CHINA’S MARXIST WAR AGAINST HUMANITY

CHINA’S MARXIST WAR CONTENTS

A picture of the chinese president with his face in front.

MARXIST PHILOSOPHY

WAR, WARFARE, AND CONFLICT DEFINED

A BRIEF HISTORY OF CHINA’S MARXIST WAR AGAINST HUMANITY
Tibet
The Democracy Movement and Tiananmen Square
Hong Kong
Uyghurs
Christians

CHINA’S TWENTY FIRST CENTURY UNCONVENTIONAL EXTERNAL TACTICS IN WAR
Global Economic Domination
Overt Intervention and Espionage
Weaponization of Covid-19
Weaponization of Illicit Drug and Drug Precursor Ingredient Trade

DISCUSSION

 

China’s Marxist war against humanity is being waged on virtually every front imaginable. This Global War is political, legal, economic, technological, educational, psychological, cultural, and militaristic, with propaganda, espionage, and surveillance as key weapons. China’s Marxist war against humanity is fought with patience and the understanding that victory can be theirs through either internal of external actions exerted against their foes. Marxists around the world view the United States as their greatest foe. Joseph Stalin said, America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within. In the United States, the left has been following this strategy for at least 100 years.

MARXIST PHILOSOPHY

Ideologies and governance of the systems on the left are based on Marxist philosophy. Marxist philosophy predicts that societies will evolve into societies where all will share equally in all the benefits of society regardless of their willingness or ability to contribute to the good of society. Wealth will be shared equally among all members of society from each according to their ability to each according to their need. To accomplish this lofty goal, individuals must sacrifice themselves to the good of the collective or society. The cost of this sacrifice is a loss of individual freedom. Historically, no society has ever accomplished this utopian vision for their Marx based society, and their people suffer. Throughout their history, Marxists have characterized themselves as Marxists, communists, or socialists depending on political expediency, cultural trends, and acceptance. After the Communist Revolution in Russia, the terms communist and socialist lost favor and became a political, social, and economic liability in Western Europe and the United States. The ideologies and governance systems underpinning the right are Judeo-Christian values, Adam Smith style capitalism, and democratic republican constitutional systems like we have in the United States.

For the purposes of this discussion, global political socio-economic systems are characterized as a linear left to right continuum. The systems and ideologies on the left include far left, dictatorial atheistic communist or socialist regimes, democratic socialists, progressives, liberals, and, in the United States, moderate Democrats and Republicans In Name Only, RINOs. The farther to the left the system or ideology is on this continuum, the quicker the practitioners will lead their societies to governance based on Marxist philosophy. The left vehemently disagrees with the assertion that their philosophical roots are Marxist because that associates them with communism and socialism. However, some younger activists on the far left in the United States are embracing and touting their Marxist, communist, or socialist roots. In my opinion, theocratic or dictatorial Islamist ideology and regimes, Islamists, belong near the far left of the political continuum.  For Islamists, the individual must be subservient to the good of Islam

sacrificing their personal freedom as with individuals espousing Marxist ideology. The fact that Islamists are not atheists is not relevant; it is the role of the individual and freedom that places Islamists on the far left of the political continuum.

WAR, WARFARE, AND CONFLICT DEFINED

For this discussion of Marxism’s war on humanity all connotations of war,warfare, and conflict must be considered. Merriam Webster’s on-line dictionary will be used to define these terms. War is defined as follows:

Noun:

“A state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations or a period of such armed conflict,

A state of hostility, conflict, or antagonism, a struggle or competition between opposing forces or for a particular end [such as] a class war [or] war against disease.”

Verb:

“To be in active or vigorous conflict or to engage in warfare.

Warfare is defined as follows:

Military operations between enemies; hostilities,

an activity undertaken by a political unit (such as a nation) to weaken or destroy another [such as] economic warfare,

Struggle between competing entities: conflict.

Conflict is defined as follows:

A struggle, fight, or battle for power or property,

Strong disagreement between people, groups, etc., that often results in angry argument,

A difference that prevents agreementdisagreement between ideas or feelings,

Competitive or opposing action of incompatiblesan antagonistic state or action [between] divergent ideas, interests, or persons, a conflict of principles,

Mental struggle resulting from incompatible or opposing needs, drives, wishes, or external or internal demands.

Although Marxist nations have engaged in all the activities described in the above definitions, the most ominous aspect of Marxism’s war against humanity are Marxist, communist, former communist, socialist, and Islamist nations preparing their military forces and arsenals for war, armed conflict, against the non-Marxist or non-Islamist nations of the world. The most threatening nations in this category are the Peoples Republic of China (PRC), and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s ally North Korea, Russia, under the former, Communist, Vladimir Putin, and the Islamist state of Iran. These four nations pose the greatest threat for war with the other nations of the world and all of humanity.

A BRIEF INTERNAL HISTORY OF CHINA’S MARXIST WAR AGAINST HUMANITY

China, the PRC, under the leadership of the CCP has been preparing for their role in China’s Marxist war against humanity since before the 1911 Xinhai or Hsinhai Revolution. The revolution ended 2,132 years of imperial rule in China and 276 years of the Qing dynasty. On January 1, 1912, the National Assembly declared the establishment of the Republic of China following the abdication of the last Qing emperor. After a period of political instability, the Chinese Nationalist Party (CNP) also known as the KMT founded by Sun Yat-sen gained power in China and admitted Chinese Communists into the CNP. Sun appointed Chiang Kai-shek  to build China’s  military; and after visiting the Soviet Union, Chiang adapted the Soviet military methods for the Chinese army but did not embrace communism. After Sun’s death, Chiang gained control of the CNP and China following the brutal expulsion of theA painting of mao zedong in front of the communist symbol. CCP from the CNP leading to a civil war in China which paused only to unite China in its war against Japan during WWII. After the defeat of Japan, China’s civil war resumed. The PRC and CCP led by Mao Zedong and his peoples Liberation Army (PLA) defeated the CNP in 1949. Chiang Kai-shek, his army, and followers were driven onto the Island of Taiwan where they remain to this day.

A map of china with major ethnic groups.Since the vast majority of the Chinese people are ethnic Hans who speak Mandarin and occupy the largest land mass in the PRC, Mao consolidated power in main-land China by suppressing or defeating the other ethnicities. The other ethnic groups occupying largest land areas on the PRC include Mongolians, who live under PRC control outside Mongolia, occupy the fourth largest land mass in the PRC. Tibetans and Uyghurs occupy the second and third largest land masses in the PRC respectively.

In my opinion, China poses a greater threat to the United States and our allies than Russia. However, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has drastically increased the possibility of war in all Europe. During the post WWII, cold war, half of the twentieth century, Russia, and China took two different approaches toward world domination. Russia took a militaristic approach, while China and the CCP took a mostly non-militant approach to world affairs during the latter cold war period. The two exceptions were their intervention supporting North Korea during the Korean War and their invasion and conquest of Tibet in the early 1950’s. During the remainder of the twentieth century, the CCP concentrated on international diplomacy and the countries economic and technological development, global trade agreements which opened the billion people of China as a market for the rest of the world and financed sustainable expansion of their military. These actions included the 1978 Open-Door Policy, 1979 establishment of full diplomatic relations with the United States, 1983 US State Department classification of China as “a friendly, developing nation,” 1986 elevation to observer status within the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, GATT,  that promoted trade and economic development. GATT was superseded by the World Trade Organization (WTO) . In 2001, China was admitted into the WTO with friendly developing nation status giving China enormous economic advantages in competition with developed nations like the United States. These CCP policies allowed China to become one of the largest economies in the world, finance their military expansion and arsenal development in preparation for China’s Marxist war against humanity, and expand their influence around the world.

Unfortunately, the United States and most of the western world did not view the PRC as a significant threat during the twentieth century. Several US administrations believed that opening Chinese markets and exposing their people to capitalism, western ideas, and freedom would eventually lead to a rejection of communism. The hope of the western world, especially the United States, for China was nave, myopic, extremely self-indulgent since little in the history of the PRC under the strong arm of the CCP indicated such a possibility. Apart from the period between establishment of the open door policy in 1978 and the 1989 Democracy Movement protests, the CCP ensured that the vast majority of the Chinese people were never exposed to western ideas and culture.  The west vastly underestimated the totality of CCP control and domination of the people of China, another aspect of China’s Marxist war against humanity. As long as the CCP controls China, the Chinese people will never have the opportunity to choose any other form of government or economy. Those allowed to interact socially and economically with the west were dedicated communists who would use the global markets to extract money, technology, and diplomatic advantages from western countries. This control of access to diverse ideas and forms of governance is part of China’s Marxist war against humanity. It is a “conflict, [or] mental struggle resulting from incompatible or opposing demands existing between western governments and economies and Marxists including the CCP.

Tibet

CCP intolerance for descent, ethnic group autonomy, and freedom for the Chinese people began early in the history of the PRC. Tibet has been part of China since it was conquered by the Qing dynasty in 1720 but maintained considerable autonomy until the middle of the twentieth century. Shortly after the CCP gained control of China in 1949, they started to consolidate power in the lands of the major Chinese ethnic groups, including Tibet. Tibet resisted these efforts for about two years. In 1951, China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defeated the vastly inferior Tibetan army. Subsequently, Tibetan negotiators were sent to Beijing by their conquerors and presented with an already-finished document commonly referred to as the Seventeen Point Agreement which they were forced to sign without consulting with Tibetan leaders. The agreement forced Tibet’s government to acknowledge its shared heritage with China for the first time in Tibet’s history. By 1956, militias were battling the PLA in parts of Tibet over CCP land reforms. Finally, in 1959, the PLA moved against the Tibetan capital crushing the rebellion and forcing the Dalai Lama and a small contingent of government officials to flee Tibet across the Himalayan mountains to India. This action virtually ended Tibetan cultural, social, religious, and political autonomy, more of China’s Marxist war against humanity.

The Democracy Movement and Tiananmen Square

CCP intolerance for descent, ethnic group autonomy, and freedom continues to this day. In the late 1980’s, the Democracy Movement, which had its roots in the open door policy and expanded diplomatic relations and student exchanges with western countries and universities, exposed many Chinese citizens to the freedoms enjoyed by the citizens of western nations. Some economic reforms opened opportunities for free markets and entrepreneurship to CCP elites, industrialists, and financers but not the majority of the population. Students and intellectuals, discouraged by the disparities of the economic reforms and lack of freedom, started to incite others to demonstrate and protest for greater economic freedom and democratic reforms for the Chinese people. By the spring of 1989, the Democracy Movement protests had spread to over 400 Chinese cities.

This descent and protests were unacceptable to the CCP and resulted in brutal suppressionA group of tanks driving down the street. of the protests throughout China. The world witnessed the brutality of the CCP suppression at Beijing’s Tiananmen Square immortalized by the Tank Man photo and video of a lone man standing in front of a column of PLA tanks. His fate, after by-standers pulled him from the scene, is unknown. Estimates of the death toll throughout China vary from several hundred to several thousand, with thousands more wounded.

After the protests were suppressed, four million people were reportedly investigated for their role in the protests, including more than one million government officials. The authorities arrested tens if not hundreds of thousands of people across the country. Many were jailed or sent to labor camps. They were often denied access to see their families and often put in cells so crowded that not everyone had space to sleep. Dissidents shared cells with murderers and rapists, and torture was not uncommon, more of China’s Marxist war against humanity.

Hong Kong

In the spring of 2019, the people of Hong Kong learned the bitter lessons that the people of Tibet and China’s Democracy Movement had learned in the twentieth century. The PRC under the CCP will not tolerate freedom, real autonomy, or democracy for those under CCP control, more of China’s Marxist war against humanity. Hong Kong was a British colony for 155 years, from 1842 until 1997, when the British transferred control to the PRC and Hong Kong became the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China. The 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration prescribed the conditions and date of the transfer including a PRC guarantee that Hong Kong would maintain its economic and political systems for 50 years after the transfer, until 2047. Under the joint declaration which included the “one country, two systems” principle. The Basic Law of Hong Kong is the regional constitution. The regional government was composed of three branches: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial with functions similar to those in our constitution. Before the transfer, The Legislative Council became a fully elected legislature in 1995. Over the 175 years since Hong Kong became a British colony, its people benefited from the freedom, political autonomy, and prosperity of western capitalism, and free markets. Hong Kong developed into a major capitalist service economy, financial center, commercial port, the worlds tenth-largest exporter, and ninth-largest importer. Hong Kong was ranked 4th in the Global Financial Centers Index., and the Hong Kong dollar became the eighth most traded currency in the world. Hong Kong was also home to the third-highest number of billionaires of any city in the world, the second-highest number of billionaires of any city in Asia with one of the highest per capita incomes in the world. In my opinion, the PRC under CCP leadership has viewed Hong Kong as a threat to CCP control of the people in China throughout the existence of the PRC. Hong Kong was a beacon of freedom and opportunity provided by Hong Kong’s democracy and prosperous capitalistic economy not experienced by the majority of the People of China under the CCP.

As improbable as it may seem, the 2019-2020 Hong Kong protests were sparked by the investigation of a 2018 murder in Taipei Tiawan. A young man and his girlfriend both from Hong Kong got into an argument in Taipei where they were vacationing. When the man learned that the baby, she carried, was not his, he murdered his girlfriend. He was able to escape Taiwan and return undetected to Hong Kong where he used her bank account to pay off some of his debt.  This act resulted in his arrest and confession to murder. Since the murder occurred in Taiwan, he could only be charged with money laundering in Hong Kong. No extradition agreement existed between Hong Kong and Taiwan because the PRC does not recognize Taiwan as a separate country. In February 2019, the Hong Kong government proposed an amendment to the ordinances regarding extradition for case-by-case transfers of fugitives, on the order of the chief executive, to any jurisdiction where the city lacks a formal extradition agreement. While the proposed amendment would allow Hong Kong to extradite this defendant to Taiwan, the amendment also allowed Hong Kong residents to be extradited to mainland China and Beijing which led to the 2019 2020 Hong Kong protests. The people of Hong Kong feared extradition to the mainland for any form of criticism of the CCP or PRC. When the protests turned into riots, the CCP sent troops to Hong Kong to control the riots by instituting martial law and quell all forms of decent including journalists and Christian leaders, like Cardinal Joseph Zen, According to a USCRIF commissioner, the CCP is eviscerating the rule of law and civil liberties in Hong Kong in Cardinal Zen’s case. The result was the end of freedom and the “one country, two systems” policy in Hong Kong in violation of the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration. Consequently, China’s Marxist war on humanity includes the fact that China does not honor written international agreements that they sign if the agreements do not serve the long-term objectives of the CCP.

Uyghurs

According to the article, Who are the Uyghurs and why is China bring accused of genocide? in the early 20th Century, the Uyghurs briefly declared independence for their region, Xinjiang Province. Sadly, soon after the formation of the PRC in 1949, like Tibet, the province was brought under the complete control of China’s new Communist government, another example of China’s Marxist war against humanity. The Uyghurs are the fifth largest ethnic group in China; but they only comprise 0.76% of China’s population. Uyghurs are mostly Muslim, see themselves as culturally and ethnically close to Central Asian nations rather than China, and speak their own language, similar to Turkish. Xinjiang Province is a mostly desert region that produces about a fifth of the world’s cotton and rich in oil and natural gas. Because of its proximity to Central Asia and Europe, Xinjiang Province is seen by Beijing as an important trade link.

