air, dangerous machines, poor wages. few bathrooms, bad water, childcare is chaining you child to a fence for the day, and the like. Her boss flew to China and asked for the cheapest costs possible. They showed him a factory full of little children cranking out production. He left crying his eyes out. He was a cold hearted bastard but even that was too much for him to see.

I viewed first hand the destruction trade agreements like NAFTA caused to good union wages and benefits in the US. Hell, that is what got Trump elected. It is tough to watch your children go into the same profession and make 50% less in wages and fringes 30 years later.

Intellectual property and patents? No so sure about that, the views here are new to me. I always supported them but I guess I need to dig deeper on that one.

In the net I think China is the loser, fewer jobs, higher food costs, their markets are down 30%, ours are peaking and are seen as a safe haven for money. Export numbers for China are dropping as is the trade balance.

At this point it is not a trade war but a re balancing of markets IMHO. If it was a real trade war things would be far worse. Middle supplier countries will be hurt, US farmers, some markets win some lose. If it was business as usual then it would be business as usual. Trump is stirring the pot and what the endgame is is anyone's guess. Did anyone really believe China would just bend over and accept any demands from the US?

All that being said China can easily wait it out and hope Trump loses and the policy is reversed which I am sure his policies will be reversed if anyone else gets elected.

Posted by: dltravers | May 18 2019 0:55 utc | 51

Blooming Barricade at 9.

Thank you for your links it adds to this story I read last night on RI re the US money and who has it


Posted by: Gordon McPhail | May 18 2019 1:02 utc | 52

[My dictionaries say that both terms are equally applicable.

your dictionary won't tell you anything about when you should use an adjective and not an adverb. ;)

But good article.

Posted by: LeaNder | May 18 2019 1:08 utc | 53

@ jared 4:47:32 PM #17

Your link about Boeing is a good one. Today at Naked Capitalism was a story about a possible 'payback' link between Huawei and Boeing. China has the option of causing a great deal of pain to both the US and Boeing in retaliation.

They could declare the recertified 737-MAX to be unsafe, so much so they're cancelling all orders and forbidding any landings in or overflights of China. If Canada hadn't screwed up so badly, the local Bombardier airplane might have been substituted for the 737. But Canada did goof in a major way.

Posted by: Zachary Smith | May 18 2019 1:19 utc | 54

@ponderer | May 17, 2019 4:27:02 PM | 15

There is no way that the US could subsidize the growth of a larger population base forever.

China sends vast amounts of manufactured goods to the United States; the US pays for all this with dollars it can effortlessly print. So who is subsidizing whom?

Posted by: Cyril | May 18 2019 1:24 utc | 55

dltravers @53: hope Trump loses and the policy is reversed

In other words: democracy works!

Just ignore:

> money in politics;

> pervasive propaganda;

> things you CAN'T vote for (absolute support for Israel and military adventures);

> CIA connections to past Presidents;

> loyalty oaths to Israel;

> jailing of Assange (after unprecedented break of asylum protection);

> the lies of past Presidents;

> Cold War imperatives;

> Sanders sheep-dogging;

> dirty tricks against protest movements like Gillet Jeune and Occupy.

Welcome to the rabbit hole/

Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 18 2019 1:26 utc | 56

A minor thing compared to the trade war, but possibly of interest to sports fans.

The National Basketball Association (NBA) has been very popular in China, but its profitable Chinese operations may become a casualty of the trade war. Presumably it fears this: the NBA is looking to hire someone who can talk to the Chinese government:

The National Basketball Association Inc. is hiring its first head of government and public affairs in China as it seeks to protect its most important international market at a time of high tension in the U.S.-China relationship.

Posted by: Cyril | May 18 2019 1:26 utc | 57

What I don't like about Chas Freeman's article is his tone-deafness.

He has been around government enough to know better. Smacking down China is a strategic priority for the Deep State. But Chas says:

There is no longer an orderly policy process in Washington to coordinate, moderate, or control policy formulation or implementation. Instead, a populist president has effectively declared open season on China.

It's a bit disturbing to see people here read Kissinger's 2014 Op-Ed (finally) but say nothing about Chas Freeman's assertion that it's all made up by a "populist" President.

<> <> <> <> <> <> <>

If the above hurt your feeling please feel free to retreat to your happy place. We'd all be better off.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 18 2019 1:35 utc | 58

Sorry about my comment's redundant reference to $11b of Huawei purchases from US suppliers; b said the same thing but I missed it.

Posted by: Schmoe | May 18 2019 2:26 utc | 59

from Market Realist. . .
The United States attacked China’s largest telecom equipment maker Huawei. If China decides to retaliate, it could target chip giants like Qualcomm and Broadcom, which rely heavily on it for revenue, or tech giant Apple, which depends on them for iPhone manufacturing.

