by Pepe Escobar for the Asia Times
He did it, his way; Chinese President Xi Jinping descended on the Swiss Alps; profited from a geopolitical vacuum only three days before Donald Trump’s inauguration with the Atlanticist West mired in stagnation and/or protectionism; unleashed a charm offensive; and deftly positioned China in the lead of “inclusive” globalization.
In a wide-ranging speech that went from global angst to China’s new normal, Xi sounded all the right notes that global capital needed to hear; protectionism is like “locking oneself in a dark room,” and “no one is a winner in a trade war.”
His speech delved into the necessity of peace in Syria, the perverse effects of the absence of financial regulation, and the struggle for “balance between efficiency and equity.”
So onwards with the fourth industrial revolution – and may China deliver.
Xi, the first Chinese president to visit the turbo-capitalist World Economic Forum talkfest, meant business from the start.
He arrived with an 80-strong delegation that included Alibaba’s Jack Ma, Dalian Wanda’s Wang Jianlin – China’s top two billionaires – as well as Baidu’s Zhang Yaqin.
Compare these “globalist princelings” with the Trump camp, represented by one of his official business advisers, Anthony Scaramucci, founder of hedge fund SkyBridge Capital and Salt, a not exactly stellar Las Vegas investment conference (the next one is at the Bellagio in May).
Where’s the ticket to the Rothschild party?
A “humanized” Davos 2017 is very worried about saving the world – or at least saving the wealthy from most of the world. The WEF has suddenly discovered that globalization as we know it fosters massive inequality, as much as globalization’s self-appointed managers remain inflexible about their moral right to bend whole nations to their will, as the “miraculous” numbers of the Irish economy attest.
Thus an alarmed WEF is promoting at least six sessions discussing inequality, from “Combating Rising Insecurity and Inequality” to “Squeezed and Angry: How to Fix the Middle Class Crisis,” starring IMF’s Christine “Vuitton” Lagarde and a bunch of hedge funders.
And this while Oxfam revealed to the world the real G8 of inequality – as in those individuals who own as much wealth as the poorest 50% of the world combined. Call them the Kings of Globalization – featuring, among others, Bill Gates, Amazon supremo Jeff Bezos, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Oracle’s Larry Ellison and Michael Bloomberg, .
In pure neo-Dadaist fashion, there could not be a more graphic emblem for inequality than Davos itself. To get a green card all-area-access, mostly in and around the Grandhotel Belvedere, corporations must become strategic partners of the WEF.
The list is a beauty. Each membership costs a whopping US$600,000, allowing a CEO to bring up to four cohorts; but still they must pay for each individual ticket. And even that does not guarantee an invitation to the glitziest party in town, thrown by Nat Rothschild in tandem with Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska.
Still, those who shelled out the cash will hardly resist the chance to hear Facebook’s COO Sheryl Sandberg (with a US$1.3 billion fortune) expand on how “older” global leaders can profit from the optimism of youth. Eric Schmidt (worth US$11 billion), chairman of Google’s parent company Alphabet, is also in town, but this time he opted for discretion.
Listen to the sound of my ‘win-win’ clapping
Xi was very careful not to advertize a new “Chinese consensus,” or model, as the model itself is being carefully, and painstakingly, tweaked.
What stood out in his presentation is that Beijing does not interpret globalization in a Western, turbo-neoliberal sense.
There are indeed benefits. They also do mask the plunder of the developing world’s resources via stealth “international laws” and (now dead in the water) trade agreements such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) or the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), mostly for the benefit of the West’s 0.01%, who then become alarmed by “inequality.”
Xi instead is promoting the notion of serial win-win deals; and that’s why his positioning is essentially the ultimate glorious pitch for the New Silk Road, a.k.a. One Belt, One Road (Obor) project, largely featured in the last part of his speech.
Everyone knows about Obor as an essential tool to tweak the Chinese model; develop the Chinese Far West; open an array of Eurasian markets; promote the internationalization of the yuan; and of course consolidate a major geopolitical shift, not least by neutralizing most of the Obama/Clinton “pivot to Asia.”
So when we get the concerted firepower of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB); the Silk Road Fund; and the New Development Bank (NDB) under Brics (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), we have enough capital to generate generous financing for an infrastructure bonanza from China, across Central Asia, and all the way to Western Europe and Eastern Africa.