Three aerial photos of a prison in the desert.According to this article, human rights groups believe China has forcibly detained more than one million Uyghurs in a large network of what the state calls “re-education camps” and sentenced hundreds of thousands to prison terms. 2020, BBC research showed that up to half a million people were being forced to pick cotton in Xinjiang. In addition, several countries, including the US, UK, Canada, and the Netherlands, have accused China of committing genocide. These reports also claim that China has been forcibly mass sterilizing Uyghur women to suppress the population, separating children from their families, and attempting to break the cultural traditions of the group. By 2020, Xinjiang had over 380 “re-education camps,” an increase of 40% above previous estimates including evidence that new factories have been built within the grounds of the re-education camps. People who have escaped the camps reported physical, mental, and sexual torture. Women have spoken of mass rape and sexual abuse.

On one hand, China has dismissed claims that it is trying to reduce the Uyghur population through genocide and mass sterilizations as “baseless and says allegations of forced labor at re-education camps are “completely fabricated.” On the other hand, China says the crackdown on Uyghurs in Xinjiang Province is necessary to prevent terrorism and root out Islamist extremism. Re-education camps are an effective tool in its fight against terrorism. Additionally, in 2017 President Xi Jinping issued an order saying all religions in China should be Chinese in orientation. Since Islam and Christianity invoke allegiance to Allah or God as at least equal to allegiance to any state power, these religions lack the needed Chinese orientation. Consequently, further crackdowns, especially on Islamic Uyghurs, were inevitable.

Human rights groups accuse China of exaggerating the Uyghur threat of terrorist activities to justify Chinese repression of the Uyghurs. China cannot have it both ways. Do Uyghur re-education camps exist or not? Are the camps in effective tool to fight terrorism? If so, the camps must exist. China’s Uyghur genocide, forced sterilization of Uyghur women, forced labor in re-education camps, and attempts to destroy Uyghur traditions and culture are examples of China’s Marxist war against humanity.

Christians

The Chinese have encountered and reluctantly accepted Christianity since the Seventh century. While the Mongolian Empire conquests reached Eastern Europe, the Byzantine and Ottoman Empires, Mongolians often adopted important parts of the culture of those they vanquished. The practice allowed for greater control of conquered populations. They also took some of the best and brightest back to Mongolia to increase their knowledge and power. The Eastern Orthodox Christianity of Byzantium was one of the cultural imports to Mongolia. The Papacy made overtures to the Mongolian Empire and western China in the thirteenth century after traders like Marco Polo opened both trade and Papal dialog. In the middle of the fourteenth century China’s Ming Dynasty conquered the Mongols and started to eliminate all non-Han influences like Christianity. By the sixteenth century, little meaningful Christianity remained in Mongolia and China. The Jesuit order was founded in 1540 and started planning to send missionaries to India and China. Jesuits struggled to gain a Christian foothold in China for over 100 years. During this period of dynastic civil war between the old Ming and victorious Manchurian Qing Dynasties, Jesuits suffered. For the most part, Jesuit Catholics had relatively few Chinese converts to Christianity.

The Protestant missionary movement started in earnest after the Second Great Awakening worldwide revivals of the early 1800’s. For the first half of the century, China restricted missionaries to the area around thirteen costal factories. After the first opium war, missionaries could live and work in five coastal cities; and after the second opium war, they were free to travel and work throughout China. One estimate indicates that some 50,000 foreign missionaries worked in China between 1809 and 1949 including unmarried Protestant women and men with their wives and children. Missionary work slowed after the 1911 Xinhai or Hsinhai Revolution ended imperial rule with the formation of the Republic of China. This republic was plagued by WWII and nearly 40 years of civil war between the CNP and CCP. The CCP was victorious and in 1949 established the PRC. By 1953, Mao Zedong’s CCP expelled all foreign missionaries from China; and the PRC persecuted any group that did not unconditionally support the government, more of China’s Marxist was against humanity. As a result, Christians were driven underground in secret home churches. Foreign missionaries infiltrated China and smuggled Bibles to home churches for distribution to Christians.

During the decade from the late 1970’s, the Open-Door Policy and full diplomatic relations with the United States were established, the Democracy Movement grew among the general population, the home church movement grew openly, and foreign missionaries were free to travel, preach, and distribute Bibles. The Democracy Movement exposed many Chinese citizens to the freedoms and prosperity enjoyed by the citizens of western nations resulting in dissatisfaction, protests, and riots throughout the nation. Sadly, for Chinese Christians, the CCP response to the unrest was violent suppression ending in the Tiananmen Square Massacre. The suppression also included ideologies that did not fully support CCP ideology, including Christianity and the Home Church Movement. Biblical Christianity, home churches, foreign missionary work, and non-Sinicized Bible distribution are once again a covert enterprise.

Why do the Marxists of the world and the CCP have such disdain, distrust, and actual fear of Christianity? The answer is found in one word, individualism. The role, value, and relationship of the individual to the value of the society or group are direct, antithetical opposites in Marxism and Christianity. For any form of Marxism to succeed, the individual must submit to the good of society. In Christianity, the individual Christian has infinite value because God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still Sinners, Christ [God’s only Son] died for us [each individual] (Romans 5:8 NIV). Each individual is one of God’s children.  heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ (Romans 8:16-17 NIV). For Marxists, the individual has no value compared to the value of the society. Individuals are worthless. For Christians as co-heirs with God’s only Son, Jesus Christ, each Christian individual has infinite value in the sight of the God. The infinite value of the individual in Christianity is incompatible with the worthless value of the individual in Marxism. Consequently, any idea or world view, like Christianity, that elevates the induvial over the collective or society must be devalued or eliminated for Marxist systems like the CCP to succeed. Since churches that preach Biblical Christianity rather than the Sinicized, Cultural Christianity preached in CCP sanctioned churches, Biblical Christian churches and Biblical Christian families in China will suffer increasing persecution.

The article, China Ramping Up Persecution of Christians As It Demands Worship and Allegiance of Xi Jinping: Watchdog relies extensively on ChinaAid for its information. This watchdog group has been reporting on China’s persecution of its approximately 96.7 million Christians since at least 2006. ChinaAid is “gravely concerned” with how state-sanctioned churches are being treated in China. The CCP escalated its persecution of Christians throughout 2022 by clamping down on churches and online religious content. The Chinese government is using charges of “fraud” to financially suffocate the house church movement, which consists of Christian congregations that have not registered with China’s official Protestant church. The traditional Christian practice of giving tithes and offerings is the basis for the fraud charges against house churches under the “Measures for the Financial Management of Religious Activity Venues,” which were updated June 2022. ChinaAid noted that the infamous ‘zero-COVID’ policy, authorities limited or eliminated Christian gatherings and multiple house church pastors and elders have been jailed and potentially face years in prison. In addition, the Chinese government is cracking down on Christian websites and apps to “remove Christianity from cyberspace, another aspect of China’s Marxist war against humanity. “China’s state-run religious groups lavished compliments and praise on Xi with more extravagant words and phrases than China’s state-run media, showing that religious Sinicization is evolving from supporting the CCP to worship and allegiance to Xi Jinping,” ”

In April of 2019 a seminar, titled, Christianity’s Enormous Harm on China’s Security. was presented to CCP members. It encouraged all CCP members to maintain correct views regarding religion and avoid being persuaded by its ideology. The goal is not only to curate a socialist-friendly church; they hope to erase it according to ChinaAid. Consequently, it is not unreasonable to think that Biblical Christians in China will face re-education camps like the Uighurs of China. Persecution of Chinese Christians is another example of China’s Marxist war against humanity.

CHINA’S TWENTY FIRST CENTURY UNCONVENTIONAL EXTERNAL TACTICS IN WAR

China’s Marxist war is a struggle or competition between opposing forces [Marxist China and humanity, particularly the United States and our global allies] for a particular end,world domination. The current CCP leader, X­ Jinping assumed leadership of the CCP in 2012 as its first leader born after formation of the PRC in 1949. Since that time, his power as leader has increased incrementally. At that time, Xi began to use the term Chinese Dream to encapsulate his vision for the future of China. The dream expresses the hope for the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation,” an empire with thousands of years of history. Stated another way, The Chinese Dream is about Chinese prosperity, collective effort, socialism, and national glory. In 2013, he quoted Confucius, saying “he who rules by virtue is like the Pole Star, it maintains its place, and the multitude of stars pay homage.” Xi also stated that the Western world was “suffering a crisis of confidence” and that the CCP has been “the loyal inheritor and promoter of China’s outstanding traditional culture.” Xi has pursued world domination more aggressively each year. After election to his second five-year term as PRC and CCP President in 2017, Xi made his plans for world domination clear by stating “To achieve great dreams there must be a great struggle.” China has entered a “new era” where it should take “center stage in the world.” He said that “socialism with Chinese characteristics” had led to China becoming “a great power” and that its “flourishing” economic model offered a “new choice” for developing countries. In his unprecedented third five-year term as party leader, Xi Jinping and the CCP see world domination as the Chinese Dream. Everything China does around the globe is designed to accomplish the Chinese Dream, or China’s Manifest Destany.

The unconventional tactics in war used by Xi and the CCP include a strategy to achieve global economic domination; covert intervention, espionage, and theft of intellectual property and technology related to the military, industrial development, manufacturing, computing hardware and software, communications, artificial intelligence, and medicine. Other unconventional tactics in war used by Xi and the CCP include the spread of Covid-19 from Wuhan Provence in China to the rest of the world. China also sells fentanyl and other illicit drugs or their precursor ingredients to Cartels and other criminal organizations around the world. Globally, millions died from Covid-19, fentanyl, and illicit drug poisoning. In my opinion, these tactics are part of China’s version of Manifest Destany or China’s Marxist war against humanity.

Global Economic Domination

The  2021 National Review article, What China Really Wants: A New World Order by Manyin Li is a frightening article outlining China’s plan to dominate the world, China’s Marxist war. The article is a translation, with commentary, of speeches by Jin Canrong, the Chinese State Master, a professor at the Chinese People’s University in Beijing, a U.S. expert, and an adviser to the CCP’s Organization Department and United Front Department. Jin’s words contradicted all the beautiful public utterances of CCP leaders, such as, We will never become a hegemon’ and, We have no intention to challenge the U.S. leadership.’ Accordingly, the article indicates that the CCP plans to increase China’s Gross Domestic Product, GDP, three-fold between 2021 and 2049, the 100th anniversary of the PRC when China will enter the club of developed countries. Unfortunately for the people of China, much if not most of the GDP increase will go to development of infrastructure, manufacturing, military equipment and personal, global investments including third-world country infrastructure, and the wealth of CCP elites and leaders.

Manyin Li noted six phases required to accomplish this goal, outlined in the discussion that follows. Phase one has four parts. First, after the 2008 US mortgage crises and recession, China purchased $800 billion of US Treasury bonds at the request of our government to stabilize the bond market. Second, China recognizes that there are about 6 million Chinese people in the United States which the CCP could possibly influence because of ties to family members in China which the CCP can use as leverage. For this purpose, China established illegal Chinese police stations near China towns in the United States and around the world. Consequently, many Chinese provinces, cities, and universities have strong relationships with their counterparts in the US. Large multi-national US corporations have built factories and established large product marketing efforts in China. These corporations and Chinese corporations sell their products in the United States benefiting the US economy with lower priced goods. These factors make the two countries inextricable. As Jin Canrong expressed it, The two countries will be inseparable, to the point that I have you in me, and you have me in you.’ This is a result of globalization. Unfortunately, many multi-national US corporations have moved manufacturing to China at the expense of US jobs to reduce labor costs and increase profits. In many ways, this has made the US dependent on China for end products and supply chain components for US based assembly plants. Third, the two countries have cooperated on international affairs for decades. Cooperation includes counterterrorism, North Korea, the first nuclear treaty negotiations with Iran, and the Paris climate accord. The latter two efforts eventually failed to gain support in the US congress. Fourth, China is using its economic prowess to gain alliances throughout the world by financing infrastructure projects in developing countries in Central Asia, Africa, and South America. These countries support China in international affairs and institutions like the United Nations. The CCP’s Phase one activities have given China enormous wealth and international statue.

Phase two is co-rule with the United States. Xi Jinping was the first CCP leader to consider China as a world power, rather than a regional power. In 2013 Xi Jinping proposed an agreement with the United States featuring a policy of no clash, no confrontation, mutual respect, cooperation, and a win-win situation with no war between the two nuclear powers. The US agreed to the general concept; but, from China’s perspective, rejected the idea of co-rule with China. However, the CCP envisions a world where China gains sufficient power that the US must accept China as, at least, an equal.

Phase three is the Chinese squeeze play when the Chinese squeeze the US out of the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait. US diversity, freedom, and polarization lead China to believe that we could not act in the face of multiple adversaries which the CCP would foster on the world stage. In his speeches, Jin Canrong stated,

For the U.S., the best situation is to have only one external enemy. If there are two, it would be at its wits’ end. I guess that Americans would be totally disoriented if there were three or four enemies. China’s strategy is to ensure that the U.S. has four enemies.

One more trick is to ensure that the U.S. be trapped in debt crisis.

China’s global squeeze play has the following additional two parts:

“The first is looking westward and called One Belt One Road,’ which will create physical connections between East Asia, West Asia, Africa and Europe by railroads, highways, pipelines, gas lines, optical cables, seaports, transportation hubs, and airports to form a huge network. The second pillar is the Asian-Pacific Free Trade Zone. Looking eastward, it was written into the declaration of the 2014 APEC meeting.”

According to Jin Canrong, China has made the greatest gains in global power during the twenty first century. In his view, the US wasted 20 years of blood and treasure in Iraq and Afghanistan with no strategic plan for those wars. Strategically, the US lost status on the world stage to China.

Phase four involves significant differences in military tactics, expenditures, and openness which places the US at a significant disadvantage. In the words of Jin Canrong,

“The U.S. military is transparent [regarding weapon systems development which we reveal once the systems become part of our arsenal], we know everything about it, while China’s is not. The two nations have very different thinking in military strategy. China does not show its prowess but hides it. We have hidden killers never made known to others.”

China and the CCP are patient and stealthy when they militarize significant global territory like the militarized islands they built in the South China Sea. This overt action is a hostile component of China’s Marxist war against humanity. China waited until the US was wayed down in Syria, Afghanistan, or Ukraine to construct these militarized islands. During this period, China has also continued with its global economic foreign investments like One Belt One Road, the Brick Bank, Asia Investment, Air Defense Identifying Zone.