Huawei uses Qualcomm’s modems in its high-end smartphones and has been in settlement talks with the chip supplier over a licensing dispute. Tensions between the United States and Huawei could delay this licensing settlement, sending Qualcomm’s stock down 4.4% on May 16.

Huawei’s competitors Nokia and Ericsson would stand to win from the above ban as the United States and its allies would resort to them for 5G deployment. Nokia’s and Ericsson’s stocks rose more than 4% and 2% in early trading on May 16. . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 18 2019 2:59 utc | 60

Many trade war articles here

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 18 2019 3:06 utc | 61

Jackrabbit at @ 58

Not happy, just learned to live with it. I think I get your point. The policy really means little, the underlying issues will never change.
Been in the rabbit hole for a really long time. If more people jump in maybe things will really start to change.

Posted by: dltravers | May 18 2019 3:13 utc | 62

@ Posted by: dltravers | May 17, 2019 8:55:12 PM | 53

I am not so sure the conclusions of the article are correct. Tariffs on Chinese factories will force production to other countries in the area like Vietnam where costs are not going to be much higher than China.

First of all, this is not a new phenomenon: low wages, low technology industries are already being transferred to India and SE-Asia. The Chinese know this and there are inumerous articles on the internet you can find about it.

But even if this process accelerates, that won't solve the manufacturing problem of the USA: it will continue to be abroad. Besides, China's "competitive advantages" are too big for a confederation of micro-countries in the Pacific to overcome. It has a socialist economy (centrally planified economy, under the hegemony of the working class); it has 1.5 billion people that will only peak in 2030; it is decades ahead in built infrastructure; it has a huge scale economy advantage (e.g. infrastructure projects that are required to reach a certain desired productive level, which are profitable in China, may not be profitable in e.g. Malaysia simply because it is too small); its financial sector is not dominant over production. But then, I repeat: even if the USA nukes China, manufacturing still won't go back to American soil.

America's problem is a secular fall of its profit rates, not manufacturing capacity: it can import whatever and how much products it needs simply because it can print world money (Dollar system).

Posted by: vk | May 18 2019 4:01 utc | 63

Excuse the interruption. John Bolton has been shot!!!

"WASHINGTON—Bursting through the Congressional chamber doors while moaning and clutching his shoulder, John Bolton reportedly stumbled into the Capitol building Friday claiming that he’d been shot by Iran."

Posted by: dh | May 18 2019 4:06 utc | 64

b said;" the U.S. economic system is based on greed and not on the welfare of its citizens."


Jrabbit @ 52 said;"US foreign policy has been remarkably consistent for over 20 years."

Maybe the last 100 yrs.? Demonize countries people and rulers, and take their stuff, but why not? We are, don't ya' know, the exceptional nation, doing gods work.

Manifest Destiny, isn't it great?

Posted by: ben | May 18 2019 4:18 utc | 65

I know next to nothing about the "Huawei" business, so a new article about it is something to grab at. Pretty cut and dried, huh? Hauwei is pure evil, and no 'ifs' or 'buts' about it.

But who is this guy. A couple of quick searches turned up some more of his output.

‘It’s now or never’: The untold story of the dramatic, Canadian-led rescue of Syria’s White Helmets

How Israel became a defender of the Syrian people

Just another neocon hack peddling BS, so I'm back to square one.

Posted by: Zachary Smith | May 18 2019 5:31 utc | 66

Thanks to everyone who replied to my comment @ 25.

I certainly agree with Peter AU 1 @ 33 and 40 that the Western (or more specifically the English) mentality of the period in which the US was founded as a set of colonies and then later became a nation was a significant influence on the US' later conception of its place in the world. The Pilgrims must have certainly felt themselves blessed by God in surviving (with the help of native individuals like Squanto) their early years of crop failures and famines; at the same time they regarded their new environment as theirs for the taking (in their mind-set, God had willed it so) and the native people, being non-Christian, as their enemies. The Pilgrims may have seen themselves as God's Chosen people cast into the wilderness like the Israelites wandering in the Sinai under Moses for 40 years. This is one root of 'Murica's belief in itself as the Exceptional Nation. (It probably also is the root of the Special Relationship between the US and Israel.)