Only in Kazakhstan, for instance, there are more than 50 deals valued at over US$20 billion in effect. The new peace in Syria negotiations – Russia, Iran and Turkey – will take place in Astana, not Geneva. Kazakhstan represents the intersection of the New Silk Roads and the Eurasia Economic Union (EEU). Russia and China are luring Iran – and later on Turkey – into the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) fold. Syria, pacified and rebuilt, will be a key plank of Obor. It’s all interlinked.
So what China is proposing has nothing to do with deglobalization. It’s rather about “localization.”
But trade deals never die. With the death of TPP, Xi had to extol the merits of the pan-Asian Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which excludes the US but crucially merges all of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations members with everyone ASEAN has trade deals with; China, India, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand.
RCEP will be a boon for manufacturing within the vastly complex and broader supply chain across Asia, smashing tariffs across the board. That will include China-India trade. Yet it remains to be seen how Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Make in India campaign will cope with opening up its markets to Chinese imports.
And, of course, Xi had to refer to the yuan question. The yuan is currently overvalued. The People’s Bank of China does not want it to slide down even further; its priority is a stable exchange rate – to stabilize trade. Still, Danske Bank strategist Allen von Mehren, who’s usually spot on, predicts the yuan falling to 7.26 to the US dollar by the end of September.
Somebody’s got to explain all this to Trump, implications included. It won’t be Scaramucci. Not to mention Peter Navarro, Wilbur Ross, “Mad Dog” Mattis or Michael Flynn. It has to be global helmsman Xi in person.
Pepe Escobar is correspondent-at-large for Asia Times. His latest book is 2030, published by Nimble Books.
Glad to hear an update on Xi Jinping. Even though I have only read a limited amount of his speeches and so on, I am a huge fan. I think he is a natural leader and visionary, and the Chinese are to be given credit for elevating someone that gifted, right to the very top!
Here’s what the Oxfam report had to say about Canada (as reported by Canadian Press): “… the wealth of billionaire businessmen David Thomson and Galen Weston Sr. equals that of about 11 million Canadians.”
Xi is old society and wealthy family, no credit to the nation required to put him there
Obvious you has not heard of black cat, white cat, as long as it catch mouse is good cat talk.
In Chinese culture, as long as someone has a talent, he/she will be employed not matter her back ground, or the way he look. There is a lot of expression on the topic.
Xi care about the country, and competent at his position. He is good for China. Too bad what ever his background is, few care.
I bring this up because I live in one of the Western countries, and it seems extremely difficult for anyone whose very talented or gifted to reach the highest levels of leadership. Most of us joke about this when talking about politics. I don’t know how Xi Jinping got to the position of Chairman, but it is impressive to see a naturally talented leader and visionary (IMO) at the head of state.
As for the human rights concerns – I call this “Human Rights to Nowhere”. This CIA ploy (IMO) is run in Canada all the time, especially when Canada might do something which is different from the USA, and which a reasonable observer might perceive as more humane then the USA’s approach in some specific area. Suddenly, we receive reminders that our country is not as humane as we think it is. As a soft-hearted leftie type, I fell for this over and over again, until I finally clued in that these compassionate warnings about human rights actually lead to nowhere. The only intent is to discredit your country, as opposed to achieving anything constructive. Not so pure and compassionate after all!! Those who are really trying to improve human rights abuses (like Xi Jinping, by the way) behave much differently,or take a much different approach.
Conveniently, an example of what I’m referring to has shown up in the past few days. This may seem ultra-cynical but I developed this view the hard way. Canada’s inadequacy in human rights is highlighted right now (continuation of the regime change of Trudeau? Is this because he is shifting Eurasian??)
“Canada Supports War Crimes: Endorses Terrorism and Destabilisation in Syria”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/canada-supports-war-crimes-endorses-terrorism-and-destabilization-in-syria/5568413
(just a reminder that under Trudeau, Canada actually withdrew from Syria. Canada’s Armed Forces’ Operation Impact is running in Iraq. This is Canada’s sole military contribution to the Middle East)
‘Canadian Aid to Africa Under Justin Trudeau’
http://www.globalresearch.ca/canadian-aid-to-africa-under-justin-trudeau/5569132
(I take it the Empire sees Canada gaining an advantage in mineral extraction through its Eurasian relationships. Time to bring up human rights!!)
Canada’s human rights record should also include its history concerning its indigenous population – a cultural genocide and ethnic cleansing in a true British imperial format…reservations, special laws, and “residential schools” for children kidnapped from their parents.