The fifth phase of China’s plan for world domination is to change the free world. In 2020, then Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stated that if the free world doesn’t change China, communist China will surely change us. According to Jin Canrong, China’s capital investments in the US will find a good outlet and we can make money and control the market. Jin goes on to explain China’s hope to gain control of the US Congress, and other western nations, through their investment strategy as follows:

Our government hopes that eventually China will have investments in each and every congressional district in the U.S., making it possible for China to control thousands of votes to influence congressional members’ stance toward China. In fact, the U.S. representatives can be controlled. The U.S. has 312 million people, who elect 435 representatives. That means 750,000 people in each district on average. The normal turnout rate is 30 percent, about 200,000 voters who determine who gets elected. Generally, the two contenders have about the same number of supporters, separated by only 10,000 votes or fewer. Therefore, if you control a few thousand votes, you would be his/her dad. China, if playing well, will be able to buy out the U.S., making the U.S. Congress the second Standing Committee of our People’s National Representatives.

In my opinion, China and CCP have made significant progress towards accomplishing their goal to control the US Congress. China is buying or attempting to buy farmland, agribusinesses, and other industrial facilities throughout our nation. In North Dakota near the Grand Forks Airforce Base China attempted to buy farmland and an agribusinesses which could serve as a base to gather intelligence on a strategic US Air Force asset. In Oklahoma, the Chinese Communist Party arranged purchase of at least 300,000 acres of agricultural land, the source of illegal marijuana sold throughout the United States and beyond. These are two examples showing that China is actively pursuing its goal to buy out the U.S., making the U.S. Congress the second Standing Committee of our People’s National Representatives. Three recent media reports in The Wall Street Journal, Vision Times, and Breitbart reported that the CCP influenced the election of 11 progressive members of the Canadian Parliament in Prime Minister Trudeau’s party. A web search of the phrase CCP contributions to Democrats provides a plethora of articles, many asking whether the Democrat party is compromised to the CCP including these three, Breitbart, the Federalist, and Extremely American-Worldwide. In December 2022, ByteDance, TikTok’s Chinese parent company, donated $150,000 to both the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation and Congressional Hispanic Caucus Foundation. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, AOC, D-N.Y., is a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute (CHCI) advisory council. Is it a coincidence that AOC defended TicToc against a complete ban in the US? Is the CCP succeeding in its efforts to coopt Representatives in the Democrat Party? Consider these three words, Marxists support Marxists. This is another overt component of China’s Marxist war against the United States.

Phase six of China’s global plan is to become the global hegemon. Jin Canrong statement of Xi Jinping’s CCP Plan is frighteningly simple,

“[China must] survive; develop; earn dignity; [and pursue] hegemony. Our new country has experienced two phases: to survive and to develop. President Xi now wants dignity. After this is achieved, we will [pursue hegemony]. But that will be achieved by the next generation. The task of this generation is to gain equal footing with the U.S. while that of the next generation is to administer all other countries, the United States included.”

China’s Manifest Destany according to Xi is to become the global hegemon in the next two generations, 2049, the 100th Anniversary of the People’s Republic of China. If Xi succeeds, the United States will be administered by China. We will be communized’ by China. How is your Mandarin? This is the culmination of China’s Marxist war against humanity.

In his ending commentary on Jin Canrong’s speeches, Manyin Li is frank about the errors of US foreign policy regarding China since the end of the cold war with Russia, Li stated,

China has deceived Americans and the U.S. government, as well as Europeans and Australians, and misled us into a situation in which we are enabling the CCP to change us.

The hope of U.S. engagement policy was to invite China into an international community based on free trade and mutually beneficial cooperation, ultimately changing China. Yet in the last 40 years, the CCP has become more internally authoritarian. At the same time, the U.S. has fully let the CCP enmesh with us and use our free system to its own advantage. But no American could have ever imagined that the CCP is plotting to ensure four enemies against the U.S. at the same time, a debt crisis to trap us, and even to control our Congress. It is one thing for a nation to strive for greatness  respecting international rules,  it is another thing to do so by enmeshing with cooperators or competitors not only to take advantage of them but also to undermine them.

[Additionally dealing] with an enemy already enmeshing with us is more difficult than fighting a war on others’ land.

Most of the Chinese people are truly proud of their country’s modernization. Whatever the U.S. does against the CCP would be seen by a great number of Chinese as blocking China’s rise.

According to LI, the CCP believes it can gain control of the US by controlling our global corporations because of the market potential of the 1.4 billion people in China and the lower prices of products made in China and marketed throughout the world. In the words of the CCP, Wall Street will prevail over the U.S. government. However, Li warns Wall Street that

They either have never known or have forgotten that the CCP once deprived Chinese property owners of all their wealth and properties. In a few decades, American companies may suffer a similar fate if the CCP grows more powerful. Profiting in the present, American businesses fail to see possible long-term damage to the U.S.

The CCP’s model includes a police state, high-tech surveillance, censorship of media and the Internet, speech restrictions, lifelong privileges for ruling-party officials, wealth concentrated in a small group of CCP officials’ clans, stark inequality, oppression of the religious, the Sinicization of all ethnic minorities with coercive measures, etc.

Manyin Li ends his discussion of the CCP’s plan to become the world hegemon with the following admonition for We the People of the United States:

America’s decline is the CCP’s best opportunity to pursue its goal: the dominance of the whole world. The more divided and chaotic the U. S. is, the likelier it is that the CCP will succeed. Americans must prove to the world that democracy is still, and will always be, better than authoritarianism. We must do everything to improve and strengthen our democracy. It’s not easy to keep America safe and strong while forcing the CCP to change. First and foremost, it requires a better, stronger, and more united America.

China, the CCP, and Xi Jinping have a plan to accomplish total global domination, including the United States in two generations, 2049. Their preference would be to accomplish this goal peacefully by economic and political domination; but China is building a powerful military industrial complex for war if necessary. This is China’s Marxist war against humanity.

Until Xi Jinping became the leader of the PRC and CCP The conventional wisdom was that China would seek an expanded regional role but would defer to the distant future any global ambitions. Now, however, the signs that China is gearing up to contest America’s global leadership are unmistakable, and they are ubiquitous. The six phase Chinese plan for world domination and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace article, China has two paths to Global Domination by Jake Sullivan and Hal Brands make China’s global ambitions clear. China is expanding its navy at an alarming rate, investing to dominate high-tech industries, control waterways off its east coast, and create a global chain of bases and logistical facilities. Belt and road projects financed by Chinese banks will convert economic influence into economic coercion globally. According to these authors, China has two paths to global dominance. The first path requires that China establish regional dominance over the nations surrounding China in the western Pacific as a springboard to global dominance. This would require dominance over Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Australia, India and Vietnam providing significant stand-off distance between the US Navy and mainland China in the event of War. Unfortunately for China, many of these nations are repulsed by China’s efforts to dominate the region. If China cannot convince these nations that the Chinese economic and political model will provide a better more prosperous and free future than the US model, China cannot be a true global power. China will remain surrounded by U.S. allies and security partners, military bases, and other outposts. China will not achieve regional dominance much less global hegemony.

The second path to world dominance is more audacious and unexpected. This would require China to undermine the U.S. global alliance system and develop China’s economic, diplomatic, and political influence and dominance on a global scale. China would put increasing emphasis on shaping the world’s economic rules, technology standards, and political institutions to its advantage and in its image. This alternative approach would be fundamentally more important than traditional military power in establishing global leadership. For the second path to succeed, China would also need to supplant the US in converting economic power into political power, become the world leader in innovation, shape key international institutions, and set the rules of global conduct. China’s global diplomatic efforts to secure peace between Saudi Aribia and Iran and Russia and Ukraine are examples of this stealthy aspect of China’s Marxist war against the US and our allies and replace the US as the diplomatic leader of the world. China is investing its infrastructure, military industrial complex, quantum computing, artificial intelligence, and biotechnology. China’s, approach to ideology may be flexible, but its cumulative effect is to expand the space for authoritarianism and constrain the space for transparency and democratic accountability.

According to Tarun Chhabra of the Brooking Institution, Beijing’s flexible authoritarianism abroad, digital tools of surveillance and control, unique brand of authoritarian capitalism, and weaponization of interdependence, may in fact render China a more formidable threat to democracy and liberal values than the Soviet Union was during the Cold War. Apparently, China is currently preparing for both paths to global hegemony with an emphasis on the second path based on overt intervention, espionage, weaponization of Covid-19, and illicit drug and drug precursor ingredient trade in countries around the world.

Overt Intervention and Espionage

A map of the world with countries that have been in decline.

A table with several countries and their names.China’s Marxist war against humanity is global in scope. While China prepares for possible war, its plan for economic domination relies on overt intervention into the economy and culture of targeted countries. In developed countries, like the United States, China’s overt economic intervention includes investments in existing corporations or using Chinese corporations to enter markets where openings would be profitable and offer inroads to US politics. China’s objectives in these activities, primarily total dependance on or interdependence with China were discussed in detail previously. In developing countries, China invests in infrastructure projects, natural resource development, and manufacturing that the country is unable to pursue without assistance from outside sources. As noted, these Belt and Road projects in 147 countries include railroads, highways, pipelines, gas lines, optical cables, seaports, transportation hubs, and airports, [many with military base implications], to form a huge network. China is most interested in developing countries with valuable natural resources especially extensive rare earth minerals necessary for electric vehicles and chip manufacturing allowing China to control global markets for these invaluable natural resources.

Readers of the 2021 DW Global Media Forum article, Study looks at China’s secret loans to developing nations, by Kristi Pladson could easily conclude that the Chinese state banks, under CCP direction, are predatory lenders. The goal of these Chinese lenders is eventual control of the project assets they finance and the third world governments whose projects they finance. This is another way for China to peacefully achieve global dominance and hegemony. According to Pladson, these Chinese state bank contracts contain the following predatory provisions and terms that “go beyond maximizing commercial advantage:”

“Such terms can amplify the lender’s influence over the debtor’s economic and foreign policies….

Chinese contracts include a clause that allows the creditor to terminate the contract and demand repayment in the case of significant law or policy change in the borrowing country. [These demands] take on a different dimension when the lender is a state entity and not a private firm subject to standard financial regulation.

The contracts also contain unusually far-reaching confidentiality clauses,’ [including clauses that] contain or refer to borrowers’ promises not to disclose their terms  or, in some cases, even the fact of the contract’s existence.

This secrecy prevents other lenders from reliably assessing a country’s creditworthiness. Most importantly, citizens in lending and borrowing countries alike cannot hold their governments accountable for secret debts.

The severance of diplomatic relations with China is also classified as a default and breach of contract, requiring the debtor government to repay the entire loan amount immediately.

30% of the contracts require loan-receiving countries to deposit collateral in special escrow accounts. Borrowing countries may also be required to deposit the revenue from projects backed financially by these banks into said accounts. In the event of bankruptcy, the Chinese bank could then seize these assets.

[Most Chinese bank] contracts  hinder borrowers from accessing standard debt restructuring mechanisms. China explicitly obliges borrowers to exclude Chinese lenders from collective restructuring initiatives [involving other nations].

Such a provision conflicts with an agreement reached in November 2020 by China and other G20 countries. [Once again, China does not adhere to international agreements that China signed, much like their treatment of Hong Kong.]”

Most of the 147 countries of the world with projects financed by Chinese banks are obliged by contract to support China in world diplomacy and organizations like the United Nations (UN). In the UN, nations contractually indebted to China compose 75% of its 193 member nations. Does this fact contribute to votes against the US in the UN? Is China gaining a position of global dominance through its Belt and Road foreign policy and predatory lending tactics? More evidence of China’s Marxist war, a struggle or competition between opposing forces or for a particular end, global domination and hegemony.

Between 2004 and 2018, China and the CCP installed nearly 550 Confucius Institutes, CI, at colleges and universities around the world with nearly 1200 Confucius classrooms in elementary and secondary schools according to BBC News. CIs are another form on China’s overt intervention into countries around the world. The CCP goal was to establish 1000 Cis around the world. According to China, CIs offer language, cultural programs, and a bridge reinforcing friendship” between China and CI students. CIs are agreements between host universities or schools, a partner university in China, and China’s education ministry which oversees CI operations and provides partial funding, staff, and other support. Consequently, the CCP controls Ci staff members who are usually Chinese citizens making them potential espionage agents.

Critics contend that CIs are a way for Beijing to spread propaganda under the guise of teaching, interfere with free speech on campuses when they attempt to limit discussions of Topics like Tibet, Taiwan, Tiananmen, and Hong Kong, spy on students, and serve as bases for broader espionage. According to the BBC article, “They are platforms for an authoritarian party that’s fundamentally hostile to liberal ideas like free speech and free inquiry to propagate a state-approved narrative. Since the Communist Party of China doesn’t have a free press or rule of law to check its use of power, it’s no surprise there have been strong indications that CIs are used for inappropriate covert activities like intelligence gathering and [infiltrating] military research [programs].” After the Chinese military moved into Hong Kong and took control of its government in violation of international treaties, CIs attempted to squelch discussion of the CCP crackdown on campuses and communities where they were located. As a result, schools, and governments closed Cis around the world because their activities constituted unacceptable foreign interference. By 2021, 75% of the Cis in the US had been closed. At one time 120 CIs were operating in the US. CIs are another form of China’s Marxist war against humanity.

A 2018 CNBC article observed that in China trade secrets aren’t secret. China’s Intellectual Property, IP, system takes whatever trade secrets it wants for its own companies. In 2018, the United States Trade Representative found that “Chinese theft of American IP currently costs between $225 billion and $600 billion annually.” China’s system can force companies to give up their technological or trade secrets if they want to do any business in the country. Additionally, allegations of outright IP theft, is rampant in China. In some situations companies have to disclose other Information, such as annual reports which would list US based executives, to  enter the Chinese market. These executives would be potential targets for Chinese espionage. The major issue we face in China IP is China has a different system that is very much state-oriented and state-controlled.

According to an April 2022 NYT on-line article by Ana Swanson, China Continues to Fall Short of Promises to Protect Intellectual Property, U.S. Says, China used unfair means and pressured companies to transfer key technology that would give its companies a competitive edge. CCP bodies and officials have also continued to make worrying assertions about their IP system. China’s system serves the needs of domestic innovation and provides a strategic resource for Chinese competitiveness abroad.

In 2020, FBI Director Christopher Wray described a far-reaching Chinese campaign of economic, medical, and military espionage, data and monetary theft and illegal political activities, using bribery and blackmail to influence US policy. Every major Chinese enterprise in the world has an internal “cell” answerable to the CCP to drive the political agenda and ensure that the company is compliant with CCP directives.   The CCP operates in every country under the natural cover of business. “The Party machine is everywhere. For [the CCP], business is inseparable from espionage and politics.” These “agents”, as well as targeted individuals in important positions in foreign companies, can be recruited or persuaded using a variety of methods. This overt intervention in global trade and business is another for of China’s Marxist war against humanity.

