Trump era: Fascist dawn, or road to liberation?

Just thinking that if the theory if Trump’s ‘genius tweets’ would be true, we should shortly expect some new ‘shocking revelations’ to be announced about The Squad individuals, perhaps some criminal activities. Those defending them would then look like fools.

Remains to be seen...
 
I'm thinking now, the purpose of the squad is to inject conflict into the system. Indoctrinated in a Marxist, collegiate education, their intent is revolution and overturning the establishment. The long standing position of Nancy Pelosi makes her a member of the establishment. It looks like Antifa is following the same rule book and so the hesitancy to denounce them. And so, all four are deeply mind programmed.

But I preach to the choir here. The following are selected quotes from The Birth Of Cultural Marxism: How The "Frankfurt School" Changed America

The roots of Western cultural decay are very deep, having first sprouted a century ago. It began with a loose clan of ideologues inside Europe’s communist movement. Today, it is known as the Frankfurt School, and its ideals have perverted American society.

Coming to America
*In 1934, the school was reborn at Columbia University. Its members began to exert their ideas on American culture.

It was at Columbia University that the school honed the tool it would use to destroy Western culture: the printed word.

*The school published a lot of popular material. The first of these was Critical Theory.

Critical Theory is a play on semantics. The theory was simple: criticize every pillar of Western culture—family, democracy, common law, freedom of speech, and others. The hope was that these pillars would crumble under the pressure.

*Their works split society into two main groups: the oppressors and the victims. They argued that history and reality were shaped by those groups who controlled traditional institutions. At the time, that was code for males of European descent.

* Who would replace the working class as the new vanguards of the Marxist revolution? Marcuse believed that it would be a victim coalition of minorities—blacks, women, and homosexuals.

*The social movements of the 1960s—black power, feminism, gay rights, sexual liberation—gave Marcuse a unique vehicle to release cultural Marxist ideas into the mainstream. Railing against all things “establishment,” The Frankfurt School’s ideals caught on like wildfire across American universities.

Marcuse then published Repressive Tolerance in 1965 as the various social movements in America were in full swing. In it, he argued that tolerance of all values and ideas meant the repression of “correct” ideas.

It was here that Marcuse coined the term “liberating tolerance.” It called for tolerance of any ideas coming from the left but intolerance of those from the right. One of the overarching themes of the Frankfurt School was total intolerance for any viewpoint but its own. That is also a basic trait of today’s political-correctness believers.

*The Frankfurt School’s work has had a deep impact on American culture. It has recast the homogenous America of the 1950s into today’s divided, animosity-filled nation.

In turn, this has contributed to the undeniable breakdown of the family unit, as well as identity politics, radical feminism, and racial polarization in America.
It’s hard to decide if today’s culture is more like Orwell’s 1984 or Huxley’s Brave New World.

Never one to buck a populist trend, the political establishment in America has fully embraced the ideas of the Frankfurt School and has pushed them on American society through public miseducation.

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the beacons of progressivism, are both disciples of Saul Alinsky, a devoted cultural Marxist.

And so we now live in a hyper-sensitive society in which social memes and feelings have overtaken biological and objective reality as the main determinants of right and wrong.

Political correctness is a war on logic and reason.
 
Last edited:
Just thinking that if the theory if Trump’s ‘genius tweets’ would be true, we should shortly expect some new ‘shocking revelations’ to be announced about The Squad individuals, perhaps some criminal activities. Those defending them would then look like fools.

Remains to be seen...
AOC and Omar are already being investigated. Cortez of misappropriation of campaign funds and Omar of immigration fraud. Haven't heard anything about this recently, maybe its being swept under the rug.
 
It almost seems like the Matrix and/ or Realities are changing at the moment again with the congress and high people in it all of a sudden defending (or pretending to ) Jordan Peterson and Co. against the evil doings of google. Who would have though that something like this would be possible just a couple of years ago? I think Russian intervention in Crimea and later in Syria and then Trumps election got things seriously rolling. A lot of things happening right now.

 
An excellent video Pashalis, thanks for posting it, Very good new!