Overthrowing British monarchical rule and replacing it with a republican form of government (and nicking the idea of federal government from the Iroquois confederacy of indigenous nations around the Great Lakes region) no doubt reinforced this self-belief in being the Exceptional Nation. Add to that the territorial expansion across the prairies and the Rockies, then receiving waves of immigrants from northern, central and eastern Europe (mostly German-speaking) through the 19th century, wars (War of 1812 and the American Civil War) in which the British are either the enemy or aid the Confederate States, the genocide of indigenous peoples by the US government in the late 1800s and the legacy of slavery (which American slave-owning states claimed was supported by the Bible) and you have the foundation for a nation that believes that everyone around the world looks up to it for moral and spiritual leadership.

The mentality of a nation founded by people who considered themselves God's Chosen probably also finds unusual parallels in the superhero phenomenon. Most comic superheroes like Superman, Spiderman et al are "chosen" in some way (even if by accident as in the case of Spiderman). They are blessed with unusual powers and make a choice as to how to use their powers, whether for good or evil. They nearly always work alone and if they work together, they don't necessarily collaborate well but tend to work in parallel against evil. Superheroes like Batman work alone (or with a junior partner) aided by loads of technology which require his alter ego to be an insanely wealthy and eccentric industrialist. As Wage Laborer @ 35 says, all this definitely is internalised: I didn't even have to look up anything on Batman to be able to say all this!

Posted by: Jen | May 18 2019 5:46 utc | 67

Without the oil, Trump has lost.
Pepe Escobar is starting to get the picture
"If President Trump had ever read Mackinder – and there’s no evidence he did – one might assume that he’s aiming at a new anti-Eurasia integration pivot centered on the Persian Gulf. And energy would be at the heart of the pivot.
If Washington were able to control everything, including “Big Prize” Iran, it would be able to dominate all Asian economies, especially China. Trump even said were that to happen, “decisions on the GNP of China will be made in Washington.”...

...Arguably the key (invisible) takeaway of the meetings this week between Foreign Ministers Sergey Lavrov and Wang Yi, and then between Lavrov and Pompeo, is that Moscow made it quite clear that Iran will be protected by Russia in the event of an American showdown. Pompeo’s body language showed how rattled he was.

What rattled Pomp. "Any use of nuclear weapons against Russia or its allies, be it small-scale, medium-scale or any other scale, will be treated as a nuclear attack on our country. The response will be instant and with all the relevant consequences,”

Trump may not have read Mackinder but Kissinger sure would have.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | May 18 2019 6:15 utc | 68

dltravers | May 17, 2019 8:55:12 PM | 54:

China will wait it out until Trump is out of office. The Chinese leadership is pretty smart and had at least three years to prepare for the worst case scenario. Once Chinese industries as a whole follow Huawei's footsteps (i.e. Plan B), there will be no turning back. They'll set off Plan B once they see Trump winning 2020.

dh | May 18, 2019 12:06:33 AM | 67:

Ugh...I almost leap for joy until I read the URL.

Posted by: Ian | May 18 2019 8:30 utc | 69

Are we to asume from "Some aspects of China's trade behavior can and should be criticized" that the United States are shining example of trade (and all other) policies,all others to follow?

Posted by: padre | May 18 2019 9:06 utc | 70

@Indrid Cold #46:

For government and other high security uses China has options like the mips based Loongson but that wouldn't work in the commercial environment so hopelessly devoted to x86 and windows. Probably the best solution would be to make an x86 analog like amd markets, and it wouldn't take that long to do.

Chinese-Taiwanese joint venture Zhaoxin has been making x86 processors since 2013, based on VIA Technologies' x86 license. These processors are manufactured by Taiwanese TSMC, but may switch to Chinese SMIC once it launches its 14nm process later this year.

Posted by: S | May 18 2019 10:02 utc | 71

"Whatever face is at the top is only representing the layers below." --b

The truth of this is also why so many in America hate Trump so much. He is too perfect a reflection of what America truly stands for. Trump accurately represents America, from America's bloated, over-inflated sense of self-importance and worth to America's pussy-grabbing foreign policy. Trump-hate is really self-hate.

Delusional American Russiagater Trump Derangement Syndrome victims will protest, but such people are incapable of taking a good hard look at themselves.

Hmm... "delusional" and "American" are redundant adjectives here. I should be more careful with my writing style.

Posted by: William Gruff | May 18 2019 11:43 utc | 72

Mr. Gruff you have it almost correct, Americans and the USA are not one in the same and they never have been.
I still don't think you guys get it.. The 7 article constitution of the USA apportions the power to rule between two branches and separates the masses from their personal political powers and their human rights. Its result is not a democracy, but a few people rule republic. 100% of the authority to rule (operate and make decisions) is vested in one person (Art. II, rule and decide: President w/VP backup), subject only to the powers distributed to the two bodied legislative structure ( Art. I, pass law and raise money: 450 house+100 senate persons). Critical to understand => one person makes all decisions, and directs the day to day government. Article III thru VII defines the judiciary and clarifies various situations. (525 popularly elected + 2 electoral college appointed <=paid governors) vs. 350,000,000 powerless governed persons entitled only to 3 votes/voter [Senator(1), House members(2)] and allowed one vote/voter for each President(1) and VP(1) <=but both Art. II persons are appointed by the electoral college).