Weaponization of Covid-19

Weaponization of Covid-19 is one of the most egregious examples of China’s war against humanity. China’s failure to fully and openly cooperate with the entire world to determine the origin of Covid-19 or stop the exodus of people from Wuhan at the start of the pandemic are inexcusable. In a May 2021 MedPagna’s  Today on-line article, Former CDC Director Robert Redfield, MD and others concluded that Covid-19 escaped from a Wuhan Institute of Virology, WIV, laboratory as early as September 2019. An on-line NBC News article draws a similar conclusion. Satellite imagery showing increased car parking at Wuhan hospitals even before September through November provides circumstantial evidence of an early fall start to the pandemic in Wuhan. The article also indicates the World Health Organization, WHO, investigation of the origin of Covid-19 was hampered by a lack of cooperation by Chinese authorities and scientists. The failure to cooperate may have contributed to the global severity of the pandemic. The June 2021 on-line Reuters article, First Covid-19 case could have emerged in China in Oct 2019  study by David Stanway draws similar conclusions. The article indicates that early cases had no known connection with the Huanan market, implying that Covid-19 was already circulating before it reached the market. A Chinese-WTO study acknowledged there could have been sporadic human infections before the Wuhan outbreak. The U.S. National Institutes of Health, NIH, confirmed to Reuters that the samples used in the study were submitted to the Sequence Read Archive (SRA) in March 2020 and later deleted at the request of Chinese investigators, who said they would be updated and submitted to another archive. Critics of the Chinese said the deletion was further evidence that China was trying to cover up the origins of COVID-19. Harvard researcher Alina Chan asked, “Why would scientists ask international databases to delete key data that informs us about how COVID-19 began in Wuhan? All agreed that the problems of doing this follow-up research in China will cause problems and delays in discerning the origin of Covid-19.

A 2021 MIT Review article by Antonio Regalado made several important observations about the Covid-19 origin controversy. Accordingly, Matthew Pottinger, a former deputy national security advisor at the White House and journalist working in China during the original SARS outbreak, believes it is very much possible that it did emerge from the laboratory and that the Chinese government, CCP, is loath to admit it. Pottinger says that is why Beijing’s joint research with the WHO is completely insufficient as far as a credible investigation.

The Chinese-WHO team led by Liang Wannian looked at two origin theories, the animal origin and lab-leak origin. Almost immediately the team eliminated the lab-leak origin theory. They said that Wuhan lab scientists claimed they had never seen or worked with a virus like Covid-19. Liang believed the Wuhan scientists and reasoned, If it doesn’t exist, there will be no way that this virus would be leaked. Additionally, Peter Daszak, president of the EcoHealth Alliance, which received grants from Dr. Fauci at the NIH, collaborated with the Wuhan lab for many years, and funded some of its work, says there is “no evidence” whatsoever to back the lab theory. However, knowing that Wuhan researchers were in the business of retrieving samples from bat caves and bringing them to Wuhan for study. They could have come into contact with unfamiliar viruses. The labs [have not been] entirely forthcoming about what viruses they do know about. The article is skeptical about the claims of the Chinese-WTO team in the following statement: The WIV possesses gene information about similar viruses that it has not released publicly. Other information disappeared from view when the institute took a database released offline. The article also indicates that the Chinese-WHO team never asked for the off-line data bases. Why?

After rejecting the lab leak theory out of hand, the joint Chinese-WTO team searched China for the creature that is the link between bats and humans giving rise to Covid-19. Eventually, the group plans to release a 300-page report. Unfortunately, Liang said China had tested 50,000 animal specimens, including 1,100 bats in Hubei province, where Wuhan is located. But no luck: a matching virus still hasn’t been found. Liang has not found a direct progenitor of the virus. He claims that the pandemic remains an unsolved mystery. Almost in desperation, The Chinese-WHO team went on a fishing expedition postulating that the intermediary may be some imported frozen species, which they hunted for almost one year. They postulated that such an intermediary could have come from thousands of miles from China’s shores. Now three years later, an internet search failed to find the intermediary species for Covid-19. If China had found it, the species would be at the top of every search. Why is the world tolerating such malarky from the Chinese-WHO team?

Jamie Metzl, a technology and national security fellow at the Atlantic Council, noted that the Chinese-WHO team isn’t set up to carry out the sort of forensic probe he believes is necessary. Everyone on earth is a stakeholder in this, he says. It’s crazy that a year into this, there is no full investigation into the origins of the pandemic. In February, Metzl published a statement in which he said he was appalled by the investigators’ quick rebuttal of the lab hypothesis. Reluctantly, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus who “was supported by a bloc of African and Asian countries, including China, for election as WHO Director-General, Issued the following statement regarding the search for the origin of Covid-19: I want to clarify that all hypotheses remain open and require further study. Now after three years or more, it is still crazy and appalling that the world still tolerates China’s intransigence regarding its role in the Covid-19 pandemic.

The Chinese-WHO efforts to determine the origin of Covid19 are totally inadequate primarily due to the CCP’s failure to cooperate with the rest of the world totally and openly. Is the CCP responsible for deletion of samples used in the study that were Wuhan submitted to the Sequence Read Archive (SRA), deletion of entire data bases, trivialization of massive hospitalizations in the fall of 2019 and 2020, and the disappearance of WIV scientists hospitalized in Wuhan with Covid-19 like symptoms in the fall of 2019? According to this article, one of these scientists may have been patient zero.

Based on the discussion above, Covid-19 originated in the WIV and was most likely released accidently into the City of Wuhan, in my opinion. The next question related to the rapid spread of Covid-19 and its possible weaponization, must be discussed and evaluated. According to Sky News Australia, over 9,000 athletes from 100 countries who participated in military games in Wuhan in the fall of 2019 returned to their homelands with many exhibiting Covid-19 like symptoms. Some US athletes had these symptoms in December of 2019, Consequently, Covid-19 originating in Wuhan was carried to the US by athletes participating in the Wuhan military games. Mr. Asher said, My concern was that the Chinese were doing research in, as we learned later, quite uncontrolled circumstances that was most definitely related to biological warfare ambitions in the future.'” Wei Jinsheng, China’s most famous defector to the United States, said he

“learned there was an unusual exercise by the Chinese government during the military games. I thought that the Chinese government would take this opportunity to spread the virus during the military games to as many foreigners as would show up.”

The question is, How were these athletes exposed to Covid-19? Were they accidentally exposed by asymptomatic Wuhan residents, or were symptomatic Chinese intentionally brought to the games as Jinsheng implies? Regardless of the mechanism, athletes from the games carried Covid-19 to as many as 100 countries by the late fall of 2019, Chain’s Marxist war against humanity.

In addition, the 2020 Voice of America, Associated Press on-line article, Where Did They Go? Millions Left Wuhan Before quarantine, has some very interesting observations of real travel from Wuhan to other parts of China and the world based on a Chinese itinerary search tool, Baldu Maps, available to researchers. 5 million people left Wuhan before the January 23, 2020, quarantine closed the province to the annual Lunar New Year exodus. China claimed that the first case of Covid-19 was identified in mid-December 2019, in Wuhan. The data shows that the first destination of most Wuhan travelers was provinces and cities adjacent to Wuhan. This article did not track those who left China from Wuhan. The top 10 global destinations for travelers from high-risk Chinese cities around Lunar New Year, according to their analysis, were Thailand, Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea, the United States, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam and Australia. The article noted a high correlation between the early spread of coronavirus cases and the geographical risk patterns they identified. The first case of the virus outside China was reported on Jan. 13 in Thailand, followed two days later by Japan, the countries with the highest connectivity risk, according to WorldPop’s analysis. Within 10 days of Wuhan’s quarantine, the virus had spread to more than two dozen countries; nine of the 10 countries with the most flight connections to at-risk mainland cities also had the highest numbers of confirmed cases, mostly afflicting people who had been in China. All these cases were identified before China closed its airways to international travel and quarantined Wuhan from the rest of China.

An April 2020 on-line ABC News article noted that that 3,200 flights flew from China to the U.S., including more than 1,000 flights that went to Los Angeles and nearly 500 each landed in San Francisco and New York  all three among the eventual hot spots of the COVID-19 outbreak in the U.S. More than 100 flights from China arrived in six other American cities: Chicago, Seattle, Detroit, Dallas, Washington, D.C., and Newark, N.J. More than 761,000 Chinese nationals and Americans returning home from the PRC entered the U.S. during that critical four-month period. This massive travel meant that the flow of the virus into the U.S. and other countries probably came quickly after it began spreading quickly in China. As early as January, cases were happening globally and specifically in the U.S. Among the flights were 50 direct from Wuhan. Twenty-seven of those flights went to San Francisco and 23 to New York. ABC News also analyzed thousands more flights during the period from Italy and Spain, which had the highest numbers of cases outside the U.S. by the end of March. Cities that took in at least 100 flights from China, Italy and Spain were the starting point for flights to every state in the country, potentially exasperating the domestic spread.

According to these two articles, the CCP allowed millions of Chinese to leave Wuhan directly to the rest of the world before their January 23, 2020, quarantine. The CCP also allowed people who left Wuhan for other Chinese provinces and cities to leave China for the rest of the world before the quarantine as well. The CCP knew that this virus was a dangerous, pandemic level virus by December 2019 following the military games cases and the WIV scientist episode. Yet the CCP allowed people to leave China for the rest of the world. Why? The Chinese-WHO team searching for the origin of Covid-19 believed WIV scientists who claimed that no Covid like virus existed in the lab and are still looking that species between bats and people that is the virus origin. Why? The CCP has removed critical scientists, information, data, and databases that must be made available to determine how Covid-19 originated and spread around the world when this information would help to prevent or mitigate another pandemic like Covid-19. Why?

It is my opinion that once the CCP determined how dangerous Covid-19 was to people, they allowed the virus to spread around the world, China’s Marxist war against humanity. Knowing the inhumane actions of the CCP during the Chinese civil war and toward Tibetans, Democracy Movement Protesters, Uyghurs, Christians, and Hong Kongese, It is not hard to believe that WIV was conducting gain of function, biological warfare research where Covid-19 was being tested and accidently infected WIV scientists who infected Wuhan Chinese. According to this idea, the CCP then allowed Covid-19 to spread around the world to test the efficacy of Covid type viruses as biological warfare agents. Additionally, the CCP knew how devastating the virus would be to the Chinese economy and could not afford to lose ground to the rest of the world. Such a worldwide release insured that the world economy would not gain on the Chinese economy. This hypothesis is consistent with the CCP and XI Jinping’s stated goal of becoming the world only superpower. Covid-19 was, from this perspective, a highly successful test release of a highly contagious human-to-human respiratory virus that had devastating effects on human populations and national economies. Such a hypothesis is also consistent with the words of Chinese defector, Wei Jinsheng who indicated that during the military games. I thought that the Chinese government would take this opportunity to spread the virus to as many foreigners as would show up.” Whether the release of Covid-19 was accidental or intentional, Covid-19 was the result of gain-of-function and/or biological warfare research or not, or the CCP facilitated the release of Covid-19 to the rest of the world or not, the PRC and CCP under the leadership of Xi Jinping gained invaluable information about the efficacy of human-to-human transmission of respiratory viruses like Covid-19.

The weaponization hypothesis is also supported by the following factors: 1) the PRC’s refusal to fully and openly cooperate with international investigators regarding the origin of Covid-19, 2) the Chinese-WHO team boondoggle search for the intermediary species, 3) the CCP’s failure to disclose the actual number of Wuhan fatalities in Wuhan during the fall of 2019 which could show that the PRC should have closed worldwide travel before January 23,2020, 4) CCP influence over Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the CCP candidate for WHO Director-General, and 5) WHO’s  failure to sanction the PRC for its failure to fully cooperate with the world regarding all of the CCP’s Covid-19 information and insights needed to prevent a future pandemic like Covid-19.

The reader can answer this question for themselves. Did the PRC, led by the CCP and Xi Jinping weaponize Covid-19 or not? A final consideration in this discussion is the global impact of PRC, CCP, and Xi Jinping’s culpability regarding Covid 19. If the world determines that China is primarily responsible for Covid-19, the status of the PRC, CCP and Xi Jinping would be greatly diminished, possibly irreparably. The previously noted MIT Technology Review article concluded with this statement:

More than any other hypothesis, a government-sponsored technology program run amok along with early efforts to conceal news of the outbreak would establish a case for retribution. If this is a man-made catastrophe,’ says Miles Yu, an analyst with the conservative Hudson Institute, I think the world should seek reparations.’

Mister Yu also discussed his distrust of the CCP and its potential treatment of foreign Covid-19 investigators and scientist working in China which is chilling. What you say in a press conference [in China] may be different than what you put in a report once you have left the country. Based on the evidence to date and the history of the CCP, it is my opinion that the CCP is hiding the truth and weaponized Covid-19 as part of China’s Marxist war on humanity.

Weaponization of Illicit Drug and Drug Precursor Ingredient Trade

Illicit drug use accounts for over 100,000 overdose deaths in the United States every year. Most of these deaths are the result of opioids; and the vast majority, over 70%, of the opioid deaths are the result of fentanyl poisoning.  In the US, opioid fatalities are most frequent among Whites. The racial and ethnic breakdown is Whites 70%, Blacks 17%, and Hispanics 12%. Males are about twice as likely to die of drug overdoses than females. A map of the united states with a map showing where fentanyl is.According to a Council on Foreign Relations on-line publication updated in April 2023, Most fentanyl in the United States is  smuggled across the southern border, U.S. officials say. Fentanyl coming directly from China”previously the dominant source has significantly decreased since 2019, but China is still the main manufacturer of the ingredients needed to create fentanyl. Other illicit opioids include oxycodone, hydrocodone, morphine, heroin, and methadone which is primarily used in addiction treatment centers. Mexican cartels move most of the illicit drugs to the US across our open southern border. The estimated lethal dose of fentanyl is about 2 milligrams or 0.007% of one ounce. Depending on where the fentanyl comes from (i.e. illicit or prescription), the lethal dose may be lower. Causes of fatal fentanyl overdose can include illicit forms of fentanyl, heroin laced with fentanyl, stimulants mixed with fentanyl (e.g. cocaine), higher doses than prescribed, doses more often than prescribed, crushing and snorting tablets, injecting fentanyl, mixing fentanyl with other illicit prescription drugs and alcohol. Fentanyl laced fake prescription drugs cause an increasing number of deaths sense these concoctions contain varying amounts of fentanyl that is unknow to the user. Unfortunately, Mexican cartels are mixing fentanyl combinations without naming fentanyl as an ingredient creating poisonous drugs that will kill unknowing victims. A bar graph showing the number of overdose deaths among age groups.More than 1,500 kids under the age of 20 died from fentanyl in 2021, four times as many as in 2018, says epidemiologist Julie Gaither. The fentanyl deaths account for nearly all of the opioid-related deaths in this age group in 2021.The chart on the left shows age and sex related drug overdose fatalities. Dealers who sell these concoctions and fentanyl should be prosecuted for one count of murder for each person they poison.

At least 70,000 US citizens die annually of fentanyl poisoning. China is the supplier of most of the illicit fentanyl and precursor fentanyl ingredients used by Mexican cartels to produce the fentanyl they smuggle across the open, southern US border for sale to Americans. The annual US citizen fentanyl poisoning rate is greater than the total number of military personal who died during the Viet Nam War. Consequently, Mexican cartels, and China are waging an undeclared war against We the People of the United States of America. China’s Marxist war is killing Americans with fentanyl and its precursors.