Project Veritas July 10 LEAK: Googlers Petition “to end Google’s business with Breitbart,” One Thousand Employees Co-Signed – Project Veritas

Francisco) Project Veritas has received and published documents from an insider at Google. The documents show Google employees discussing a letter asking Google leadership “to end Google’s business relationship with Breitbart.” This is the fifth release in a series of document releases from insiders at Google.

According to the documents, the letter was co-signed by over one thousand Google employees. Breitbart News has published similar materials which reportedly show a group at Google “sought to strike at Breitbart News’ revenue by kicking the site off Google’s market-dominating ad services.”

“Google basically says they are impartial publishers of content and therefore are not liable for any content they publish. But these documents show that they are anything but impartial.”
One of the documents Project Veritas has published shows an internal Google email:

“… I’m sure most of you are aware of the extreme sexism that articles and comments on Breitbart disseminate. For this and many other reasons, my colleagues and I have drafted an internal letter to leadership asking them to end Google’s business relationship with Breitbart and enforce AdSense policies on prohibited content.
Please consider. And if you do agree, please ask others to sign. Our goal is to send the letter to company leadership tomorrow for their consideration. So far, 1186 Googlers have co-signed the letter…”
Another document Project Veritas has published shows a Google email that reads:

“Anyone want to hold their nose and look through Breitbart.com for hate spe[e]ch?”
In that same document, another Googler wrote:

“… When sufficient violations have been found we’ll take action at the site level.”
Said Breitbart New’s Alex Marlow in response to a request for comment on this story:
“This is more confirmation that Google is staffed by many left-wing activists with a totalitarian, un-American desire to silence, defund, and de-platform those with whom they politically disagree,”
A Google insider explained to Project Veritas that the documents show a Google effort to damage Breitbart News for political reasons:

“They are unhappy with the election and they are unhappy with the narratives that are being put out there that contradict the mainstream media’s narrative.”
James O’Keefe will attend the Social Media Summit at the White House this week and plans to discuss Project Veritas’ recent insider Google reports.

Project Veritas intends to continue investigating abuses in big tech companies and encourages more Silicon Valley insiders to share their stories through their Be Brave campaign.
 
article-3439-1.jpg Tucker Carlson Diagnosed With Resting Baffled Face

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Doctors informed author and political commentator Tucker Carlson Monday that, tragically, he has been diagnosed with Resting Baffled Face


Pulling up a recent clip from Carlson’s hit show Tucker Carlson Tonight on his tablet, the doctor pointed out the clear RBF symptoms apparent in the host’s face.

“Look, anytime you’re not talking, do you see the bewildered expression on your face?” the doctor reportedly said. “Head cocked, brow furrowed, mouth slightly opened as if you’re utterly stupefied by what you’re seeing or hearing: these are classic indications of Resting Baffled Face.
The doctor informed Carlson that he had “one of the most advanced cases of RBF he’d ever seen,” according to sources.

As doctors explained his diagnosis, Carlson reportedly listened intently, a befuddled, mystified look on his face.

The Babylon Bee
 
Last edited:

4-5 minute Read Snip:
President Donald Trump also responded to calls to help Rocky at the behest of first lady Melania Trump.

“Many, many members of the African American community have called me, friends of mine, and said, ‘Can you help?’" Trump said in the Oval Office on Friday. "So, I personally don’t know ASAP Rocky, but I can tell you that he has tremendous support from the African American community in this country and when I say African American I think I can really say from everybody in the country because we’re all one."

"Actually, the one who knew about A$AP Rocky was our first lady. She was telling me about, ‘Can you help ASAP Rocky?’" he said.

The first lady added: "We’ll be working with the State Department and we hope to get him home soon.”

He later tweeted that he spoke to Kanye West and that he "will be calling the very talented Prime Minister of Sweden to see what we can do about helping" Rocky.

Skipping down

Before his arrest, videos posted to Rocky's Instagram account shows that he and members of his entourage were arguing with two men on the street, telling the men to stop following them.