The USA is about delivering to the ownership of a very few, all of the assets, all of the power, and all of the services once possessed by the many. The demand for all of the possessions of the many, to be delivered to the few, has expanded over time from 13 colony America to earth and now space. No one but the few are entitled to anything and the USA and other governments are there to be sure of it. But how is 'total possession vested in the few' to be maintained? By rule of law!

But what law would transfer everyone's possessions into the ownership of a few? Ah, the laws of monopoly.. so rule of law, from thin air, generates=> monopoly powers and rights of ownership.. Examples of laws that bear monopoly powers and that transfer ownership rights are copyright laws, patent laws, as they convert monopoly powers that once the many shared (via governments) now belong to the few. The transfer is called privatization. Oil is controlled for the benefit of the private few by ownership laws and right to produce contracts. All in all the function of t he USA has been to make a few very wealthy at the expense of the many.

The trade issues, sanctions, wars, tariffs, race wars, oil wars, religious wars etc. are about which people are going to be the few. Until the form and function of governments are determined by the masses from the bottom, instead of by the few from the top, nothing will ever change. The masses will suffer or prosper according to which government is the winner.

Posted by: snake | May 18 2019 11:55 utc | 73

US factories moved to China because the US economy is based on greed?!! US government greed for the company's money maybe. US factories moved to China because it was cheaper to produce products there and then pay the expense to ship them all the way back. The US has one of the highest federal tax rates on earth, and add in high state taxes for an unacceptable situation. US fiat paper money is the base problem.

Posted by: therevolutionwas | May 18 2019 12:08 utc | 74

"Soon U.S. chip companies will have lost all their sales to the second largest smartphone producer of the world. That loss will not be just temporarily, it will become permanent." --b

This is a crucial and important development. So long as China is just developing their domestic chip designs as an academic exercise they will forever trail behind the market leaders by at least one technological iteration. Why try so hard with chip designs that will only ever just be used in college degree theses papers and proof of concept models? Real innovation comes from scratching an itch; from fulfilling an actual need. Chip fab is the only remaining significant technological lead that America retains anymore, but the raw engineering brainpower behind that industry in the US is mostly imported from China anyway. The Chinese have no shortage of brilliant engineers, they just have not really had the need to do without Intel and AMD before. Now they do.

In the short term the transition will be painful for China. The first few iterations of their replacement chip designs will be buggy and not have the features of chips they could have bought for cheaper from the US. They will also have problems ramping up capacity to meet their needs. Typical growing pains, in other words. In the long term, though, this will be seen as the point at which the end started for America's chip tech dominance. Within a year or so China will be producing chips as good as America's. Another year after that and America will be eclipsed in that industry. No longer will people be looking for "Intel Inside!" stickers on products but rather "Huawei Inside!".

Posted by: William Gruff | May 18 2019 12:11 utc | 75

William Gruff @ 72 & snake 71
I was just about to say the very same thing !
Delusions of grandeur ! And now major self-harm symtems !
But are these degenerates above the law ? They are after all genicidel mass murder’s!
String um up I say or shall we fry um ?
Right now the brain dead american public are like something out of — - -
‘The invasion of the body snatchers ‘ film

Posted by: Mark2 | May 18 2019 12:24 utc | 76

@William Gruff #75: China is already producing world-class ARM chips. HiSilicon's latest Kirin processors are on par with Qualcomm's Snapdragon and Samsung's Exynos processors. Apple's A-series is ahead of them all, but what does it matter if Apple's rising prices and falling quality are going to kill Apple anyway?

Posted by: S | May 18 2019 12:47 utc | 77

@58, JackRabitt, Smacking down China is a strategic priority for the Deep State.

the first time I got some type of glimpse of the average American Mind on China, as it filtered down from "the deep state" to the more fearfully ill-informed quarters of society no doubt, was in the post 9/11 universe.

The person or persons pushing the meme, may have been a bit confused by all the conspiracy theories about 9/11 unfolding at the time.

Anyway, Chinese troops he7she/they asserted readers were close to the Mexican border approaching, advancing swiftly.

In hindsight, maybe accidentally, although I doubt, Trump combines the elements of that narrative perfectly. And it is not my intention to argue right or wrong here. But apparently down at the border there is this "invasion" on the other hand there's also the Yellow Peril.