Annually, cartels kill at least six times more Americans with illicit drugs and fentanyl than the Taliban Killed in all three of their 911 attacks on Pennsylvania, New York City, and The Pentagon. Many in the US believe that the Mexican cartels should be designated as terrorist organizations. Then, the US should impose economic sanctions against Mexico to force the country to end the cartel problem themselves or cooperate with our military deal with the cartel problem. If invited, our military should use overwhelming force, decimate the cartels, and leave Mexico as soon as the well-defined mission to eliminate illicit cross-border drug trafficking is accomplished. Then, if Mexico fails to keep cartels in check and control their drug trafficking, repeat the military mission until Mexico eliminates the cartels within their borders.

Annually, China, the CCP, and Xi Jinping supply the fentanyl, or its precursor chemicals needed for Mexican cartels to manufacture fentanyl. This fentanyl kills five to six times more Americans than died on 911 and in the Viet Nam War combined. Stopping the flow of fentanyl and its precursor chemicals manufactured in China is a complicated issue. Drastically reducing, hopefully eliminating, the Mexican cartel demand would eliminate one market for these Chinese poisons. Sadly, China could attempt to provide these products directly to US drug gangs, increase mail sales, direct internet sales, and social media marketing in the US. To accomplish this, China would need to use independent smugglers to get the product into the US. If China engaged in such an operation, Xi would risk high probability of smuggler conflicts the US Coast Guard and a drastic increase in US-China tension. Of course, if the Mexican cartel market was eliminated, the better option for China would be to abandon its Mexican cartel-US fentanyl market.

Weaponization of illicit drug and drug precursor ingredient trade particularly related to fentanyl is another example of China’s Marxist war against humanity.

Discussion

China’s Marxist war against humanity since its revolution that ended the last Chinese empire is a story of civil war brutality that led to formation of the PRC under control of the CCP. Almost immediately, the CCP began brutal PLA suppression of non-Han ethnic minorities in China including Tibetans and Uyghurs and religious minorities primarily Christians. Repression of these groups includes forced relocation to re-education camps, forced labor, and genocidal persecution. Large scale protests and riots against the austerity and control of the general Chinee population like that of the Democracy Movement or the Hong Kong autonomy protests are met with the same brutality, imprisonments, party purges, and re-education tactics used by the CCP whenever resistance to its dogma is encountered.

In 2020, autonomy protests erupted in Hong Kong. After the CCP used the PLA to end the protests, the CCP revoked the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration and the PRC guarantee that Hong Kong would maintain its autonomy, economic, and political systems for 50 years after the transfer, until 2047. This CCP act demonstrates that Xi Jinping and the CCP will not tolerate proponents of democracy and capitalism to infect the rest of the Chinese population. The act clearly demonstrates to the rest of the world that China does not respect international law or treaties that the PRC and CCP sign and agree to respect. Therefore, China’s Marxist war against humanity is without limits, compassion, or dignity.

From the time Xi Jinping was first installed as PRC and CCP leader, he has stated that The Chinese Dream’ is about Chinese prosperity, collective effort, socialism, and national glory, and the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.” He has quoted Confucius, saying “He who rules by virtue is like the Pole Star, it maintains its place, and the multitude of stars pay homage.” He said that “socialism with Chinese characteristics” had led to China becoming “a great power” and that its “flourishing” economic model offered a “new choice” for developing countries. Xi’s Chinese Dream is world domination, politically, economically, and militarily. Xi’s Chinese Dream is to replace the United States of America as the world’s only superpower. Xi plans to accomplish his Chinese Dream, China’s Marxist war, by 2049, the 100th anniversary of the founding of the PRC.

To accomplish their Chinese Dream, the CCP has a detailed plan. Although the plan may be unattainable, it reflects Xi’s Chinese Dream. The plan starts with the goal of a three-fold increase in China’s gross domestic product by 2049. Whenever possible, China will buy US Treasury Bonds as they did during the 2008 mortgage crisis when they purchased $800 billion of our debt as requested by our government. China plans to use globalism and multinational corporations with co-mingled ownership, factories, and markets in the US and China to gain economic leverage whenever possible. Medical supply and pharmaceutical industry globalization is causing critical medical supplies and equipment and drug shortages related to supply chain and active pharmaceutical ingredient problems. This includes leveraging the millions of Chinese citizens, permanent residents, and visa holders to encourage joint ventures with Chinese corporations and perform military, industrial, technological, medical, and pharmaceutical espionage. In many industries, US corporations have moved most of their production to China giving China control of both supply chains and many end products. China is also financing infrastructure projects in developing countries around the world, especially west Asia which could connect to the Middle East and Southern Europe, South America, and Africa. These efforts provide allies in global politics and access to the mineral and other natural resources which include rare earth minerals needed for emerging Electric vehicle batteries chip manufacturing. In most of these infrastructure projects, China uses predatory financing where countries cannot meet obligations and default giving China control over the projects and their profits. As China’s global economic, military, and political power increases, the US will have to consider China as at least a global equal according to the plan. At this point China will attempt to gain South China Sea allies and drive the US from the area including the Taiwan Strait which would allow the PRC to invade Taiwan. With US debt exceeding $31 trillion, Chinese planners want to ensure that the U.S. is trapped in a debt crisis.” The US may do the trapping for China. China’s weapons development is secretive while ours is more open. China uses this to their advantage. The Chinese hypersonic missile program, which totally surprised the west, is an example which the US must counter. China plans to gain control of the US House of Representatives by purchasing enough land and commercial investments in every House District to gain enough economic influence to affect congressional polices related to China and globalism in general. In two generations, by 2049, China plans to be the Global hegemon and control the world’s economy, culture, and politics. Every component of their plan is underway. China and the CCP simply need to maintain their momentum and ensure that they maintain control. My question is, How is your mandarin?

In 2020, Carnegie Institute researchers Jake Sullivan and Gal Brands observed that Xi Jinping’s China is displaying a superpower’s ambition. Signs that China is gearing up to contest America’s global leadership are unmistakable, and they are ubiquitous. In my opinion, the United States has the same myopia toward Xi Jinping and China as we had toward Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda on September10 2001. That is, China is at war with us; but, we are not at war with China. China is effectively fighting on the the economic front, the geo-political front, the cultural front, and the public opinion front and preparing to fight on the military front and the space front. Sadly, the United States is not effectively fighting China on any of these fronts. In fact, Marxist progressive ideology, espoused throughout the left in the US, is closely aligned with the CCP’s Marxist ideology.

We are a 50-50 Democrat-Republican nation with each party more interested in political power than solving the problems facing our nation internally and internationally. Much to Xi’s delight, progressives seek to undermine and abandon our heritage, Constitutional law, economic system, Judeo-Christian values and culture, and traditional family structure. Progressives pit races, genders, sexes, economic classes, age classes, management and labor, and regions of our nation against each other hoping that the largest among each of these divisions will be and vote democratic. This would give the Democrat Party control of the legislature, a majority in the Senate, and the Presidency. In all likely hood, the Democrat majority would be slim. A 2% majority would, in my opinion, be huge. Xi understands that if the people and politicians in the US are expending most of our energy and attention fighting each other, we will not pay attention to China and its march toward replacing the US as the world’s only superpower. Xi also understands that he has an ally in the progressives of the US whether they understand this fact or not. This is part of China’s Marxist war.

Xi Jinping sees the deep divisions being fostered and encouraged by the Marxist progressives in the United States. In my opinion, he will use everything at his disposal, TICTOC comes to mind, to promote and encourage division within our country. Another form of Chiona’s Marxist War against humanity.

Xi Jinping understands that a nation divided cannot stand.

Do we?

How’s your Mandarin?

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GLOBALISM CAN KILL US

A man holding a whip in front of a pile of money.Globalism can kill us! An April 2023 on-line Supply Management article makes some startling remarks about drug shortages in the US. Nine in 10 (90-95%) of generic sterile injectable drugs for critical acute care in the US rely on key starting materials from China and India. India possessed 62% of the global manufacturing capacity of active pharmaceutical ingredients, API, in 2021, while China stood at 23%, and the US just 4%, and doctors were rationing lifesaving treatments. The article concludes with this dire warning, Drug shortages are increasing, lasting longer, and having a greater impact on patient care.

A May 2023 on-line article reviewed a Senate report that cited an overreliance on foreign sources as a concern. Factories in China and India supply most of the raw materials used in American medicines. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, India restricted exports of API’s and finished drugs made from those chemicals to protect its domestic drug supply. BIG PHARMA further complicates supply shortages because medications like Adderall and amoxicillin generate thin profits so companies don’t have an incentive to make and store large amounts in case a shortage develops, University of Utah Health researcher Erin Fox observed. In addition, when demand spikes. Federal regulators limit supplies of Adderall each year because it is a controlled substance. Once shortages develop, they can last for years; and it can be tough for patients to get reliable information. Fox said there is no legal requirement for drugmakers to update the public. Companies have said they aren’t getting enough raw materials to make the drugs, and the federal government says companies aren’t using what they have. Fox said, There’s been a lot of finger pointing back and forth.

The finger pointing is amplified by a February 2023 CNN on-line article, McKinney, the FDA spokesman, clarified that although the FDA is working with manufacturers, the agency does not make drugs and cannot require a pharmaceutical company to make a drug, make more of a drug, or change the distribution of a drug. The lack of transparency about these production issues “ how big the shortage is and how much drug each company is making “ is hindering solutions. Additionally, pharmaceutical manufacturers are not required to disclose the reason for disrupted supply. Knowing the exact reason for a given shortage is needed to anticipate shortages and find solutions. Without solutions, globalism can kill us.

The Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response told the committee staff that 90 to 95% of injectable drugs used for critical acute care rely on key substances from China and India. In other words, a severe breakdown in the supply chain could leave emergency rooms scrambling. The report also found that the federal government and industry regulators lack visibility into the supply chain for such drugs, making it harder to predict shortages. The Food and Drug Administration doesn’t know, for example, the amount of starting material a manufacturer has available, or, in some instances, how many manufacturers are involved in producing the final drug.

Nikkei Asia headlines and summaries note that China’s pharmaceutical market is already the second biggest in the world, after the U.S., thanks in large part to domestic demand from hospitals. Now Beijing wants to take the final step and surpass the U.S.  Many pharmaceutical companies faced supply chain disruptions, especially since Covid-19. Often, chemicals used to produce the key ingredients in drugs were sourced from only a few suppliers in China — or sometimes just one. The pandemic has brought to light just how much the global pharmaceutical supply chain depends on China, even for the most basic ingredients. Consequently, globalism can kill us.

According to an August 2021 Harvard Business Review on-line article, most finished pharmaceuticals, whether made abroad or in U.S. factories, depend almost entirely on the availability of API’s, the primary functional components of the drugs we take. These ingredients include everything from the active substances in over-the-counter pain medications to life-saving IV solutions. Without APIs, pharmaceutical manufacturing grinds to a halt and shortages quickly follow. There is a very limited domestic capacity to make these essential medicine ingredients. The U.S. manufacturing base to make APIs has drastically eroded over the last several decades. Most of the supply now comes from abroad. For many materials, there is a single, foreign source of supply. The global over-reliance on China and India for APIs required to produce them, and essential medicines is especially worrisome. An estimated 80% of the world’s APIs come from China, India, and a handful of other foreign countries.

For several decades globalists in our national government, pharmaceutical industry, and many of our other domestic manufacturing conglomerates have moved manufacturing overseas. The result is a progressive globalism contradiction. They do this to save money on land, labor, facility construction due to lower environmental protection laws, and fewer occupational safety regulations. Consequently, the United States no longer controls our supply chains for many products needed to maintain our dominance in several global markets, including pharmaceuticals. Where the pharmaceutical industry is concerned, globalism can kill us.

The fact that the US only produces 4% of the globes API needed to manufacture critical pharmaceuticals must be solved. This is a national security problem and a national health problem. The fact that most of our pharmaceutical companies are now international conglomerates run by globalists makes solutions to this problem difficult. The multinational corporations must first answer the question of allegiance. Do they owe their allegiance to their shareholders; or to the nation and people where they gained their stature and competitive position on the world market? This is the most critical and contradictory question that progressive corporate globalists must answer. If corporate leaders and boards of directors cannot convince pharmaceutical shareholders that they should put the United States and We the People ahead of profits, then globalism can kill us. If the majority of the pharmaceutical supply chains, API sourcing and production, and final product manufacturing cannot be either greatly diversified or moved to US facilities, globalism can kill us.

Solving these critical issues will require cooperation between our local, state, and national governments and the entire pharmaceutical industry. At the national level, many of the more restrictive environmental assessment requirements could be waived to facilitate timely plant construction. State and local zoning regulations could be reduced and programs to train the workforce for these plants could be implemented and timed to meet plant openings. Government and the pharmaceutical industry must work together to ensure that We the People have the medications to live healthy, productive lives without the danger of medication shortages. If this cannot be done, shame on you in government and the pharmaceutical industry, globalism can kill us; it has and it will.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

 

 

 

PROGRESSIVES PREFER MURDER’S OIL

A man with his hands crossed in front of him.Progressives prefer murder’s oil over America’s oil. More specifically, the left, communists, socialists, progressives, liberals, and Democrats prefer murder’s oil over oil drilled and refined in the United States. This is based on the actions, not the rhetoric, of the left including progressives. Since oil is financing much of Putin’s Russian war against Ukraine, the west, especially the United States, needs to cut off all sales of Russian and their allies oil on world markets. This must include removal of Russian and their allies oil transactions from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT) system. The Biden Administration is sending representatives or third-party negotiators, like Russia, to try to negotiate increased oil production for export to the United States from murderous dictators in counties like Iran, Saudi Aribia, and Venezuela. The Administration, including the President, is also unsuccessfully requesting increased oil exports from other Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) like the United Arab Emirates. These actions show that the Biden Administration and progressives prefer murder’s oil over America’s oil.

The Biden administration and progressives think the We the People of the United States are to stupid to understand that all greenhouse gases are the same regardless of the source of the carbon during their transition to renewable energy. Progressives also believe that energy inflation is an acceptable tool to reduce carbon energy use in the United States. Perhaps the Biden Administration and progressives are the stupid ones. They believe that it is economically sound to pay other countries, many controlled by murderous dictators, for oil. This strategy also ships good paying oil jobs to foreign countries robing We the People of these good paying jobs. Our enemies, both military and economic, use energy as a weapon. Progressives and the Biden Administration fail to understand that the United States, with the largest energy reserves in the world, especially our petroleum reserves, should use energy as a weapon to crippler or destroy the economies of our enemies, especially Russia which invaded Ukraine without provocation and is committing unprecedented war crimes against the Ukrainian people.

Unfortunately, for the United States and the world, the Biden Administration, from the President to Cabinet Secretaries and regulators in the Environmental Protection Agency, The Federal Reserve System, banking, treasury, commerce, energy, and transportation at virtually every level have stated their intent to eliminate carbon-based energy produced in the United States, especially petroleum, as quickly as possible. Â This policy eliminates the possibility of using our petroleum as a weapon against tyrants like Putin and his nation Russia. The policy also guarantees continued gas price inflation into the future, at least 2024, unless Republicans win veto proof House and Senate majorities in the 2022 elections. The energy policy of the Biden Administration demonstrates that Biden and progressives prefer murder’s oil over America’s oil.