One bodyguard was released without charge soon after Rocky and two of his associates were arrested. But a judge extended the detention of Rocky on Friday after ruling that he was a flight risk.

Jovicic maintained that Rocky and his associates were acting in self-defense after being provoked by the other men on the street.
"They begged and pleaded to be left alone," he said.

He said that designating Rocky as a flight risk was "unreasonable" because he is a well-known celebrity, and while he must travel for work, he is determined to prove his innocence.

Even if Rocky were guilty, his continued detention and financial losses are "disproportional" punishment to the crime he is being accused of, Jovicic added.

 
Tucker Carlson Diagnosed With Resting Baffled Face

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Doctors informed author and political commentator Tucker Carlson Monday that, tragically, he has been diagnosed with Resting Baffled Face

Wait, that's a thing? I thought it was just Tucker's signature expression of having to listen to absurdities. To me it showed his sharpness in cutting through BS. Watching his videos it's like you're in suspense of what he is about to call out the person on. That expression is like a meme for me, but not in a negative way. What kind of default expression should you have in an Idiocracy of absurdities?
 
Wait, that's a thing? I thought it was just Tucker's signature expression of having to listen to absurdities. To me it showed his sharpness in cutting through BS. Watching his videos it's like you're in suspense of what he is about to call out the person on. That expression is like a meme for me, but not in a negative way. What kind of default expression should you have in an Idiocracy of absurdities?

Ah.... Its a joke, I thought it was hilarious. I thought a little comic relief here might be good on occasion. The Babylon Bee is a new discovery for me and I love some of their political satire.

This Fun New Snapchat Filter Will Make It Look Like You're Crying At The Border

article-4517-2.jpg

U.S.—Users demanded it, and now it's here: a fun new filter introduced by Snapchat today will make it look like you're crying at the U.S./Mexico border.
Yassss!

Now you can make it look as though you're really concerned about the immigration crisis, even though all you've done is tweet about it. You don't even need to hire an expensive photographer to stage pics---just open up Snapchat, select the "Crying at the Border" filter, and presto! You too can have a staged picture of yourself crying about the immigration crisis that you only started caring about when Trump took office.

You can swipe between a few different backgrounds, from the border fence with sad-looking immigrants standing behind it to a detention center where a woman is drinking out of a toilet behind you as you weep.

You might even be able to run for Congress with a great photo op like that!
 
U.S. Vice President Pence abruptly cancels trip to New Hampshire
U.S. Vice President Pence abruptly cancels trip to New Hampshire

Report: Pence canceled trip to avoid contact with an alleged drug dealer
Report: Pence canceled trip to avoid contact with an alleged drug dealer
Nothing to worry about. Mike Pence was just staying far away from an alleged drug dealer. (Photo: ASSOCIATED PRESS)


WASHINGTON – Vice President Mike Pence abruptly canceled a trip to New Hampshire this month to avoid shaking hands with an alleged interstate drug dealer, Politico reported Monday.

White House officials have declined to explain why Pence aborted the July 2 trip, saying only that the reason would eventually become known.

“Facts came to our attention that made it no longer appropriate for us to make the trip,” Pence told Fox News during a July 12 interview. “And I can’t discuss it.”

Politico reported Monday that Pence would have come into contact with Jeff Hatch, a former New York Giants player and the chief business development officer for the opioid addiction treatment center that Pence was scheduled to visit. The event was to include a discussion with former patients and alumni at the Granite Recovery Center headquarters.

Hatch, on Friday, agreed to plead guilty to moving more than $100,000 of fentanyl from Massachusetts to New Hampshire, according to the report.

President Trump told reporters, days after the canceled trip, that the reason would become known "in about a week or two."

"There was a very interesting problem that they had in New Hampshire," Trump said. "I can’t tell you about it. But it had nothing to do with the White House. There was a problem up there.