Iraq may be Canada’s only military contribution directly, but it supports western agenda in other respects e.g. selling military equipment to Saudi Arabia, security and military trade with Israel…..
Thank you, Jim Miles. It certainly should, and actually, I think it does. This information is certainly not occulted – although aspects of the abuse of Indigenous people in Canada, involving collaboration between the government and other outside entities does tend to get dead-body buried. (Maybe some PR types are paid handsomely to keep it that way, I don’t know).
So let’s talk about constructive action, like identifying those involved and maybe holding them responsible for example, instead of just rehashing again and again the same “compassionate” human rights warnings.
S113,
It seems all of them went through provincial governmentship.
I’d imagine like everything else, opportunity, talent, sincerity, hard work and some luck got them there.
Premier Li actually was from a very poor family, so was the previous president Hu.
China is so big, there are a lot of talented people who want to serve the country, just like everywhere else.
In chinese school, we admire and study all those people has done a lot of good for the country throughout history, we also study those people has done harm. Everyone want to leave a good name in the history book, but competition must be very fierce. So I imagine they have to pass all the test, and well qualified to get there, otherwise, someone else will take their place.
Bad leadership is very bad for the ruling party among many things.
Hi J,
Appreciate your thoughts. The competition must be intense. (Someone from Kolkata, India told me once about how seriously education is taken there because of the need to compete with a very large number of other students.) That’s interesting, about Premier Li. He spent some time in Canada this past year, and I was impressed with him.
I don’t share Escobar’s breathless admiration for the human ant heap of homo economicus that is China. The Russian soul has nothing in common with communist China, which is deeply atheistic and materialistic. “To be rich is glorious.” vs “blessed are the poor in spirit.” Russia needs to watch its back.
Human rights: What is China accused of?
By Camila Ruz BBC News Magazine
21 October 2015
China’s human rights record has been criticised for years. The UK government has been urged to bring up concerns during a state visit by the Chinese president. But what are the main issues?
Harassment of activists and dissidents
Human rights campaigners say that China continues to target activists and their family members with harassment, imprisonment and torture.
The government has frequently imprisoned people who have spoken about politically sensitive topics. In July, there was a crackdown on lawyers who worked on cases involving free speech and abuses of power. Amnesty International says that 245 lawyers and activists have been targeted since July. One of the best known, Li Heping, is still missing.
Amnesty says there needs to be more awareness of cases such as that of Cao Shunli, a human rights activist who died in police detention last year. Her family said that she had been denied medical attention and that they had been refused access to her body. The government has denied any mistreatment, saying that the activist’s “lawful rights and interests have been protected in accordance with law”.
More recently, a group of feminist activists were detained as they prepared to hand out leaflets and stickers about domestic violence. Five of the women were detained for more than a month. Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo also continues his 11-year jail term for subversion. There have repeated called from other countries for his release. But the Chinese government has responded by saying that it is for China to decide and that “only the 1.3 billion Chinese people have a say on China’s human rights”.
China is often accused of heavy-handed tactics against protesters. There have been complaints over the aggressive handling of large pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong last year. Amnesty says that eight people remained in detention in September.
Persecution of people for religious beliefs
Image copyright Getty Images
Image caption Protestants pray at an underground church
Religion is carefully controlled in China. Independent groups such as Protestant “house churches” are considered unlawful and can be raided, closed and their members detained.
Muslims in Xinjiang have also faced restrictions on their religious activities, including during Ramadan. The Falun Gong spiritual movement has been banned since 1999 and its members have been sent to labour camps and prisons, Amnesty notes.
Discrimination against ethnic minorities
Image copyright EPA
Image caption Members of Australia’s Uighur community protest outside the Chinese consulate in Melbourne
Human Rights groups say that Tibetans, Uighurs and Mongolians continue to face discrimination and restrictions on their freedoms.
There is frequent unrest in the Xinjiang autonomous region in the far west between Chinese authorities and ethnic Uighurs, who are part of China’s Muslim minority. Hundreds have died in attacks over the past three years. China said last year that the violence had forced it to launch a “year-long campaign against terrorism” and it has stepped up security in the region.
Tibet has also seen years of unrest. Human Rights Watch says that seven people set themselves on fire in Tibetan populated areas in 2014 in protest against repressive policies by the authorities. The total number of immolations since 2008 is 140.
The death penalty
Amnesty says that there are more executions in China than the rest of the world combined. There are no officially published statistics but activists believe that thousands are executed and sentenced to death there every year.