Hopefully, Putin’s Russian invasion, war, and war crimes against Ukraine and its people will show the freedom loving, independent, democratic people of the world that that murderous dictators like Putin cannot be tolerated any longer. The free world should unite to destroy the economies of dictatorships, like Putin’s, before they have the economic power to wage wars like Putin’s Russian war against Ukraine. To accomplish this goal, the free democratic countries of the world must be unified economically by enacting true free trade agreements which excludes the dictatorships of the world.

The Biden Administration’s energy and foreign policies plans are totally inept, short sighted, and strategically lacking. The potential wars of the future are not being considered by this administration, progressives, and globalists. The Biden Administration does not understand that China and Russia are uniting to wage the current and upcoming economic energy wars. When the Biden Administration acted to immediately curtail carbon-based energy production, primarily petroleum, in the United States, Russia, the world’s third largest petroleum producer, could finance its invasion and war against Ukraine with oil revenue from the United States and the rest of the world. This was because we reduced Unites States oil production and became an importer rather than an exporter of oil. Our reduction in production reduced global supply and increased the global market price for oil increasing Russian oil profits. More actions demonstrating that progressives prefer murder’s oil over America’s oil.

In addition, the Biden Administration lacks foreign, environmental, and energy policies that ensure the long-term ability to secure the rare earth minerals and capacity to produce the Lithium-ion batteries needed to power the electric vehicles that they are forcing on We the People in the United States. However, Tesla does manufacture its lithium-ion batteries in their Panasonic plant in California. The minerals needed to produce lithium-ion batteries are lithium, graphite, nickel, cobalt, manganese, copper, and aluminum (bauxite). According to United States Geological Survey information summarized in the article, Where do batteries come  from? And where do they go?, the natural reserves of these minerals in the United States do not rank among the top five countries of the world. In contrast, China is among the top three producers of lithium, graphite, copper, and aluminum (bauxite), and the United States is not listed as a top producers of these minerals in the world. Additionally, according to the 2020 United Nations publication using 2018 data, COMMODITIES AT A GLANCE Special issue on strategic battery raw materials, Commodities at a Glance: Special issue on strategic battery raw materials (unctad.org), China controls trade of critical duratives of the world lithium, cobalt and manganese supplies by aggressive import of raw materials and refined exports and produces most of the world’s graphite. The 2019 article, How Electric Car Batteries Are Made: From Mining To Driving states that mining lithium and cobalt causes harmful environmental pollution, and cobalt mines in the Congo use child labor with extremely low wages and deplorable conditions. The Biden Administration foreign, environmental, and energy policies do not provide a long term strategy to secure supplies of the essential minerals needed to produce lithium-ion batteries in the United States. This failure will make our electronic vehicle industry supply chain issues controlled by military and economic enemies, especially China. Just as progressives prefer murder’s oil over America’s oil, progressives prefer enemy murder’s lithium-ion battery mineral supplies over America’s and our ally friend’s lithium-ion mineral supplies.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

 

 

 

GLOBAL ALLIANCES, FRIENDS, AND ENEMIES

 

Two horses running in front of a sunset.
Global alliances should be more than military alliances. They should also be reciprocal open, free trade alliances to be effective.

The United States of America is involved in numerous global alliances that are military and defensive in nature. Unfortunately, most of our military allies are not necessarily economic, free trade, allies, partners, or friends. When it comes to international trade and economic agreements, the unstated contention of President Trump is that the United States is primarily confronted by international trading opponents or enemies. In my opinion, true global alliances should be totally reciprocal, politically, economically with respect to trade and monetary policy, and militarily. After all, true allies or friends don’t take unfair economic and trade advantage of allies or friends. Allies do not drain the economic resources and strength of their allies.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is one of the largest military alliances to which the United States is a signatory. My contention is that the majority of the military allies in NATO are not economic friends of the United States. The European Union (EU) members of NATO, members of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and other trade partners act more like economic enemies. The same could be said of most Pacific Rim military allies. The Chinese, North Koreans, Iranian and other Middle East countries, and socialist South American nations are also trading advisories. With trading friends like these, who needs trading enemies?

Consequently, when our so called global allies threaten to challenge our proposed tariffs at the World Trade Organization (WTO), we should immediately challenge their existing tariffs, trade barriers, and subsidies to selected industries that provide a competitive advantage for their products on the world market with the WTO. To protect our agricultural products, if allies place barriers or tariffs on our agriculture products, we should not allow competing products into our nation to protect prices for our farmers. With the largest economy in the world, our allies need to trade with us more than we need to trade with them. Again, truly strong global alliances are fully reciprocal.

When critics and global free trade proponents say that it is bad policy to start trade wars with allies, they fail consider the possibility that military allies are not necessarily economic or trading allies or friends. These allies are already waging a trade war with the United States. They also fail to acknowledge that global free trade is a myth. Military allies that levy tariffs that are ten times what the United States levies on the same category of goods or erect trade barriers for United States products or commodities are not economic or trading partners and allies. Military allies that fail to contribute equitably to their military obligations within global alliances are questionable allies. Free trade and military obligation should be reciprocal in all areas.

The Merriam-Webster, On-Line Dictionary definitions of two terms related to this discussion are relevant. Globalism is defined as “a national policy of treating the whole world as a proper sphere for political influence.” Influence is defined as “to affect or change without use of direct force or authority.” In my opinion, globalism is currently used most often in reference to global trade or the global market that is not characterized by free trade. The reality of international trade is that the United States has little significant influence that positively affects our economy, manufacturing, labor force, and personal or family income. That is why the United States has a huge trade deficit. That is why President Trump is renegotiating most of our international trade agreements and putting America first. Consequently, globalism only applies to military and defensive alliances but not to economic and international trade agreements.

In my opinion, it is time that our global alliances are composed of military allies that are also our economic and international trade allies rather than our economic and international trade adversaries. Our allies need to stop depending on the United States to finance their defense needs and economies in general. The world needs open, fair, reciprocal, and truly free trade.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your “Patriot Visions,” start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

 

GLOBAL FREE TRADE: REALLY?

 

The idea of global free trade or that the global market place is an open free market place is a damn lie. This damnation is spread by the World Trade Organization, progressives, many of whom are closet capitalists, globalists, international conglomerate capitalists, so called free-traders, conservatives, RINO’s, business pundits, and most intellectual elites. The lie comes from deep in the elitist Washington, DC, globalist swamp.

A red and white background with the word globalization written in it.
There are at least 6 reasons that the idea of global free trade is a damn lie!

Global free trade does not exist when 1) countries refuse to allow any category of products made in the United States (US) into their country, and we allow the same category into our country; 2) countries impose high tariffs on any category of products imported into their country, and we impose tariffs that are a fraction of those imposed by so-called œtrading partners; 3) other countries subsidize production of categories of products, and we do not subsidize production of the same category of products; 4) other countries do not impose costly environmental, health, and safety regulations on energy and production facilities that are required in the US; 5) other countries tolerate theft of intellectual property for new or improved products from US businesses without paying for use of the intellectual property or imposition of penalties when these products enter US markets; and 6) other countries manipulate international money markets for their benefit. If the so called global free trade experts were honest, they could add to my list of real global free trade impediments. Whether or not the announced Trump Administration tariffs will be good for our economy and labor force in general, the argument that tariffs violate free market principles is void because global free trade does not exit. The argument is based on a lie. No true global free trade market exists.

The result of globalism, as now practiced, is global wealth redistribution. The $800 billion US trade deficit is global wealth redistribution. Virtually all of the so-called œFree Trade agreements involving the US constitute wealth redistribution since they result in trade deficits with the other countries involved. The reality is that the redistribution has cost the US labor force jobs, lost wages, and lowered benefits which were transferred to labor forces in developing countries.

In my opinion, most progressive policy initiatives are based on Marxist philosophy, especially wealth redistribution. Similarly, capitalists seek to expand markets and increase their profitability which requires decreasing costs and opening of new markets in developing countries or increasing income, especially disposable income, in new and existing markets resulting in increased customer purchasing power. Although the ultimate goal, increasing consumer or personal incomes and buying power, is the same for both progressives and capitalists, the method of accomplishing the goal is drastically different. Interestingly, globalism often unites progressives and capitalists when nationalism, protectionism, and tariffs are the subject of debate and discussions.

Unfortunately, US laborers have borne the brunt of the adverse effects of globalism, lost jobs lost opportunities, stagnant wages, and regional economic decline. Through factory relocations to the developing world, capitalists achieve their goal of reducing capital improvement and labor costs, and increased factory productivity. Progressive globalists achieve their goal of global wealth redistribution when new factory wages increase the standard of living, opportunity, and economic development in the regions where new facilities are opened.

Global free trade is a globalist myth. Until a global free market actually exists, the experts should stop insisting that tariffs will impede free trade. Global free trade does not exist. The œexperts should simply tell us that tariffs will increase costs and prices and are the same as taxes. However, if the threat of tariffs, force our so-called trading partners to open markets, reduce their own tariffs, end their subsidies, clean up their own environment, end intellectual property theft, and stop currency manipulation, then tariffs could start progress toward an unfettered global free trade where all the people of the world could move toward greater prosperity.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your “Patriot Visions,” start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

 

TARIFFS, GLOBAL MARKETS, CAPITALISM, AND LABORERS

 

Proposed and existing tariffs will affect global markets. Announced tariffs on steel, aluminum, washing machine, and solar panel imports into United States (US) markets are currently a major economic issue in the news nationally and globally related to global markets. The Trump Administration commitment to renegotiate international trade agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Paris Climate Accord, and trade sanctions related to efforts to end the Iranian and North Korean nuclear weapon and ballistic missile programs further complicate discussions about tariffs and global markets. Global markets also complicate projections of the impacts of tariffs on the global and US economy and the potential for retaliatory tariffs or other market reactions by other nations. Trade wars are the fear of tariff opponents.

A red and white background with the word globalization written in it.
Tariffs, global markets, and trade agreements affect and threaten manufacturing capacity in the US.

The Trump Administration claims that the US is in danger of losing adequate steel and aluminum capacity to manufacture military equipment during a time of war. The purpose of proposed tariffs is to correct these critical steel and aluminum production capacity issues as a matter of national security. Although US steel and aluminum imports from China are below 10%, the fact that China often floods the world market with these products drives the international price down. Flooding US markets with Chinese steel or aluminum in this situation, often through other countries, makes it even more difficult for US firms to compete in global markets. Since these prices are determined by global markets, China does not have to flood US markets with steel and aluminum to force prices too low for US companies to be competitive. The issue is whether or not tariffs could be maintained long enough to rebuild US steel and aluminum and whether or not global retaliation and potential trade wars would negate the effect of the tariffs.

Causes for the significant decline of US manufacturing in general as well as our steel and aluminum industries are complicated by global markets. Our previous federal tax codes, environmental, health, safety, labor, and zoning regulations add to the costs of products manufactured in the US. Environmental impact assessments, zoning issues, and permitting often take years to complete for large projects adding significant costs and delays for new facilities or expansions. These extra costs, which many of our competitors in do not incur, adversely influence US product competitiveness in global markets. In addition, any construction or natural resource extraction project in the US that is opposed by a significant part of the population can be delayed by demonstrations due to the right of the people peacefully to assemble. Legal actions in our state and federal courts often delay or halt these type projects  which can reduce capacity, increase costs, and decrease our competitiveness in global markets.

In the US, we value clean air and water and the health, safety, and well-being of our labor force. Consequently, the extra costs that we require our manufacturers to incur, and the resultant competitive disadvantage these costs bring, is also part of the calculation that corporations make to locate manufacturing facilities in the US or to locate or relocate facilities to less restrictive countries. For the labor force in Western Europe, North America, and especially the US, progressives and the labor movement have achieved comparatively high wages and benefits compared to other parts of the world. The success of progressives in the environmental and labor movements has resulted in contradictory outcomes related to national and global aspirations which directly influence global corporate capital expenditure decisions related to global markets.

The result is a globalism contradiction for the left, the labor movement, and US capitalists. One of primary goals of progressives on the left is wealth redistribution or income equality on both the national and global scale. In the US, the labor movement has gained wages, benefits, and safe healthy work environments that are the envy of much of the world. Unfortunately, progressive and labor successes in the US are significant reasons for the decline of US manufacturing and competiveness in global markets. The total costs of expenses related to labor, the additional costs related to the anti-capitalist progressive environmental agenda, and progressive taxation resulted in factory closures in the US as corporations relocated factories and jobs to developing countries. The factories built in developing countries are new state-of-the-art facilities built at lower costs and greater worker productivity capacity than the outdated US factories that were closed or remain in the US. The compensation for laborers in the developing countries raises the standard of living for them that multiply as it spreads in local communities. Labor costs in the developing world are usually far lower than similar costs in the US but often much higher than wages before new factories open. In the US, factory closures increase the size of the labor pool for a declining number of manufacturing jobs in old factories now competing with state-of-the-art developing country facilities. Under these circumstances, the US manufacturing labor force is faced with declining number of jobs in old productively disadvantaged factories which can result in lower or stagnant wages and benefits. This is the globalism contradiction for the left. Consequently, in global markets, wealth is being redistributed, but the redistribution is from the labor force in the western industrialized nations to the labor force in the developing nations of the world.

The globalism contradiction for US capitalists and capitalists in the rest of the industrialized west is closely related to the success of progressives and the labor movement and the resultant cost of manufacturing land, labor, and capital improvements. Since the purpose of international manufacturing conglomerates is to maximize corporate profit, cost reduction is an essential responsibility of corporate executives and board members. This necessity stands in direct contradiction to the goals of nationalism, patriotism, and any since of obligation to the labor force, communities, states, and the United States of America, all of which, supported US corporations as they gained economic dominance in global markets. In my opinion, corporations founded in the United States, should give significant consideration to the fact that they would not be in their current global economic situation without the United States of America. These corporations have a debt to pay to We the People who supported their rise to positions of global economic power. This obligation is at the heart of the globalism contradiction for US capitalists.

The tariff and trade negotiation package announced by the Trump Administration is a complicated and aggressive plan to reinvigorate the US steel and aluminum industries and our manufacturing in general in global markets.  During a time of war, the United States must be able to support its military with the best equipment available and supply the needs of the population supporting any war effort. This requires a complete manufacturing base. This is one of the primary objectives of the Trump Administration’s goal to Make America Great Again.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your “Patriot Visions,” start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

TRANSFORMATION OF OUR FOUNDER’S NATION

CONTENTS

VISION FOR THE FOUNDER’S NATION
TRANSFORMATION OF OUR CONSTITUTION
TRANSFORMATION OF EDUCATION
TRANSFORMATION OF OUR CULTURE
TRANSFORMATION OF OUR POPULATION
TRANSFORMATION OF OUR NATIONAL DEFENSE

Our Founder’s nation, like every nation that cannot defend itself, maintain geographic integrity, and loses its unique culture, economic and political identity will wither away as Marx and Engels stated it. The Marxist left, whatever name they have used throughout the last two centuries, communists, socialists, Critical Theorists, humanists, progressives, liberals, or Democrats have accomplished a significant transformation of our Founder’s nation using their plan to transform America. Progressives used the tools provided by our Constitution and culture in a relentlessly incremental process to transform the United States into a nation that our Founders never envisioned.

A man in a hat and a quote
The Founders also understood that God (Providence) had His hand on this nation.

