by Pepe Escobar with permission and cross-posted with Asia Times
Whatever the geopolitical and geoeconomic consequences of the spectacular US dystopia, the Russia-China strategic partnership, in their own slightly different registers, have already voted on their path forward.
Here is how I framed what is at the heart of the Chinese 2021-2025 five-year plan approved at the plenum in Beijing last week.
Here is a standard Chinese think tank interpretation.
And here is some especially pertinent context examining how rampant Sinophobia is impotent when faced with an extremely efficient made in China model of governance. This study shows how China’s complex history, culture, and civilizational axioms simply cannot fit into the Western, Christian hegemonic worldview.
The not so hidden “secret” of China’s 2021-2025 five-year plan – which the Global Times described as “economic self-reliance” – is to base the civilization-state’s increasing geopolitical clout on technological breakthroughs.
Crucially, China is on a “self-driven” path – depending on little to no foreign input. Even a clear – “pragmatic” – horizon has been set: 2035, halfway between now and 2049. By this time China should be on a par or even surpassing the US in geopolitical, geoeconomic and techno power.
That is the rationale behind the Chinese leadership actively studying the convergence of quantum physics and information sciences – which is regarded as the backbone of the Made in China push towards the Fourth Industrial Revolution.
The five-year plan makes it quite clear that the two key vectors are AI and robotics – where Chinese research is already quite advanced. Innovations in these fields will yield a matrix of applications in every area from transportation to medicine, not to mention weaponry.
Huawei is essential in this ongoing process, as it’s not a mere data behemoth, but a hardware provider, creating platforms and the physical infrastructure for a slew of companies to develop their own versions of smart cities, safe cities – or medicines.
Big Capital – from East and West – is very much in tune with where all of this is going, a process that also implicates the core hubs of the New Silk Roads. In tune with the 21st century “land of opportunity” script, Big Capital will increasingly move towards East Asia, China and these New Silk hubs.
This new geoeconomic matrix will mostly rely on spin offs of the Made in China 2025 strategy. A clear choice will be presented for most of the planet: “win win” or “zero sum”.
The failures of neoliberalism
After observing the mighty clash, enhanced by Covid-19, between the neoliberal paradigm and “socialism with Chinese characteristics”, the Global South is only beginning to draw the necessary conclusions.
No Western propaganda tsunami can favorably spin what is in effect a devastating, one-two, ideological collapse.
Neoliberalism’s abject failure in dealing with Covid-19 is manifestly evident all across the West.
The US election dystopia is now sealing the abject failure of Western liberal “democracy”: what kind of “choice” is offered by Trump-Biden?
This is happening just as the ultra-efficient, relentlessly demonized “Chinese Communist Party” rolls out the road map for the next five years. Washington cannot even plan what happens the day ahead.
Trump’s original drive, suggested by Henry Kissinger before the January 2017 inauguration, was to play – what else – Divide and Rule, seducing Russia against China.
This was absolute anathema for the Deep State and its Dem minions. Thus the subsequent, relentless demonization of Trump – with Russiagate topping the charts. And then Trump unilaterally chose to sanction and demonize China anyway.
Assuming a Dem victory, the scenario will veer towards Russia demonization on steroids even as hysterical Hybrid War on China will persist on all fronts – Uighurs, Tibet, Hong Kong, South China Sea, Taiwan.
Now compare all of the above with the Russian road map.
That was clearly stated in crucial interventions by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and President Putin at the recent Valdai Club discussions.
Putin has made a key assertion on the role of Capital, stressing the necessity of “abandoning the practice of unrestrained and unlimited consumption – overconsumption – in favor of judicious and reasonable sufficiency, when you do not live just for today but also think about tomorrow.”
Putin once again stressed the importance of the role of the state: “The state is a necessary fixture, there is no way […] could do without state support.”