Behind Pence's abrupt Air Force Two cancellation: A drug dealer?
Behind Pence’s Air Force Two cancellation: A drug dealer
giraffe-295645-1563834420721.jpg


Vice President Mike Pence was one short plane ride away from shaking hands with an alleged interstate drug dealer. Pence abruptly canceled his trip to Manchester, N.H., earlier this month but never said why he was pulled from Air Force Two at the last minute.
Vice President Mike Pence was one short plane ride away from shaking hands with an alleged interstate drug dealer.

(The White House needs to get some new script writers - at least, someone who can dream up something more believable?) :knitting:
 
Guatemalan court halts 'safe third country' designation for asylum seekers
Guatemala's Constitutional Court has blocked President Jimmy Morales from immediately declaring the poor Central American nation a safe third country for asylum-seekers, amid growing pushback to U.S. pressure that it absorb large numbers of migrants.

Perhaps, eliminating the word "safe" in the "Third-Safe-Country" may work, because at south US border, there is practicaly non safe countries, less in Central America, they are not even safe for their own citizens, I think Trump, Trump's administration knows it very well, but...

 
Some thoughts after reading this article on Sott:


I think Trump's way of doing business, i.e. sowing confusion, doing this today and that tomorrow, good cop/bad cop routine, outrageous offers and threats etc. is kind of symbolic for the "American Way". It's US-style capitalism and culture taken to extremes.

Such business tactics may work well in some contexts, but that doesn't mean it's morally good. I mean, nothing against some assertive negotiation skills, but contrast Trump's approach of sowing confusion with Putin's approach of continuity, adhering to the rules, reliability and making his positions crystal-clear and therefore predictable.

I'm reminded of the win-win approach as outlined in "7 habits of highly effective people". Russia is seeking out such win-win scenarios, whereas Trump and the US are about crushing opponents - win/lose.

I think if this aspect of Trump's personality and approach gets the upper hand, this will be his and the US' downfall. It might be better than the psychopathic approach of pure careless destruction - at least Trump tries, in his own strange way, to secure something for the benefit of his country. But this confusion-sowing madness is just not helpful or sustainable mid to long term, IMO.
 
Mueller's Testimony - a lot of heavy anticipation and hype - nothing much of substance. It amounted to word-salad and defection, while he protected himself!

Fox's Chris Wallace: Mueller Testimony a "Disaster for the Democrats" and for His Reputation (Video)
Fox’s Chris Wallace: Mueller Testimony a ‘Disaster for the Democrats’ and for His Reputation
b6f13362d9ecd738ad2728885e925cbe


Wed. July 24, 2019 - During the first break in Wednesday’s House testimony of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Fox News anchor Chris Wallace claimed the hearing had thus far been a “disaster” for both House Democrats and Mueller himself.

With Republicans already making the case that the former FBI director appeared doddering and confused, Fox News’ special coverage team of Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum immediately noted at the break that the special counsel struggled to answer questions, saying the hearing had been “halting.”

“I think you both have been very kind,” Wallace responded. “This has been a disaster for the Democrats, and I think it’s been a disaster for the reputation of Robert Mueller.”

He went on to note that Mueller had “seemed very uncertain” with his answers and that he appeared to not know what was in the report that he wrote.

“He has been attacked a number of times and you would think that almost anybody else would have defended his own integrity and the integrity of the investigation, and over and over Mueller just sits silent and allows the attacks from the Republicans to sweep over him and says nothing,” the Fox anchor observed.

Furthermore, Wallace suggested that Mueller may not have been “in charge and in control of this report,” something Trumpworld has been pushing for a while now.

Minutes after Wallace made his on-air remarks, President Donald Trump celebrated it on Twitter, quoting the Fox anchor in full. Wallace meanwhile, brushed off the presidential tweet, remarking: “I've gotten plenty of negative tweets from the president.”

With Collusion Collapse, Public Loses Interest in Mueller Theatrics
With Collusion Collapse, Public Loses Interest in Mueller Theatrics
RTX6X0YQ.jpg

Dear Sir, The public does not care.

If the Trump Justice Department were to write a letter in response to House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff’s Tuesday night tirade, that’s what it would say.

Well, okay, not exactly. I’m sure there’d be the obligatory “with due respect” throat clearing and whatever else decorum demands when camouflaging a flip of the middle finger. Make no mistake, though: The bird has been flipped.