From colonial times until the Constitution was ratified and well into the twentieth century, We the People of the United States shared a strong, significant Judeo-Christian heritage which the Founders clearly understood. In the late eighteenth century, the majority of the population was of British descent, spoke English, and attended one of the many Protestant denomination or Catholic churches. All of the universities were of Christian origin, including Harvard which was named after a wealthy preacher who gave his theological library and wealth to the university. Most of the first departments established at these universities were Divinity Schools and Law Schools. Additional universities were established after the Great Awakening revivals of the mid-eighteenth century to train more evangelists. Our Founder’s nation shared a strong Judeo-Christian heritage.

VISION FOR THE FOUNDER’S NATION

The Founders also understood that God (Providence) had His hand on this nation from the time the first colonists set foot on this continent.  This sentiment was eloquently stated by John Jay, first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America, in The Federalist No. 2 where he wrote,

Providence (God especially when conceived of as exercising this) has blessed it (Independent America) for the delight and accommodation of its inhabitants.  Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country, to one united people, a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion (Christianity with all its orders and denominations), attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, have nobly established their general Liberty and Independence.

This country and this people seem to have been made for each other [by] design of Providence for a band of brethren, united by the strongest ties, should never be split into alien sovereignties.

Similar sentiments have hitherto prevailed among all orders and denominations of men among us (Parenthetical remarks added).

James Madison in The Federalist No.14 was also confident that a constitution so ordained and based on Judeo-Christian morality, ethics, and law would be a model for mankind. He stated,

Posterity will be indebted for the possession, and the world for the example of the numerous innovations displayed on the American theater, in favor of private rights and public happiness.  Happily for America, happily we trust for the whole human race, they pursued a new and more noble course.  They accomplished a revolution which has no parallel in the annals of human society: They reared the fabrics of governments which have no model on the face of the globe.  They formed the design of a great confederacy, which has been new modeled by the act of your Convention, and it is that act on which you are now to deliberate and to decide (Ratify the Constitution, Remark added).

Fifty of the fifty five men who attended the Constitutional Convention were practicing Christians including theologians, denominational leaders, pastors, and evangelists. Many were also legal scholars and attorneys. After shepherding the nation through the first eight years of our experiment, the Father of our Country, George Washington, expressed similar sentiments in his Farewell Address to the Nation:

“With slight shades of difference, you have the same Religion, Manners, Habits and Political Principles.  You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the Independence and Liberty you possess are the work of joint councils, and joint efforts “ of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.

Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion, and Morality are indispensable supports. “ In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens. Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths in Courts of Justice?  And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

Cultivate peace and harmony with all. “ Religion and Morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it? “ It will be worthy of a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a People always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages, which might be lost by a steady adherence to it?  Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a Nation with its virtue?  The Experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. “ Alas!  is it rendered impossible by its vices?

The Father of our Country clearly stated that the international reputation of the United States, sound governmental policies, and the integrity of our courts were dependent on our shared Judeo-Christian religion and morality, our cultural and societal identity. In our Founder’s nation, We the People had leaders like John Jay who summarized the Founders’ view of the importance of Christianity to the successful future of the United States as follows:

No human society has ever been able to maintain both order and freedom, both cohesiveness and liberty apart from the moral precepts of the Christian religion. Should our Republic ever forget this fundamental precept of governance this great experiment will then be surely doomed.

Not only did these four Founders express this view, but virtually all the significant Founders wrote expansively about the importance of our Judeo-Christian heritage to previous success and future benefits that would come to the world as a result of the virtue and religious morality of the United States. Consequently, our Founder’s nation was a Judeo-Christian nation. In my opinion, most of the current societal, cultural, political, and legal problems in our nation are the consequence of our abandonment of Washington’s admonition concerning Religion and Morality.”

Historically, great nations deteriorate from within. Moral and ethical deterioration of cultures normally precedes political, economic and military instability. These problems often lead to the inability of nations to defend themselves against external economic or military forces. In the United States, our national greatness flowed historically from the individual and collective character, virtue, strength, and moral integrity of We the People. Our Judeo-Christian heritage, Constitution and the rule of law, and our economic system based on individual entrepreneurialism and capitalism have been largely responsible for the success of the United States on the world stage. Virtually every aspect of the historical cultural, political, and economic strength of our nation is being incrementally undermined by forces seeking to fundamentally transform the United States of America.

The preamble to the Constitution of the United States outlined five general functions of constitutional governance, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity. Only those areas of life and governance detailed in the various Articles and Amendments to the Constitution were intended to fall under the authority and responsibility of the National or Federal government.  In the Founder’s nation, Tranquility, general Welfare, and the Blessings of Liberty were the responsibility of citizens, state, and local governments. The Constitution was established for a virtuous, moral, industrious, and responsible citizenry free to pursue their personal general Welfare and secure the Blessings of [their] Liberty.

In my view, one word in the Preamble to the Constitution has great significance to understanding why our Founder’s nation subsequently exceeded the expectations of the world. The word is  “ordain,” to set apart for a sacred function in service of God. The Preamble states, We the People of the United States do ordain’ and establish this Constitution. This meaning for ordain is the only one that fits the context and definitions of ordain and establish found in Samuel Johnson’s 1755 Dictionary of the English Language because all of the meanings for establish are synonymous with the non-sacred meanings in the definition for ordain. If the Framers had not intended the sacred meaning of ordain, they would not have included the word establish which would, therefore, have been redundant. The Constitution was not written as a strictly secular document. The Constitution of our Founder’s nation was a document design to serve God.

During the first half-century or more of the history of our Founder’s nation, our Judeo-Christian heritage was critical to the principles and doctrines of law.  Sir Edward Coke (1552-1634) wrote, The Law of Nature is that which God at the time of creation of the nature of man infused into his heart, for his preservation and direction the moral law called also the law of Nature.  Similarly, Commentaries on the laws of England by William Blackstone, was a widely respected commentary on law in America.  In a statement almost identical to that of Coke, Blackstone wrote, Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation (Biblical Law), depend all of human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered to contradict these.  Additionally, prior to the mid-1800’s, it is safe to assume that Constitutional manifest tenor was the basis of court decisions related to the constitutionality of laws. Manifest tenor is the readily perceived, obvious, plain understanding of the course of thought running through the applicable article, amendment, section, or clause of the Constitution in relation to the case or statute under consideration. A synonymous phrase for manifest tenor is contextual original intent. During this period in the history of our Founder’s nation, the “law of nature” which “God… infused” into the “heart” of We the people was critical to our understanding of the meaning and purpose of our laws and duties as citizens.

TRANSFORMATION OF OUR CONSTITUTION

Progressives  have used several tools to “fundamentally transform America. The first, and possibly  most important tool, is the transformation of  Constitutional law which has had a significant effect on our Founder’s nation. In 1848, Marx and Engels published The Communist Manifesto promoting atheism and social evolution; and in 1859, Charles Darwin published Origin of Species positing biological evolution which challenged Biblical creationism.  Both concepts were widely embraced by academics throughout the world.  In 1869, scholars at the Harvard Law School embraced evolutionary thinking as keys to life and the law.  They taught that great legal scholars and judges could develop the laws governing mankind since mankind did not need God and Scripture for guidance in law. All references to both God and Scripture were eliminated   from legal education, and consequently, from the practice of law.

To accomplish this goal, these legal scholars developed the concept of case law in which legal principles, doctrines, and presidencies are developed over time by degrees through a series of cases.  John Chipman Gray, summarized the concept by stating, The law is a living thing with a continuous history, sloughing off the old, taking on the new.  After three to six decades of the development of legal principles and doctrines based on case law, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, summarized the legal system as follows, [Law is] simply an embodiment of the ends and purposes of society at a given point in its history, beliefs that have triumphed and nothing more. These two statements regarding constitutional law bear a striking resemblance to the following discussion of truth found in A Dictionary of Marxist Thought edited by Tom Bottomore:

The criterion for evaluating truth-claims normally is, or involves, human practice, a practicist criterion of truth. Truth is conceived as essentially the practical expression of a subject, rather than the theoretically adequate representation. Truth becomes a totality to be achieved in the realized identity of subject and object in history…. Truths are the this-worldly manifestations of the particular class-related needs and interests. Truth is an ideal asymptotically approached in history but only finally realized under communism after a practical consensus has been achieved.

Apparently, according to legal scholars, jurists, and philosophers, the Constitution, law, and truth are living things, ideas that have triumphed at a given point in history. Through case law over time, judges have transformed our Constitution and laws into a changing body of this-worldly manifestations of the particular class-related needs and interests. One could say that the Constitution of the United States of America, as envisioned by the Founders, has already withered away; or the Constitution is being transformed and will soon wither away.

Progressives have been using courts and the concept of living Constitutions to challenge long held Judeo-Christian cultural norms for decades. Consequently, progressives have used our courts to undermine the sanctity of life through abortion and right to die decisions, marriage and the traditional family through same-sex marriage decisions, biological sexuality through decisions recognizing LGBT identity and access to previously gender specific public facilities, and religious freedom in business, public schools, governmental lands and facilities, and government agencies. Our courts have been the most effective tool used by progressives to fundamentally transform the Judeo-Christian culture of the United States of America. As time passes, the United States of America is becoming less and less like our Founder’s nation.

TRANSFORMATION OF EDUCATION

The second tool used by progressives to fundamentally transform America culturally is the establishment of a public education dictatorship. Our current public education curriculum promotes progressive cultural, social, economic, and political values and principles from pre-school to Ph.D. These curricula seek to undermine or eliminate discussion of the influence of our Judeo-Christian heritage and culture, in relation to our Constitution and legal system. Curricula ignore or minimize our Founders’ emphasis on the relationship between shared moral and ethical values and cultural harmony, individual and national prosperity, and national identity and strength on the world stage. Curricula stress claimed abuses of all western civilization on the rest of the world, capitalism as a form of western imperialism a concept espoused by Marxism, the benefits of socialist systems, and the progressive cultural agenda. The left’s educational dictatorship has been extremely effective as an agent to fundamentally transform the United States of America which has less and less resemblance to our Founder’s nation.

TRANSFORMATION OF OUR CULTURE

The third tool used by progressives to fundamentally transform America culturally is our telecommunications and entertainment industry including social media and pop culture. Television, movies, and music promotes non-traditional families and include LGBT characters, single parent families, illicit sexual content including workplace affairs between co-workers and supervisors of both sexes with subordinates, violence, and murder. Christianity, the essence of our Founder’s nation, is often mocked, portrayed as a form of manipulation, or Christian leaders portrayed as criminal. Capitalism is portrayed as an evil often criminal economic system. Our government is also portrayed as a source of problems in the world. Mainstream news outlets including print and on-line sources forward narratives supporting the progressive cultural, political, and economic agenda, policies, and candidates. The advertising industry is a more subliminal medium used to promote the fundamental transformation of America.

The final tool used by progressives to fundamentally transform America culturally is legal immigration policy and border security. Between 1960 and 1970, the 1965 Immigration Act began to change the composition of the US foreign-born population. Due to the ethnic and religious strife between Balkan Muslims and various Christian sects that started WWI, the 1965 Act ended a 1924 regional immigration quota system that discriminated against Southeastern Europeans including Italians, Asians, and Africans. The previously favored regions included Northwestern Europe including the British Isles, and Canada.

TRANSFORMATION OF OUR POPULATION

A group of people standing next to each other.
“Only one other great republic has ever experienced such a change in the texture of its people ” the Roman Republic.” It failed.

Many considered the 1965 Immigration Act to be an extension of the Civil Rights and Voter Rights legislation of the Johnson Administration granting immigration civil rights to the world by eliminating regional quotas. Although some Republicans supported the 1965 Immigration Act in its initial form, the Democrat Party promoted the bill in the legislature giving assurances that the bill would not adversely influence our nation, economy, and culture. When he signed the bill into law, President Lyndon Johnson said, “This bill we sign today is not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions. It will not restructure the shape of our daily lives.” Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Edward Kennedy (D-MA.) reassured his colleagues and the nation with the following:

“First, our cities will not be flooded with immigrants. Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset. [The bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia. In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs.”

Senator Hiram Fong (R-HI) testified that Our cultural pattern will never be changed as far as America is concerned.” In an October 4, 1965 article on the immigration bill, The Washington Post author wrote,

“The most important change [is that] preference categories give first consideration to relatives of American citizens instead of to specially skilled persons. This insured that the new immigration pattern would not stray radically from the old one.”

Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-SC), testified as follows: “The preferences established by this proposal are not entirely dissimilar from those which underlie the national origins quotas of existing law.” With hind sight as twenty-twenty, it seems fair to ask whether the supporters of the 1965 Immigration Act were actually honest about their claims that the new immigration policy would not alter the culture and ethnic composition of our Founder’s nation.

Some opponents and legislators asked critical questions painting a less rosy picture of the potential outcome. William Miller of New York wrote:

‘The number of immigrants next year will increase threefold and in subsequent years will increase even more.’ He asked, ‘Shall we, instead, look at this situation realistically and begin solving our own unemployment problems before we start tackling the world’s?'”

Myra C. Hacker, Vice President of the New Jersey Coalition, testified in the Senate Immigration Subcommittee hearing:

“We should remember that [the bill will] lower our wage and living standards [and] disrupt our cultural patterns. Whatever may be our benevolent intent toward many people, [the bill] fails to give due consideration to the economic needs, the cultural traditions, and the public sentiment of the citizens of the United States.”

In his 1982 book America in Search of Itself, Theodore White contradicted President Johnson’s signing-day assurance that it was not a revolutionary bill, writing that the bill was revolutionary and probably the most thoughtless of the many acts of the Great Society. In reality, critics were correct and the assurances that the Act would not upset the ethnic mix of our society were not justified as noted by the above data on the changes in foreign-born population associated with the Act.

Data from the US Census Bureau showing the region of birth of the foreign-born population of the United States is informative regarding the cultural transformation of the United States. From 1850-1960, Europeans and Canadians averaged approximately 95% of the foreign-born population. Southern and Eastern Europeans were greatly underrepresented in the US foreign-born population prior to 1960. In 1960, Europeans and Canadians comprised 75% which was a reduction of more than 15% of the foreign-born population compared to the previous 90 years. In 1970 this group comprised 61.7%; 1980, 39.0%; and in 1990 Europeans and Canadians comprised 26.9% of the US foreign-born population which was less than one third of the 1960 level and slightly more than one fourth of the 1850-1960 level. In contrast, Hispanics comprised an average of only 2.8% of the foreign-born population from 1850-1960. In 1960, the composition was 9.4%; in 1970, 19.4%; 1980, 33.1%; and 1990, 44.3% nearly 16 times the 1850-1960 average of the US foreign-born population. Asians comprised an average of only 1.7% of the US foreign-born population from 1850-1960. In 1960, the composition was 5.1%; 1970, 8.9%: 1980, 19.3%; and 1990, 26.3% which was more than 15 times the 1850-1960 average of the foreign-born population. In 1990, people from Africa and Oceania composed less than 2.5% of the US foreign-born population. By 2050, the racial and ethnic composition of the US population is expected to be 47% White, 29% Hispanic, 14% Black, and 9% Asian. According to this projection, the composition of whites will decline; the composition blacks will be stable; and the composition of Hispanics and Asians will increase. Although conservative pundits and other intellectuals agree, progressives always start immigration discussions with the phrase, We are a nation of immigrants, or We are all descendants of immigrants. What they fail to say is that, prior to the 1965 Immigration Act, we were a nation of European and Canadian immigrants; and after 1965, we became and nation of Asian and Hispanic immigrants .