Posted by: Joanna | May 18 2019 13:30 utc | 78

William Gruff says:

Chip fab is the only remaining significant technological lead that America retains anymore, but the raw engineering brainpower behind that industry in the US is mostly imported from China anyway

yeah, afterall, they've been gaming those iterations with little sliding beads for at least the last 5000 years.

Posted by: john | May 18 2019 13:51 utc | 79

Isnt it clear the US is globalist? Uhhm, well, yes, it's only been clear for the prior 75 years at least. In fact Lenin laid it all out during WWI so one could say it's been clear for 100 years.

What doesn't seem to be clear, or else ignored/excused here---China is today just as globalist as the US and in fact the multinational corporations in control of both countries are inextricably linked, especially in the high tech sector currently under the intense MoA thread microscope.

Why aren't Huawei making making more smartphone chips in production? Because so many Chinese component manufacturers are still heavily invested in churning out product for Apple. These companies employ millions in "relatively high paying" factory jobs and account for a large slice of Chinese export income and stock market capitalisation. These corporate oligarchs supported by the Chinese government retain a vested interest in the status quo.

This is not to minimise Huawei or Chinese growing ability to compete at the design and innovation level as well as production, it is simply rightsizing the perspective to fit the reality. Huawei production is growing worldwide but this doesn't mean Apple or Samsung will evaporate or fall by the wayside and the Chinese need Apple and its markets too. In fact, Huawei is now willing for the first time to sell microchips to third party cell phone producers including Apple. Successful capitalist growth for China depends on increasing production into new products, technologies and markets not replacing current platforms with new. The product cycle will take care of itself in time anyway.

By our standards exploitation of workers in China is a grim picture, which compares with the grim blue collar conditions in the US, the equal and opposite result of the globalist equation wrt offshoring factory jobs endemic to capitalist production.

China is still in the industrial growth phase of its capitalist development, although beginning to transition to the higher phase for sure. Of course.

MoA China "experts" should study the reality of globalisation after removing the rose coloured glasses if you wish to be considered analysts instead of merely wishful thinkers/cheerleaders of groupthink delusion.

Posted by: donkeytale | May 18 2019 13:57 utc | 80

Well, the chinese system of power has always been the thoughest to understand for any outsider. It has been this way, but in the last years it seems the so called age of information has lead to erode the curtains of this complex mechanism. At least for those who want to look behind those curtains, and not use them to project their propaganda.. ;)

And it is a good sign that while Xi tired to establish himself in such a unique position of power like Mao, and openly tried to put himself into the historic succession of the old emperors (like Mao did too), that the will of the people and party still tips the scale of power.
It means the chinese confucian tradition and its consequences for a ruler even today still matter. Even though they are anyway lost on someone who is not of asian origin.

What to westerners look like a dictator, is of a different nature as one can even imagine with western eyes. Every ruler has to strive for balance, for harmony, which in turns makes hearing of the peoples popular will a neccisity.

Even though many chinese say, they like any other people only strive for what they need most ;) (like harmony and compromise). Though many also say, that the chinese will always choose stability and security over freedom. And i guess that is what many from the western world dont get about China, and also about the Putinists.
I say let them and every one else have their choice. Just like i say let the US do theirs, and reap what they seeded.

For those able to read German check out the Books of Peter Scholl-Latour on China. The most telling and authorative books from a journalist who has reported first had for over 60 years, and has always defended and honored his own perspective;
While the western so called reporters were trapt in their professional delusion of pro-NATO propaganda, and while the SDS praised the culture revolution as a democratic means, when whole china was terrorized and millions slaugtherd.
Hard to walk that middle ground, while being attacked from ideological drones from both sides i guess..

Anyway, the neocons in the US believes it is now or never to defend the USs unique position as world power. They believe, that if they dont fight now, they will have lost.
I say, they already have.

Short of pulling a Hitler on China, meaning a total annihilation of the chinese people, there is nothing they can do. And even Bolton will have a hard time trying to push through a clear cut genocide ;)

We will see china rise. Those who feared of this will see that china will not be half as bad as thought, and those who gloirfy china and put them into a good (vs bad US) black-wide scheme will learn of the faults of the chinese power and its projection (Like its own believe of supremacy, of racism (a reason why china in the cold war was pretty unsuccessfull in Africa, where most knew who deeply racist chinese treated their fellows as workers, guest students,..).

All in all, what we need is a true and functional global community of nations and people, where goverments truely work together to balance out the stronger world powers. And with the pressure of Chinas rise and its strugle with the US, we may finally have a better chance for this to at least partially succed.
I hope.. ;) Or of course it nuclear winter time. We will see.