The night before former special counsel Robert Mueller’s much anticipated (and certain to be disappointing) appearance before two congressional committees, Chairman Schiff fired off a letter to protest limitations the Justice Department, at Mueller’s request, has imposed on his testimony.

In essence, DOJ has ordered Mueller not to provide testimony outside the four corners of his report. This suits Mueller just fine since he does not want to testify at all. He made that clear in his May 29 press statement, attempting to foreclose a possible subpoena by insisting that he would have nothing to add to the two-volume, 448-page tome.

Further, he gave Democrats what, from their perspective, is the best spin that could be put on the obstruction aspect of his probe: He had not “exonerated” the president, even though he neither found crimes, nor even considered whether crimes had occurred — the prosecutor’s peculiar interpretation of Justice Department guidance that forbids indictment of a sitting president.

He was trying to tell them: This is as good as it gets. I am not going to say I would have indicted him if not for the guidance.

But Democrats cannot leave well enough alone. They hope against hope that Mueller will break down — that Schiff, a former prosecutor, will have a Perry Mason moment, in which Mueller throws up his hands and confesses that, yes, if he could, he would throw the book at Trump.

But it’s not going to happen. Mueller cannot give Democrats what they want because doing so would contradict his report. He’s not going to do that. He wanted a Justice Department directive that he not address matters outside the report so he could try to persuade Democrats not to bother asking him to explain his reasoning. Of course, they are going to ask him anyway, but he’s not going to tell them what they want to hear.

In ordering Mueller to stick to the report, Justice relied on its usual rationales for denying information to Congress. This is a stew of privileges claimed to shield investigations, the deliberative process over investigative judgments, communications within the executive branch, communications with lawyers, and so on.

Of course, Congress does not need to accept the executive’s privilege claims. The Justice Department is a creature of statute. It depends on Congress for its existence, funding, and lawful authority. Congress has the power to conduct oversight. If the administration does not cooperate, the Constitution gives lawmakers an array of weapons to attempt to induce compliance — control over the executive’s budget, public hearings to embarrass executive officials, contempt, censure, even impeachment.

That is what Schiff’s letter to Mueller is meant to threaten. The chairman is making it clear that Congress is not bound by the executive’s claims of privilege.

He has a problem, though. Disputes between the political branches are, well, political. Congress’s arsenal of powers to check executive departments is political. And to be a meaningful weapon, political power needs public support.

The public was very interested in Mueller’s investigation because, for over two years, Democrats and their media collaborators assured the country that the president was complicit in a corrupt conspiracy with the Kremlin to undermine the 2016 campaign, hack Democratic email accounts, and steal the election.

Once Mueller concluded that there was no “collusion” scheme, however, public interest ebbed. After finally being told that the narrative of a traitorous president in a corrupt pact with a hostile foreign power was just a political narrative, Americans were not inclined to hop aboard the Democrats’ new and improved obstruction narrative.

This is not to say the conduct outlined in the obstruction volume of Mueller’s report is admirable. Some of it is disturbing. It is understandable that Democrats would want the public to focus on it. But it does not rise to the level of a prosecutable obstruction case and it did not, in any event, present to the slightest impediment to Mueller’s completion of the investigation — with which the president cooperated extensively, for all his ranting and raving about a “witch hunt.”

Equivocal proof of obstruction in an investigation that was not actually impeded, into a crime that did not actually happen, is not going to grab the public’s interest – not after the collusion let down, not after Democrats and the media have convinced the country that their rabid opposition to Trump is transparently political, and not when the country is dealing with other more pressing matters and the 2020 election is looming.

America has moved on. Democrats are at the point where continuing to press the Mueller probe hurts them more than it hurts the president.

So Chairman Schiff and Democrats on his Intelligence Committee, and on chairman Jerry Nadler’s Judiciary Committee, which will get the first shot at Mueller today, can rattle their sabers and threaten all sorts of sanctions. But they are not going to hold Mueller in contempt, much less impeach the president. They don’t have the public support to follow through, and they know it.