Torture
People detained for political views, human rights activities or religious beliefs are at a “high risk” of torture in custody, says Human Rights Watch. A report this year said that methods used include electrocution.
There are frequent allegations of police officers using torture to extract confessions. This is despite a ruling by the Chinese Supreme Court that forbids using “freezing, starving, extreme heat, fire branding or extreme exhaustion” on suspects.
Secrecy on Tiananmen Square
Image copyright AP
Image caption June 1989: A solitary man tries to block a line of tanks in Tiananmen Square
It has been 26 years since several hundred people died in a crackdown on democratic protest in China’s Tiananmen Square.
Activists say that calls for a proper investigation into events on 4 June 1989 have been ignored. Human Rights Watch says that discussions about it remained censored and that the truth of what happened is withheld from people in China.
Internet and media freedom
Image copyright Getty Images
There are tight restrictions on the press in China and several leading journalists have recently had criminal charges brought against them. Gao Yu, 71, was jailed in April on suspicion of “illegally disseminating state secrets internationally”. Amnesty International called the sentence “an affront to justice”.
For years China has also sought to limit access to foreign TV and publications. The government blocks hundreds of websites and has targeted users of apps such as WeChat. Censors also target Chinese social media. They deleted mocking comments about a World War Two military parade this year.
Labour rights
Independent trade unions are illegal in China. But there have been many disputes over low wages, poor working conditions and the treatment of migrant workers. Striking workers often face intimidation and arrests.
Family planning
China famously introduced a one-child policy in 1979. Campaigners said that it led to forced abortions, female infanticide and a gender imbalance in the country. There has been a formal easing of the policy but rights groups say that women’s reproductive rights are still under heavy control of the state.
Lack of land rights
Image copyright Getty Images
Image caption December 2011: Villagers protest in the southern province of Guangdong, after the death in custody of a local leader on 19 December, 2011
Protests erupted in 2011 in a village in the southern Guangdong province over land taken from villagers by the local government.
Disputes like this are not unusual in China. All land is effectively owned by the government and farmers are allocated areas for set amounts of time. Villagers often accuse local officials of taking their land without giving them any compensation. And of using violent tactics to quash their protests.
Mental health and disabilities
China has been criticised for its treatment of people with disabilities. Human Rights Watch has called protections “inadequate” and says that people face serious discrimination in employment and education. Campaigners say that some efforts have been made to address this. In 2014 it was announced that China would allow Braille or electronic university entrance exams. But Human Rights Watch says that there are still problems with the practicalities.
The Mental Health Law says that hospitalisation should be voluntary except in cases where individuals pose a danger to themselves or others. But campaigners say that there are still loopholes in the law. A woman called Gu Xianghong was detained in a Beijing psychiatric hospital for five weeks after petitioning the authorities, Amnesty said.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34592336
HRW. Amnesty. The BBC. AP. In short, the standard cabal of Anglo-Zionist disinformation and ‘fake news’.
I can say this about the Uighurs and us.
I knew some missionaries, nice enough people, but they were going deep into Mongolia and the Uighur regions of China to…they called it ‘convert’… I called it ‘stir up trouble’.
The fact that someone could compile as negative a dossier about the USA, does not make it necessarily the whole truth, any more than your screed is the ‘whole truth’.
Why not leave China, Russian and Iran, in fact the whole world, alone?
Is it because your own problems are intractable?
US is the most incarcerating nation.
Blacks in the USA are killed by police with utter impunity.
The USA is proud of torturing people (violating the Geneva Conventions).
The USA is in constant violation of international law since 1945.
The USA puts whistleblowers in prison (solitary confinement) for 35 years while mouthing platitudes about protection of whistleblowers.
The list is long and ugly. And if you are Israeli it is even uglier.
@Franz (as for Nussiminen, let him continue to find “clear evidence” where he will).
Seriously? Discernment is one thing and silly paranoia and emotional bias is another. The human rights abuses in China are well documented–it’s hardly “fake news” or disinformation. I recall a Russian interview on Saker, way back, in which the official said that the difference between Russia and the Chinese was that the Chinese were just commercially minded materialists. “To be rich is glorious,” precisely. It seems to me that what we don’t need at the Saker combox is “Saker-russophlle groupie” mentality that is both silly and fanatical. Yes, the Western media are corrupted, but this doesn’t mean that truth never appears anywhere, nor does it mean that the US has a monopoly on evil done in the world. By the way, the article posted is hardly a “screed” and doesn’t seem to be the poster’s article. Also, googling (another CIA front exclusively!!) Camila Ruz is a zoologist and mostly a science journalist.