Posted by: DontBelieveEitherPropaganda | May 18 2019 13:58 utc | 81

@donkeytale: Thank you for your comment. The red colored glasses IMHO are just the mirror reflection of the NATO colored glasses IMHO, so the same problem, albeit on other sides of the coin. Some where seem to need a "good" guy they can pin their hope on. Psychological understandable, but pretty damning for a serious try to look at the world at least somewhat uninfluenced.

Posted by: DontBelieveEitherPropaganda | May 18 2019 14:02 utc | 82

vk @ 63

True but tariffs have always been applied to protect sectors of an economy that a nation feels is important until the free trade era. Countries still use tariffs and probably always will in some instances. In my lifetime I saw the destruction of the working class in the US accelerate. To the Trump voter tariffs are the simple and logical answer.

I have always suspected that Nixon's rapprochement with China had as much to do with breaking the enormous union power of that era that counterbalancing the Soviets. Interestingly enough, Kissinger's brother was a big time union busting consultant in those days.

That would make innovation important but with some thoughts and ideas can be plagiarized and manufactured. The US is in decline and China is ascending and nothing is going to stop that from happening at this point. It is cyclical and the Europeans have had their 500 years of planetary dominance.

If the Anglo American Europeans are smart they will let that cycle flow without a world war. I do not think they are smart.

Posted by: dltravers | May 18 2019 14:10 utc | 83


Hard to walk that middle ground, while being attacked from ideological drones from both sides i guess.

No, it's easy to walk grounded in truth. And while I appreciate the point you make "middle ground" will itself by misunderstood and politicised. Of course, you will be attacked by the drones of delusion simply for pointing out their fallacies.

Posted by: donkeytale | May 18 2019 14:10 utc | 84


"The trade issues, sanctions, wars, tariffs, race wars, oil wars, religious wars etc. are about which people are going to be the few."

Very insightful post.
This summary sentence makes sense.
Wish I could disagree. Perhaps others can find evidence to refute.
Obama could have pushed to change the electoral system when he had the trifecta of controlling all three branches of govt. He did nothing.
I would like to read further analysis that relates this view to the concept of the Electoral College, which (I think) is that all power not given to the fed govt. actually resides in the states, not the federal government. That is, the USA is a confederation of states.

How come the executive has so much power when (I believe) the official structure of the USA is a confederation of states? Isn't this also the reason why each state has two senators, regardless of size?

Posted by: Really? | May 18 2019 14:13 utc | 85


Hah correct you are so let me preempt Jackrabbit here.

b, please check donkeytale and Don'tBelieveEitherPropaganda IP addresses to make sure we aren't the same poster. Thank you.

Posted by: donkeytale | May 18 2019 14:13 utc | 86

What we need is a true and functional global community of nations and people, where governments truly work together to balance out the stronger world powers.

The US national security state which enjoys a huge military budget and 800 overseas bases necessarily sees the world in a masculine competitive sense, not in a feminine cooperative sense. So winning the competition takes precedence over working together, and diplomacy is reduced to making and enforcing US demands.

from the recent US National Defense Strategy. . .

We are facing increased global disorder, characterized by decline in the long-standing rules-based international order—creating a security environment more complex and volatile than any we have experienced in recent memory. Inter-state strategic competition, not terrorism, is now the primary concern in U.S. national security. China is a strategic competitor using predatory economics to intimidate its neighbors while militarizing features in the South China Sea. . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | May 18 2019 14:26 utc | 87

vk @ 13

China now, Japan in the 1980s - it's "deja vu all over again!"

"AFTER ITS DEFEAT in World War II, Japan was content to take foreign inventions -- the transistor, the laser, the videotape player -- and convert them into products that it could market around the world. Japan acquired much of its base of Western technology, most of it American, perfectly legally through licensing, careful study of scientific papers and patents, and imitation. But when the U.S. wasn't willing to share, some Japanese companies simply copied with little regard for patents and other intellectual property rights that the courts have only recently begun to define in many areas of high technology. The U.S., confident of its technical superiority, ''sold out to the Japanese,'' says G. Steven Burrill, head of the high-technology consulting group at Arthur Young, a Big Eight accounting firm. ''We let them share our brain.'' Now, belatedly awake to the recognition that Japan has been eating their breakfast, lunch, dinner, and bedtime snack, American companies are stirring. IBM vs. Fujitsu over computer software, Honeywell vs. Minolta over automatic focusing, Corning Glass vs. Sumitomo Electric over fiber optics -- these are only the latest, best-publicized complaints that Japan has stolen American technology. Even as those legal battles are fought out, the copycat cliche is becoming obsolete. A series of studies financed by the U.S. government since 1984 warn that Japan has caught up with the U.S. or passed it in the development of integrated circuits, fiber optics, computer hardware engineering, and advanced materials like polymers. It is pressing hard in some areas of biotechnology, and lags primarily in computer software. Already there are signs that the Japanese, buoyed by their new prowess, have assumed the arrogance of the U.S. along with its technology."