And, in concert with the endless Chinese experimentation, he added that in fact there are no economic rules set in stone: “No model is pure or rigid, neither the market economy nor the command economy today, but we simply have to determine the level of the state’s involvement in the economy. What do we use as a baseline for this decision? Expediency. We need to avoid using any templates, and so far, we have successfully avoided that.”
Pragmatic Putin defined how to regulate the role of the state as “a form of art”.
And he offered as an example, “keeping inflation up by a bit will make it easier for Russian consumers and companies to pay back their loans. It is economically healthier than the deflationary policies of western societies.”
As a direct consequence of Putin’s pragmatic policies – which include wide-ranging social programs and vast national projects – the West ignores that Russia may well be on the way to overtake Germany as the fifth largest economy in the world.
The bottom line is that combined, the Russia-China strategic partnership is offering, especially to the Global South, two radically different approaches to the standard Western neoliberal dogma. And that, for the whole US establishment, is anathema.
So whatever the result of the Trump-Biden “choice”, the clash between the Hegemon and the Top Two Sovereigns is only bound to become more incandescent.
Russia is still dominated by a “liberastic” elite, that owns almost all internal affairs and especially the economy. Many of its recipes are Washington Consensus driven and very, very detrimental. Didn’t Putin tell Russians not to expect much growth in his Valdai appearance? Khazin, Delyagin, Katasonov and many others are railing against this ludicrous economic policy into overdrive – to no avail. The most popular public shows with Soloviov almost always cut into the “liberastic” policies of the elite, recently into the enormously idiotic proposal of Siluanov’s finance ministry to cut the army by 10%. And I hear all the same talking points from 2008 onward. Truth be told, some important political decisions to re-sovereignize have been made. Some achievements in the military / industrial sphere have been made, but nothing remotely on the level of the Chinese.
As it now stands China will speed ahead as most other states are marred by their own incomprehensible brand of idiocy. Far from being perfect, the Chinese have at least in the grand scheme of things, a very competent leadership and practical approach to solve their problems.
I wish them the best.
I think Vlad and Xi understand that they must cooperate in every sense of the word to stand defiant against the Western Mad Dogs. Humanity should count on it!
Yes, you’re correct. It’s confusing as to why VVP continues to keep those liberalist parasites in top positions.
Being the largest country in the world, Russia definitely needs long-term planning to regain its position as a top global power, but it wouldn’t be possible if they try to emulate the ‘western values and methods’
China’s advantage is the unbroken line of leadership at the helm. Russia also has it, but still lacks the planning and putting it to work. VVP has to put his powers into work to remove corrupt people from the system
Liberalist parasites:
An article from Helmer: When we last audited Kudrin’s political account in February of this year, we reported: “In the politics of the Russian succession, Alexei Kudrin, 59 years of age, has two distinctions. The first is that he is hated by the General Staff, Igor Sechin, and a large number of Russian voters. The second is that he is loved by the US Government, the international banks, the Russian oligarchs, and President Vladimir Putin. He failed once, nine years ago, to replace Dmitry Medvedev as prime minister
Because Putin is a neoliberal capitalist and his instincts are always to do what is best for neoliberal capitalism, nothing else.
@Swordfish
Agree. In his Valdai speech Putin sucked on Russia’s agreement with “our western partners and International bankers” to introduce Green Bonds, Austerity and Sustainability into Russia’s financial system.
Latest we have Merkel offering Germany to Washington to be “equal partners” against Russia.
Only China is profiting with their win-win model while the rest are losing all their advantages in their obsession to be “equal partners” with a rotten hegemon.
Boy that’s a switch from you nachtinggal, what happened to your legitimate concerns for the Uyghurs and Tibetans? That’s a sincere question, not to goad you. I freely admit that all I know on thus topic is based on reading, and therefore I have no solid evidence that the West is telling the truth on the treatment of Uygur, Kyrgyz and hui Muslims or whether China is telling the truth. So if your concerns on this have been allayed, it would be valuable to share what indication you have acquired for this to happen.