Robert Mueller will stick to his report today. Democrats — and Republicans, who have lots of questions about alleged investigative abuses — will not like being stonewalled. But stonewalled they will be. We’re going through the motions. Loudly, sure, but still just going through the motions.

I think Trump's way of doing business, i.e. sowing confusion, doing this today and that tomorrow, good cop/bad cop routine, outrageous offers and threats etc. is kind of symbolic for the "American Way". It's US-style capitalism and culture taken to extremes.

Such business tactics may work well in some contexts, but that doesn't mean it's morally good. I mean, nothing against some assertive negotiation skills, but contrast Trump's approach of sowing confusion with Putin's approach of continuity, adhering to the rules, reliability and making his positions crystal-clear and therefore predictable.

I think, trying to contrast Trump's approach in negotiation skills verses Putin's are unrealistic and premature, at this point. Both individuals came into the Presidency under different Political and social circumstances. Putin was readily accepted by the elites and a large majority of the Russian people. Roadblocks weren't put in front of Putin - by Political opponents, in forming his Staff and other executive duties. Putin also had working knowledge of Statesmanship and Diplomat procedures. Circumstances surrounding Trump are very different. And to be honest, the reputable high status that Putin projects on the World stage, Trump may never obtain. Yet, Trump has some remarkable traits, in his own right. He is a highly successful businessman and has made social, as well as Political contacts in his dealings. He does project a form of Statesmanship in his dealings but might fall short on the diplomatic level. Diplomacy tends to be a highly advanced "Art" of it's own.

Trump's "business-ship" seems to be the only outlet he has had any leverage on, considering the Neo-con's that were placed in his Staff - to control he's every move.

Going back to 1999-2000 and the break-up of the Soviet Union ... and now, observing current affairs, it's apparent that an individual with unique talents was needed to reverse the downward spiral the Country was headed into. At the time, Putin possessed the background and the characteristics that were required to elicit a change and completely reverse the trend.

In much of the same way, the United States is in free-fall, near a complete social and economic collapse. The U.S. use to be an industrial Country with a higher standard of living. Now, we qualify as "a third-country"... all across the board! Trump possesses the qualities and hands on experience that is needed in this Country - to reverse the economic tide and downward spiral. Trump may be playing a Poker game with his "Art-of-the-Deal" but he might also be moving Chess pieces on a board to elicit "real change" and pull us out of the hole we're in?

Donald Trump’s Remarks on Hong Kong Are an Expression of Realism
Donald Trump's Remarks on Hong Kong Are an Expression of Realism - Eurasia Future


Donald Trump’s press conference delivered whilst hosting Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan was highly instructive on multiple levels. Although issues regarding the US relationship to Pakistan as well as issues relating to neighbouring India, Afghanistan and Iran featured heavily in the lengthy exchange with the press, Trump’s remark on Hong Kong was among his most important.

When touching on China-US relations, Trump delivered a predictable statement about how tariffs are good for the American economy but that he nevertheless remains somewhat optimistic that a good trading agreement with China will eventually be signed. Things got even more interesting when Trump was asked specifically about the recent wave of agitation in Hong Kong. When asked about Hong Kong Trump stated:

“I’m not involved in it very much but I think President Xi of China has acted responsibly, very responsibly”.
In addition to largely praising Beijing’s handling of the situation, Trump further implied that the police have exercised something of a soft touch against the agitators. Although Trump is famous for hitting China with incredibly harsh tariffs even when compared to many other countries on the receiving side of his infamous trade war, this is only part of the broader picture.