"A MEASURE of Japan's progress can be found in the number of patent filings in the U.S., Japan's most important export market. ..."

"THE FACT that Americans now worry about their access to Japanese technology is an acknowledgment of Japan's new scientific competence. When the Japanese were known primarily as copycats, the flow of technology was essentially in one direction. It was also cheap. Aaron Gellman, president of a consulting firm, says that for years U.S. firms licensed technology to the Japanese without asking for a grant-back, the right to use any improvements they made. Says Gellman: ''This was very arrogant and implied that no one could improve on our technology.''"

"U.S. scientists and companies have failed to take advantage of opportunities to tap Japanese academic research. ''What's wrong here is pure laziness,'' says Martin Anderson, an analyst with the MAC Group, a consulting firm in Cambridge, Massachusetts."

Posted by: daffyDuct | May 18 2019 14:30 utc | 88

.Trust the unitedsnake to blame the Chinese for
reneging on an agreement !

Fact is, Trump's team Add in last minute conditions that are totally unacceptable to China.
Chinese commentators are fuming at the audacity of
the demands.
'WTF, Do they think we'r their gawd damned 51st state ?'

Typical unitedsnake's 'negotiation' tactics, designed to fail !

Thats how Clinton justity his bombing of ex Yugo,
by blaming Belgrade for the breakdown of negotiation,to justify its 78 days of airial arsons against Yugo.

Posted by: denk | May 18 2019 14:39 utc | 89

How the unitedsnake destroyed Toshiba and took over its crown jewel chip tech,...

Toshiba was severely punished for breaking fukus
sanction on USSR, by selling state of art milling
machine to the Soviets.

the unitedsnake slapped a heavy fine, demanded
the resignation of Toshiba CEO, imposed a ten
years ban on Toshiba products, FORCED the japs
to share their latest chip tech with merikkans.

Toshiba never recovered from that disaster.

Posted by: denk | May 18 2019 14:49 utc | 90

Really? @ 73

Obama could have pushed to change the electoral system when he had the trifecta of controlling all three branches of govt. He did nothing.

no, not really, really?

Lies are easy to get away with if they are repeated often enough and given voice by many different people. Repeat a lie often enough and that lie often becomes conventional wisdom. Repeating a lie doesn’t change the lie into the truth, it changes the people hearing the repeated lie.

Obama never effectively controlled all three branches. For one thing the Senate filibuster lever was controlled by both Demotardic blue dogs and Senate moderates who effectivly removed the public option from ACA and limited the 2009 stimulus package well below the amount requested by Obama (fun fact: it actually took 3 Republicans crossing the aisle to kill the filibuster of the stim package).

Besides, there were actually very few days in the 2009-2010 Senate when 60 Democrates were even seated because of such items as AL Franken not seated for months while his thin victory was litigated and the absence via sickness of some sitting Senators, most prominently Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd. For all of the two years Dems had 60 seated Senators for only 4 months, during which time they were able to pass Obamacare in the diluted form such as it was (subsequently diluted even further courtesy of the SCOTUS--which in reality is the "third branch of goverment" and NOT under Obama's control).

Not sure what you mean by "changing the electoral system" but in the main any substantial change to the electoral system requires a constitutional amendment which is an even higher bar to cross than simply having 60 sitting Senators and "control of all three branches".

So basically your comment amounts to vague nonsense unsupported by fact. I'll be charitable and not call you a liar, just misinformed.

I agree with your contention that Obama was not pushy enough, for sure, possibly as a result of his not want to be viewed as "uppity" as the first black POTUS, he may have vitimised himself. White (or orange) presidents seem to have no worries about being portrayed as pushy....

Posted by: donkeytale | May 18 2019 14:49 utc | 91

Correction: the Dems never had 60 seated....Blue Dog Lieberman was an independent and not nealry as reliable a Dem voter (see public option) as fellow independent Bernie Sanders.

Posted by: donkeytale | May 18 2019 14:52 utc | 92

Time to discard any illusions about the US,source: Global Times Published: 2019/5/17 22:49:35

Posted by: vk | May 18 2019 14:52 utc | 93

An excellent summary of many aspects of a serious and deteriorating situation.