Thirty years after implementation of the 1965 Immigration Act became law some conclusions are relevant to this discussion. A new era of mass immigration ensued in which country origins of immigrants changed radically. The European economy stabilized resulting in fewer European immigrants. Mass entry of people from Asia and Latin America and emphasis on family reunification ensured that these groups could bring in their relatives, freezing out potential immigrants from Europe and from other developing nations because of limits on total immigration numbers. Unfortunately, twice as many immigrants as native-born Americans did not have high school diplomas in the mid-1990’s. This contributed downward wage pressure to a growing pool of blue-collar workers competing for a shrinking number of well-paying jobs. This issue is compounded by increasing levels of illegal immigrants who also compete for these jobs.

In 2000, sociologist Christopher Jencks predicted that the US population will grow to 500 million by 2050 if our immigration policies do not change. After evaluating congressional politics, Jencks concluded that congress did not want to appear to be racist and their leaders would not direct change. Consequently, Jerry Kammer, in his 2015 concluding remarks, included a dire analysis of our national future by Theodore White concerning of the potential impact of the 1965 Immigration Act,

‘Only one other great republic has ever experienced such a change in the texture of its people ” the Roman Republic’ He then observed that ‘Rome could not pass on the heritage of its past to the people of its future’ and ultimately unraveled so badly that it could no longer govern itself. ‘

Kammer also included this contrarian and optimistic quote from a 1965 Immigration Act, 50th anniversary book, A Nation of Nations (2015) by Tom Gjelten, which disregards the lesson of Roman Empire history,

While immigration may swamp us, it may, if we seize the opportunity, mean the impregnation of our national life with a new brilliancy. It is only in the half century after 1965, with a population connected to every corner of the globe, that the country has finally begun to demonstrate the exceptionalism it has long claimed for itself.’

One Amazon reviewer of A Nation of Nations wrote,

“While Gjelten doesn’t make statements about assimilation with current tides of immigrant groups, he suggest[s] that these groups who differ more widely culturally than past [European immigrants] will ultimately accept the national ethos and fit in well.”

Apparently, like most US progressives, Gjelton and the reviewer believes that we can do things better than the Romans, the Soviet Communists, the Maoists, and the Cuban Communists, and achieve an internal globalist culture of new brilliancy and exceptionalism in the United States.

Without the benefit of actually reading his book, it appears that Gjelton does not believe that our Constitution and Bill of Rights are exceptional guidelines for governance or that turning the tide of victory in both World War I and World War II were exceptional events in world history. It doesn’t appear that he considered our Industrial Revolution, railroads, interstate highway system, technical revolution, IBM, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, and Twitter to be brilliant contributions making the United States the greatest economic power in history. As a true progressive globalist, Gjelton apparently believes that until the United States looks like the rest of the world, we cannot be either brilliant or exceptional. None of the reviews or excerpts answer the question posed by White, [With] such a change in the texture of [our] people, will the United States of America be able to govern itself? The cultural and racial diversity created by the 1965 Immigration Act has not resulted in a political and social environment of greater stability. Our educational, cultural and political elites discourage acceptance of our national ethos, our Judeo-Christian heritage, Constitutional capitalism, and individual freedom. The progressive elites consider and communicate that this national ethos is offensive to the rest of the world, especially the regions of origin for most of today’s immigrants.  Under these circumstances, how can we expect these immigrants to fit in well? Under the current circumstances in which we are losing our national ethos, my fear is that the admonition of John Jay portends a dire outcome for the United States of America, Should our Republic ever forget this fundamental precept of governance this great experiment will then be surely doomed. This component of the fundamental transformation of the United States of America could help ensure that our nation will wither away. Phrased alternatively, our Founder’s nation will cease to exist.

Border security is a critical component of immigration policy. Secure borders insure that nations have control over immigration into each country. Without secure borders and immigration policies that immediately detain or expel illegal immigrants, all immigration has the potential of becoming legal immigration which is the goal for progressive open border advocates. In this situation, citizenship and related voting rights would be meaningless; the wealthy and unscrupulous could import voters to gain control of any jurisdiction; or politicians could promise immigrants free benefits for their votes. Criminals, revolutionaries, insurgents, and freeloaders as well as unskilled and skilled workers, artisans, entrepreneurs, technicians, and highly educated professionals could flow in and out of countries. All pretexts of economic, political, legal system, and numerical population stability and predictability would be eliminated. Determination of population based representation in our republic, as in the US House of Representatives, would not be fair with the fluid population possible without immigration control and border security.  This would be a fundamental transformation of the United States of America; and our Founder’s nation could wither away.

TRANSFORMATION OF OUR NATIONAL DEFENSE

The final requirement necessary for nations to persist is the ability to remain strong and defend themselves against both foreign and domestic enemies. For the most part, we have adequate local, state, and national law enforcement and legal system to ensure domestic Tranquility; but this nation has a great deal of difficulty to provide for the common defense. The primary reason for this difficulty is the fact that the Democrat and Republican Parties have vastly different priorities regarding defense and domestic expenditures. The two parties seem to have vastly different ideas regarding the necessity maintaining the world’s most powerful military force that can defend our nation on multiple battle fronts and contingencies simultaneously. Progressives and the Democrat Party do not see this level of military power as a national necessity for funding compared to domestic program spending. Military power and force size was drastically decreased in the Carter, Clinton, and Obama administrations. Each of the intervening Bush Administrations and the current Trump Administration were confronted with depleted military forces which they attempted slowly rebuild throughout their Administrations. Unfortunately the overall trend in our military strength since the Carter Administration is downward in both numbers and capabilities. The problem was compounded during the last Bush and Trump Administrations by the long multi-front war on Radical Islamic Terrorism which has resulted in attrition of equipment due to fiscal constraints. With reduced force size, our military heroes are forced to deploy more frequently or for longer tours in theater. The result is combat fatigue, home front family difficulties for deployed forces, and potential reduction in re-enlistment numbers resulting in less experienced fighting forces.

Currently, our military cannot fight on two fronts, equipment is old and waring out with high percentage of the equipment out-of-service due to lack of repair and replacement parts. This problem and inadequate funding for continuing training means that many of our military unites are not combat ready. These problems have resulted in higher numbers of military training and mission related accidents, personnel injuries, and deaths in the last few years. In my opinion, this situation has the potential to become a threat to our national security due to increasing tensions throughout the world.

The threat of North Korean ballistic missiles armed with nuclear warheads capable of striking anywhere in the United States intensifies our military readiness issues. Incursion of China into the South China Sea seeking to control sea travel, trading routes throughout the south Pacific, and exert their naval power in the region is also worrying. The fact that China is expanding military forces with the goal of becoming the world’s preeminent military power is cause for additional concern. Iran’s expansion and aggression in the Middle East is troubling. Radical Islamic terrorism is growing not declining in Africa where the opportunity to train is enhanced due to weak governments unable to control terrorist activities.  Other parts of the world are also subjected to Radical Islamic terrorist attacks. Threats to the safety and security of the United States of America are increasing worldwide. This aspect of the transformation of the United States of America is the most concerning to me. Without a strong military capable of defending our nation against all enemies foreign and domestic is essential to ensure that my country, the United States of America, does not wither away.

In my opinion, the progressive plan to fundamentally transform of the United States of America has been executed in an incremental evolutionary manner for approximately 170 years. The goal of this transformation has always been a unified global community and economy, a utopia, governed by Marxist principles which ensure that all people share equally in all the benefits of the world regardless of their ability or willingness to contribute to the good of the world community. Phrased another way, from each according to his ability to each according to his need wealth will be redistributed on a global scale. For this goal to be achieved, the United States of America must wither away, a really fundamental transformation.  Our Founder’s nation would no longer exist.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your “Patriot Visions,” start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

CAPITALISM’S GLOBALISM CONTRADICTION

 

A person holding a globe with cars in it
Capitalism’s globalism contradiction centers on cost savings in emerging markets.

Capitalism’s globalism contradiction centers on Executive’s and Board of Director’s obligation to maximize profits and their obligation to their employees, their communities, and the nations of their origin. Failure to consider the implications of this contradiction provides the left with a powerful criticism against capitalism. In the United States, this contradiction is exacerbated by our high labor costs and benefits, safety regulations, environmental regulations including environmental impact assessments that increase both the costs and time required to open a facility or project, financial system regulations, land use and zoning regulations, and past high corporate taxes. The relationship between profit and societal obligation is only one component of capitalism’s globalism contradiction.

Another aspect of capitalism’s globalism contradiction is the incredible economic success of western civilization, especially in the United States, since the start of the industrial revolution. Until the 1960’s or 1970’s, globalization was not a significant issue in relation to competition and market share for corporations in the western world. Consequently, costs associated with land, labor, and capital were comparatively inconsequential strategic considerations compared to today’s markets. Costs of doing business were evaluated only in relation to competition in the United States and other western industrial powers. For example, the big three US auto makers competed among themselves for US market share and labor. Labor union contracts for wages, benefits, and working conditions that often precluded effective discipline and quality control were virtually identical throughout the US auto industry. The result was high industry wide wages, benefits, and job security. As countries like China, South Korea, India, other Eastern Pacific rim countries, and parts of the old Soviet Union emerged as competing centers of industry, the cost of land, labor, and capital became a competitive liability for western industry.

Finally, North American and European capitalists are harnessed to strongly unionized labor forces unwilling to negotiate lower, more globally competitive wage, benefit, and work condition packages which could have slowed reductions in US manufacturing and plant closures. This issue is complicated by the success of western capitalism causing high costs of living and the expectation of high disposable income to finance the good life. These two factors make efforts to make our labor costs more competitive in the global market difficult. Western capitalism’s success also amplifies capitalism’s globalism contradiction when faced with emerging markets for our products and competition with our products throughout the world.

Capitalism’s globalism contradiction is profit versus support of the labor force that makes their products or provides their services and loyalty to the communities and countries of their origin. Interestingly, it is also the left’s globalism contradiction, maintaining wealth for our workers while redistributing wealth to developing country industries and workers.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your “Patriot Visions,” start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

 

GLOBALISM IS WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION

 

To understand progressive domestic policy it is necessary to understand that globalism is wealth redistribution. The critical concept of globalism is the statement by Marx, From each according to his ability to each according to his need wealth redistribution will occur on a global scale. To prepare people in successful, industrialized, capitalistic countries like the United States for a totally globalized economy, several precursors are necessary. Changing the minds of the citizenry to accept global wealth redistribution is probably the most difficult, but essential, step. To accomplish this goal, an educational dictatorship has been established by progressives. The second step is the left’s domestic policy. The third step is the lefts foreign and immigration policy. These three prerequisites are discussed in detail at the links provided. A great deal of progress must be made in these three areas before the final stages of global wealth redistribution can be accomplished. The left plans and thinks in evolutionary time frames. They have worked toward their goal of complete globalism, wealth redistribution, since at least the early 1800’s.

A group of people standing in front of a map.
For progressive domestic policy and globalism to succeed, it is necessary to understand that both require wealth redistribution.

Some of the tactics of the left in this process are virtually invisible especially in the developed countries. From the perspective of individuals and families, the greatest difference between the people of advanced countries and Third World countries is disposable income. In my opinion, disposable income is income available beyond basic survival needs. Basic survival is simply food to maintain population vigor and vitality or a strong, healthy, and reproductive society. Safe water to drink and the ability to survive extreme heat or cold which requires adequate shelter are also basic survival necessities. The ability to stave off severe epidemics and diseases is also a basic necessity for life. Virtually everything beyond these survival necessities constitutes disposable income. Meeting these needs constitutes the fixed costs of life at the survival level. The more income a population has to secure amenities above these survival needs, the greater their disposable income.

The left has numerous resources and tools available for their closure of the disposable income gap between advanced capitalistic countries and Third World countries. Incremental increases affecting regulatory policies that increase production costs and higher taxes on fixed cost products and services like food, shelter, water, and healthcare are stealthy methods of reducing disposable income in advanced countries. In addition, taxes and regulations that increase costs of unnecessary necessities, such as advanced transportation systems, entertainment, recreation, and technology related to the basics of the good life decrease disposable income available for these necessities in industrialized Western cultures.

Similarly, excessively high business income and property taxes as well as business and financial institution regulations reduce available capital for business expansion. One of the most detrimental regulations has been Obamacare which mandates employee health insurance coverage for all businesses with 50 or more employees. This regulation stifles business growth and profitability. Small businesses either restrict growth to less than 50 employees or increase their prices to cover increased costs. Banking and financial regulations such as increased cash reserve requirements for banks reduce the supply of capital for business improvements or expansion. Financial regulations also cause a reduction in the number of local banks further reducing the supply of capital available to many small businesses. These actions result in lower product and service supplies resulting in increased costs. Until the current administration  reduced regulations and taxes, these costs caused corporations to move their headquarters or factories overseas to reduce overhead costs. Loss of productive capacity also increased costs. When taxes and regulations increase, the resulting cost increases are added to fixed costs related to the real or perceived necessities for life, thus reducing disposable income in developed countries.

Possibly the most powerful tool in the progressive stealth toolbox is global environmentalism. In the United States, the environmental movement has been supported by both Democrat and Republican administrations. Republican support shows that they support reasonable efforts to maintain safe water, clean air, and stable ecosystems. Republicans, however, do not support regulations that have adverse effects on the quality of life of our citizens by increasing fixed costs of living. One of the strongest proponents of environmentalism has been the United States federal court system. Our federal courts usually side with environmentalists. Often, these court decisions have the effect of decreasing supplies of lumber products, agricultural production, other renewable natural resources, and nonrenewable natural resources, both petroleum and mineral extraction. Environmentalists also work actively to reduce planned, and in the not too distant future, eliminate existing hydroelectric and irrigation dam projects. Many existing Hydro projects are facing their fifty-year environmental impact reviews in the near future. In all these critical areas of our fixed consumer economy, the result is a decrease in disposable income as fixed costs of the basic necessities of life increase. Environmental regulations associated with global warming have the same impact. They increase the fixed costs of both real and perceived necessities for life. Costs of heating, cooling, energy production, manufacturing, and transportation and sales of consumer goods, constitute increases in fixed costs in industrialized societies.

From the left’s perspective, the stealthy beauty of the entire environmental toolbox is the fact that saving minnows, spotted owls, or rare lizards, sounds so progressively wonderful and feels so good to a large portion of the populace, the urban dwellers. The impact on their disposable income and quality of life is irrelevant to them. After all, they already have enough, until they start losing too much of what they currently have.

In the United States, middle class voters in the northeastern industrialized states who experienced stagnant wages and rising fixed costs for a decade voted for change. They voted against the status quo and declining disposable income because they started experiencing the reality of global wealth redistribution on their quality of life.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your “Patriot Visions,” start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.