However, Trump’s views on China’s internal development are largely that of a respectful head of state who does not seek to meddle in the affairs of a foreign land. Unlike many western leaders, Trump has tended to shy away from the fake news regarding the situation in Xinjiang and yesterday’s remarks prove that he also does not seek to directly meddle in Hong Kong. This does not mean that elements of the American so-called “deep state” are not promoting reckless behavior in Hong Kong and nor does it mean that the US State Department will suddenly change its official stance on China’s internal conditions. But as the leader of the United States, Trump displays a clear willingness to be very tough and even very rough on the issue of trade but when it comes to prodding into the business of others, Trump is refreshingly laissez-faire. As such, Trump’s remarks not only demonstrate that he has no time for elements in Washington that continue to salivate over lawlessness in Hong Kong but it also represents one final blow to the outgoing UK Prime Minister Theresa May whose government has taken a vocal position on Hong Kong and one that is not consistent with a rules based world order based on the respect for national sovereignty.

The fact that the current wave of Hong Kong protests has a foreign hand behind it is generally considered self-evident. When the protesters broke into Hong Kong’s local Legislative Council, defaced the property, vandalised walls with hateful graffiti and hoisted the colonial era flag, it became clear enough that the protesters represent the latest shriek of minority opinion in Hong Kong that would prefer to turn back the clock and go back to living under British rule.

It is also now obvious that the protests are about more than opposition to a so-called extradition law (one that was incidentally going to be far less extreme than the EU’s European Arrest Warrant) that has now been scrapped. The axing of the law was supposed to make the protesters satisfied but in all attempted colour revolutions, a general foreign backed agitation is merely masked by a specific grievance. When this specific grievance is settled and the protests continue, one realises that there was no real ethical dimension to the protests form the get-go. So far – so obvious. Here is where it gets interesting.

Trump doesn’t care
Whilst meddlesome elements of America’s wealthy elite and their friends in the so-called US deep state are almost certainly behind substantial elements of the Hong Kong provocations, Donald Trump does not seem to care and the fact of the matter is that based on Trump’s known proclivities, he likely does not care at all. Whilst Trump seeks to dictate the terms on which the world trades with the United States, unlike most of his predecessors, he cares little about the internal developments of foreign countries.

It should be of note that Barack Obama would talk frequently about molesting China’s sovereign rights in the South China Sea whilst also making provocative and false comments about the status of human rights in China. From Trump there is none of this kind of unhelpful and tiresome talk. One could imagine therefore that if someone like Hillary Clinton had a trade dispute with China, she would use the Hong Kong situation to try and leverage China into a bad deal in return for calling off her proverbial dogs in Hong Kong.

From Trump however, no such deviousness pervades. For Trump it is all about dollars and cents – nothing more and nothing less. As such, whilst his protectionist views are rather dated, at least they do not carry with them a hidden agenda. This is all the more reason for China to intensely work on a trade deal with the US. Such a trade deal would be good for a mainland economy more dependant on traditional trade and high quality product development than financial markets. Such a deal would also help to pave the way for trade fuelled financial markets on the mainland (in Shanghai) to gain further confidence among international investors who remain more influenced by Wall Street than by Shanghai for the time being.

Just as many in Britain continue to view Hong Kong as a colony inside of China whilst many in the US feel the same way about Taiwan, Trump merely wants to do trade deals and sell weapons to whomever will purchase them. In this sense, even Washington’s current provocative Taiwan policy is more about making a quick buck than it is about re-writing the One China Policy. By extrapolation, the same is true of America’s continued provocative South China Sea policy. Whilst some might say that the policies are the same as prior to Trump – Trump’s end game is very different. Trump wants to make new trade deals (for better or worse) and sell countries expensive weapons that will likely never be used. By comparison to his predecessors, this view is actually benign by modern US standards.

All of this should be considered when analysing Trump’s views on China. Trump might have normalised anti-China racism in a politically divided America looking for a successful foreign scapegoat, but apart from that, he actually harbours far less condescension towards China than the likes of Obama and Clinton.

China’s soft hand
Those who unlike Trump are obsessed over Hong Kong will perversely be disappointed that the Chinese police have been highly restrained in trying to curtail the outbursts of lawlessness. There are several reasons for this. First of all and most obviously, China does not want bad publicity from a wider world that has been fed constant anti-China narratives by liberal western media outlets ever since China became the world’s second largest economy. If anything, this should make China realise that it requires better methods of distributing foreign language (English in particular) information to the outside world.