In the end, China has a lot of brainpower to apply to situations like this.

They are used to speaking and writing one of the world's most difficult languages.

They are used to playing Go, one of the world's most difficult board games.

And their national endowment of analytical skills immensely surpasses that of the United States.

They are said to have eight times as many students in math and science and engineering in their universities.

Xi himself is very bright, having earned degrees in difficult subjects at demanding universities, and he is calm and very forward-thinking. Just consider that magnificent long-term Silk Road Project.

When I think of Trump with his constant mock-heroic poses and foot-high signatures on every silly memo and his gang of noisy, pompous thugs in top appointments, I can't help thinking I know how this will turn out in the end.

Posted by: JOHN CHUCKMAN | May 18 2019 14:59 utc | 94

donkeytale @ 91 was directed to Really? at 85. ha!

Posted by: donkeytale | May 18 2019 15:04 utc | 95

China’s yuan slide risks trolling Trump

It's good to remember that would not be the first time. After the first round of tariffs, China devalued the Renminbi and it basically wiped out the tariffs. In fact, it didn't even need to devalue that much: 1 Renminbi is now US$ 0.14 -- just a little over the Government max upwards band of 1:7.

Posted by: vk | May 18 2019 15:11 utc | 96

In 2013, the CEO of French hi tech co Alstom
was arrested by FBI ,while changing flight at
New York.
His 'crime', breaking MERIKKAN anti corruption
law by bribing govn officials in INDONESIA !

Such is the LONG arm of merikkan extra territorial jurisdiction, rings a bell ...
Ms meng ?

Just like Toshiba, the French paid a very heavy price. The CEO went to jail, Allstom, the crown
jewel of French industry, was FORCED to sell off its core bussiness to its main rival, GE. !

What did Ian Fleming's fundamental law of probability says....

Posted by: denk | May 18 2019 15:24 utc | 97

Really @85:

Obama could have pushed to change the electoral system when he had the trifecta of controlling all three branches of govt.

Obama could have also elevated the message of Occupy via his bully pulpit. In that way he could've used Occupy to effect real change and overcome institutional barriers like the conservatives in his own party. Instead, Obama bailed out banks, gave CIA/NSA a free pass, made Bush tax cuts permanent, and conducted covert wars and drone attacks (which he boosted: "I'm pretty good at").

Obamabots, dembots, and Kool-Aid drinkers will not like this comment. Beware their oh-so-clever bullshit.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 18 2019 15:32 utc | 98

US MegaCos. outsourced and ‘globalised’ with the blessing, nay encouragement! of the Pol. Class.

Cheaper labor and lax environmental rules, in comparison with ‘home’ (US, W countries, etc.) is a mantra. That is of course good enough, and one can track, say, sh*t-clothes factories transiting from Bangladesh, to China, to Malaysia, to Mexico, etc.

Other motives, the first is lack of responsibility and involvement which allows domineering and rapacious behavior. Foreign co. implant can just leave, relocate, if whatever. A random /racist term/ exploited worker in the 3rd world is not voting in US elections.

Deadly industrial pollution is outsourced, and energy use etc. at home while not curtailed or significantly diminished is not as high as one might see under condition of the industries returning home - a sort of ‘greener’ environment can be touted.

The PTB simply cannot grasp why some US citizens, who live high on the hog, house, 2 cars, 3 kids, endless dirt cheap consumer goods, etc. produced by ‘slaves’ abroad, complain. If the ‘stuff’ was produced at home, it would cost much more, the pay would be going to ‘low-level’ US labor — in a more closed economic circuit there would be more ‘equality’ as things stand today in the US - *not* claiming it’s a general rule.

Trump had some confused? thoughts about turning the present situation around, and relocating industrial - some extractive - manufacturing - jobs back home, say 1960s, with decent pay, to ppl who would then vote for him.

The stumbling block is that profits to shareholders, oligarchs, chief CEO’s, asset trippers, usurers, Mafia types, Banks and other Fin, and Politicians who in the US are highly paid lackeys, etc. is set to diminish, as ‘the pie’ can no longer be grown much to accomodate all these grifters. Due to energy constraints, disruption of climate change, etc.

Posted by: Noirette | May 18 2019 15:39 utc | 99

Brit and Dutch spooks now concur with Trump the
charlantan's claim of Huawei security risk !

Trust the Brits to doublecross the Chinese, after they've been given the huawei source codes to examine and declared it free of bugs.

As for the Dutch , they seems to be the goto guys these days, whenever the 5liars need some loyal poodles to corroborate their B.S., cue the M17 'investigation'.


Posted by: denk | May 18 2019 15:56 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.