So James, what is wrong with being rich?
I see nothing wrong with people who has ability, knowledge, hard working, has things, or skills other need to make more money as long as it is lawful, and they pay tax.
What is your suggestion of encourage progress of mankind, and provide for whole population without encourage all those good qualities? wars? highway robbery? or stay back waiting for god to help you?
If the US does not have a ‘monopoly on evil’ it is not because it does not want one but because it has to share with Israel.
Travesty International might actually be willing to change Party Line all right — it’s just a matter, after all, of outbribing the competitors. Of course, that wouldn’t be sufficient by itself. The moment their Party Line drops the Western drivel, the news services will instantly let them know about it: total media blackout.
Dear James, Anon,
Discernment is precisely what’s lacking in Anon’s piece.
Take his complaint that “The land belongs to the State.”
Quite so. And this is very wise law, especially in countries where land is scarce: it protects peasants, inter alia, from greedy developers who will offer them take advantage of them in times of hardship and offer them a handful of peanuts for their precious land.
People have been known to sell land to pay school fees, medical bills, debts, etc., and when the money is finished, or they naively invest it in a losing venture, then they become destitute.
Now, had Anon done a bit of fact checking, instead of merely relying on “fake news BBC” (Trump dixit) he would have found that:
“Individuals can privately own real estate, including residential houses and apartments (i.e., buildings and structures on the land), although not the land on which the houses and apartments are situated.”
“There are normally no limitations on the length of time for which land-use rights can be allocated”
“When the term for the right to use land for residential purposes expires, the term will be automatically renewed.”
“[Owners] may transfer their land-use rights to others through sale, exchange, or gift, or other legal means.” http://www.loc.gov/law/help/real-property-law/china.php
Now, there will certainly be abuse and corruption in the implementation of these laws, but the laws themselves are fine. Except of course for an ultra-liberal free-marketeer…
Hi, Franz,
Exactly. How many time we heard this kind of talk right before the west beating war drums…
There was Iraq, Libya, Syria, just to name a few.
The poster either has an axe to grind with China, or simply an attack dog of some zionist organization.
Don’t forget, every year, there are over 1000 unarmed people killed by US police. Those are stats can be found readily on internet.
Soros, honey: You should keep your faithful disciples to your own media outlets. No “Anon”:s needed over here, thank you.
“Amnesty says that there are more executions in China than the rest of the world combined. There are no officially published statistics but activists believe that thousands are executed and sentenced to death there every year.”
A clear case of creative accounting, deliberately omitting what is euphemistically called “The Global War On Terror”. I would merrily spread this entire pack of anti-Chinese slanders and Western all-out bigotry too were I working for AI and wanted to keep my job there.
Amnesty, Amnesty. How would the world fare without it? Who would protect Uighur, Chechen terrorists (eh, activists) ‘human rights’?
Wiz Os
do you mean ” Am nasty ” International
it’s very telling when you appear to be oh so concerned about alleged “human rights” violations in China but you have nothing to say about the human rights violations in Saudi Arabia.
Yep yep. China is designated enemy while Saudi Arabia is both UK and UsA ‘s pal.
fake news from beginning to end. I will listen to you when you write the same long essay about the human rights violations in Saudi Arabia or Egypt or any of the USA and UK’s pals.
“Religion is carefully controlled in China. Independent groups such as Protestant ‘house churches’ are considered unlawful and can be raided, closed and their members detained.”
With very good reason, amen. Those inner quotation marks (part of the original) look like a little Freudian slip, mind you.
wow
…… wow
fk …. how to reply?
oh, to hell with it …. one word is enough
“twit”
….. you should heed Mark Twain’s advice “Better to stay quiet and let people think you are stupid, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt”
Though your post has a strong element of the ad-hominem to it, it is creatively put. It also attacks the Empire and its apologists, so I will let it pass. – fk mod
Stopped reading after “BBC”.