Moreover, the fact is that whilst Hong Kong forms part of the economically important Greater Bay Area, in many respects, Hong Kong is less important in the eyes of Beijing than it is in the eyes of foreigners. The reason for this is that among Chinese officials, Hong Kong is just another region of an extremely large country with multiple important, substantial, ultra-modern and business friendly cities – all of which are now more open to foreign direct investment (FDI) than at any time in contemporary Chinese history.

But whilst Beijing takes a rational view of Hong Kong, many westerners and western minded Asians outside of China tend to fetishise Hong Kong as a kind of “China for people who don’t like China”. Whilst the population is ethnically Han Chinese, whilst the people speak Chinese and whilst the island is part of China, because of its peculiar history, both visiting and doing business in Hong Kong is seen by many foreigners as the geogrpahic version of “Chinese cuisine” as cooked by a chef in San Francisco as opposed to the Chinese cuisine cooked by a chief in Beijing.

Whilst Beijing has no problem with the fact that Hong Kong has naturally retained some western cultural characteristics, this is hardly considered novel within China. By contrast, many non-Chinese tend to romanticise Hong Kong in the same way that white middle class liberals are happy to listen to foreign music so long as it’s sold to them as “world music” by the white English public school boy Peter Gabriel. In this sense, whilst emotion should not factor into geopolitical developments, it nevertheless often dose. This is why even among many who wouldn’t dream of supporting imperialist causes, Hong Kong nevertheless has an oddly special place in the hearts of many foreigners. This might be good for tourism but it is bad for political sovereignty due to the sense of entitlement that western liberalism has always created in the minds of its adherents.

China is aware that in order to maintain Hong Kong as a China’s “Disneyland for naieve foreigners”, it needn’t act with brutality. Also, as Hong Kong’s population is generally economically well-off (as are most people in China’s coastal regions), the protests will eventually die down in ways that are less likely in economically depressed and socially retrograde places. Thus there is no need to treat the well dressed/well educated protesters of Hong Kong in the way that a paramilitary force might treat a heavily armed mob in Afghanistan.

Hence, China is more frustrated than enraged by what is going on. Some might see this as a fine line, but it is a bigger line than many have imagined.

Solutions
Chinese officials tend to take the long view when problem solving. As such, they will neither politically alter the nature of Hong Kong to please protesters who often feel more European than Chinese but nor will China declare a state of emergency in a desperate attempt to restore normalcy. As most businesses in Hong Kong continue to operate under normal conditions, the protests are more of a physical disturbance to Hong Kong at a logistical level than they are a financial or political disturbance.

Naturally, if the protesters continue to increase their violence against property (something that would incidentally be despicable in both Britain and China), police will respond proportionally but without resorting to excess. As such, it is notable that whilst French police have blinded and maimed unarmed Yellow Vest protesters, no such brutality is occurring in China. This is perhaps ironic given the fact that the Yellow Vests tend to be nation minded whilst Hong Kong’s protesters are more or less begging for colonialism to return to north east Asia.

For China, the lesson learnt is that certain elements of Hong Kong have gone out of their way to act as bad citizens. This will not be punished in any traditional sense but nor will it be forgotten. Hong Kong may well remain a “Disneyfied” version of China for foreigners, but when it comes to China’s serious business cities, Hong Kong’s importance over the course of this century may well go the way of the British Empire itself.
 
Snip:
A federal judge on Wednesday temporarily blocked President Donald Trump's plan to deny most asylum claims at the U.S.-Mexico border, dealing a major blow to the administration's latest attempt to deter migration to the U.S.

The nationwide injunction by the Northern District of California judge, who had been appointed by President Barack Obama, came just hours after a Trump-appointed judge in Washington, D.C., said the policy would be allowed, at least temporarily.

The dueling rulings all but guarantee the question over restricting asylum claims would be appealed and possibly wind up before the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile one, of many Ratlines are being crushed:


ca0c24f54d2a6bacfca794c52755e0c0.png

cd3e7e3a6e731e044ce3df38db0febd0.png



 
Back
Top Bottom