I usually find it amusing when some westerners froth at the mouth about the ‘human rights’ records of countries that western governments have designated as official enemies. Isn’t it beautiful the way American elites periodically designate the enemy to be hated & westerners, like Pavlov’s dogs, respond accordingly? Isn’t it also beautiful the way westerners have constructed their self as champions of freedom & democracy worldwide? What is even more beautiful is : the west and its ‘soft power’ apparatus (Amnesty International anyone?) will accuse a country of human rights violations only when that country refuses to bow down to the Masters of the Universe. If you doubt my claim, just look at how they love, pamper & drool over Saudi Barbaria. By the way, I hope you know the following : Iran became an official enemy when St. Shah Reza Pahlavi was deposed ; Iraq when Saddam Hussein went beyond the leash the west had measured for him ; and the latest evil incarnate Putin because he dares to stand up against the humiliation and plunder of Russia by the oligarchs and their western enablers. The west is running out of steam. It’s chickens are coming home to roost. It’s elites don’t have credible answers to the deep structural problems facing the west. Doubt my claim? Then read Nassim Taleb’s delightful “Intellectual-Yet-Idiot”. The future for global growth is Eurasian. The west has nothing to offer economically longterm. Deep down, western elites know that the world they have always controlled is getting out of their hands. Neoliberalism has run its bankrupt course. TTIP & TPP are dead because even for westerners that are servile to what their elites tell them, these two trade agreements overreached in terms of the brazen plunder they were espousing. The only strategy that the west is banking on to maintain hegemony is to work towards the disintegration of China & Russia (Kissinger & Dr Zbig anyone?) The only danger for the world is that they may overreach with this strategy and plunge the world into a nuclear war. They’re not willing to go down quietly into that good night.
As always… at least 99% of the time… Pepe is spot on and his humor is so so so refreshing … and btw 2 days to go to Obama gone actually OUT of the WH… Trump in.. looks good but then who knows… Xi never disappoints… Putin and Xi makes such a good team… each wearing different hats that complement each other perfectly….
and the ones who don’t get it are the loosers ….
“So what China is proposing has nothing to do with deglobalization. It’s rather about “localization.”
I’m sorry to break it to Pepe, but China wants Globalization as much as the West, just on its own terms and conditions. That doesn’t mean it’s to the benefit of everyone. I do like this site but it’s black – white thinking is sometimes hard to bear. Yes Xi has his vision and I share a lot of it. Improved infrastructure will be beneficial for Europe, Central Asia and the Far East. Yet whose main interest is served by this infrastructure? China’s elite stands to gain a lot from it.
Now, don’t get me wrong the summit in Astana is impressive and important for the future of Syria, yet to somehow connect it to the new silk road is far fetched. It was a natural hosting spot for the three original atendees (Russia, Turkey, Iran) a former Soviet state with Turkic people and Muslim heritage this has no implication for the future of Geneva as an important diplomatic centre in a neutral country. Again, while I appreciate Pepe’s analysis let’s try to see the world as it is, not nearly as black and white as many in here make it out to be. And China is – first and foremost, – its own very savior and not that of the world.
“I do like this site but its black – white thinking is sometimes hard to bear.”
Agreed! Precisely my point.
The word globalisation has two different meanings not exactly made too clear here.
For China it is about seeing trade expand to involve as many countries as possible in win-win deals which leverage up the standard of living in these countries through improvement in their infrastructure. This benefits China by creating new customers for it’s products since they know the US is not going to be their biggest customer for much longer.
For the US globalisation means global domination and control of other countries through violence, terror and subjugation and essentially creating a world run by a few (mainly US) corporations.
The difference between the two meanings is clear as day and given that humans prefer modest prosperity to fascist slavery and war explains why more and more countries (eg the Philippines) are going with the Chinese and Russian models. This breaking away from the US is bound to accelerate because people can see what is in their real interests. The US has nothing to offer anybody except tyranny.
Well put, Mr Berry.
In addition, I would like to point out here that Zionazi globalisation is being prettified by the MSM which carefully avoids to penetrate the very substance of this phenomenon: Corporate monopolization and unaccountable issuance of debt. Neoliberalism and monetarism stand out as total frauds in the service of all-out financial parasites. If Russia and China end up vanquished by the latter it’s Game Over, since human civilization won’t survive the ensuing chaos.
After posting a comment about Xi Jinping in another thread, I was reminded that the situation he faced when he became Chairman bears many similarities to the situation Trump is facing as President. Both are tasked with overcoming deeply entrenched corruption (and let’s face it, Washington has become more or less as totalitarian as China.) I also thought Xi needed to make a major shift in the nation’s policy, like Trump has to do with the USA? I know comparisons have been made between the present day USA with Russia in the 90’s, but I think there are many similarities with China as well. Although I’m sure Americans will select different solutions, which is understandable!