China does not have the most efficient or effective form of government: go live there, work there, become fluent in putonghua (standardized mandarin) and you will see for yourself the reality: chinese enterprises are very bureacratic and slow to make decisions. Their debt to GDP ratio is worse than the United States, but they don’t own the global cash (reserve currency) printing press that United States possesses. Nor will china’s Yuan ever be part of of the global currency of exchange system (not after this COVID fiasco and the trend to diversify supply chains) because it’s based on trust (which China has squandered) as well as guns.
Also president Putin has further underscored that Russia and China do not have an alliance:
Now what are people going to say?
Anonymous
What is an alliance ? it is a political, economic or military contract between one or more entities. If such a contract pertains to a military alliance, then politics and economics are usually part of this contract. Such an alliance is usually confirmed by a written document, although this does not have to be the case. For example, in both world wars, Sweden was officially neutral, but supplied Germany with its iron ore needs. It clearly was in alliance with Germany, but never confirmed by any document. After World War Two, Sweden was de facto part of NATO, but again this was never confirmed by any official document.
When it comes to Russia and China, both have one quality which the US will never possess, and that is patience. Both have not signed any document which can confirm an alliance, either political or military. A wise move. How would the neocons in the US have reacted if both did in fact sign an alliance ? They would have screamed about the Asiatic “threat” from Russia and China, while the US military, backed by the Military Industrial Complex, would have screamed for extra billions for it’s Defense Budget.
What Russia and China have signed are bilateral agreements in trade, like constructing the Siberian gas pipeline to China. When it comes to military matters, there is no official Russian-Chinese military alliance. However, not too long ago, you had Chinese troops in Russia, where they participated in a military exercise.
What in fact you do have is a de facto political, economic and military alliance between Russia and China, and one which – wisely – was not confirmed in writing. This is doubly practical. Not only are the neocons in the US prevented from screaming about a Russian-Chinese “threat”, but should the political and military situation in the world deteriorate, then neither Russia nor China would be drawn into such a conflict if one of them decides that it would not be prudent to do so. This unofficial alliance between Russia and China is in fact superior to the NATO alliance, which now has to worry about the behavior of Turkey and it’s military adventures in Syria, Libya and Azerbaijan.
Finally, the author has stated that “Trump’s original drive, suggested by Henry Kissinger before the January 2017 inauguration, was to play – what else – Divide and Rule, seducing Russia against China”. Kissinger was hardly original. He tried that little trick back in 1971, when he went to China with the aim of bringing it into the Western economic camp, and then into the political camp. The aim was to move China away from Russia. The Chinese were no fools. They played along. They joined the Western economic camp, but did not turn their back on Russia. Now they trade with both. Kissinger therefore repeats the same tactic with that advice he gave to Trump. However, he forgot what his Khazarian pals did in 1917, when they financed the Russian “revolution”. This event is bitterly remembered in Russia, and Putin certainly does not fall for any cheap divide and conquer tactics. Russia and China are reality, and there is nothing Washington can do about it, short of a nuclear war.
Your comment is filled with your personal opinion and speculation (which you are entitled to) which completely contradicts what Putin clearly and bluntly stated. Your entitled to your opinions but you aren’t going to be able to convert those options into facts:
There is no alliance between Russia and China, not even defacto. There is a marriage of convenience, in trade and finance, between the 2 countries, thanks to the incompetence and corruption of the Obama regime and the paid off criminal, susan rice, who carried out an unprovoked attack on Russia, via Ukraine and Syria,, driving Russia, unwillingly, in the direction of China.
Here’s why Russia and China do not have a military alliance:
The fact is that the above quote correlates perfectly with what Russia is actually doing: Russia continues to sell weapons and munitions to countries that are in a near war situation with China (ie India, which had already received large volumes of munitions, tank shells, and are on a fast track to receive 2 dozen Mig-29s in response to China’s intrusion into india’s Ladakh territory. Or Vietnam, which continues to buy and receive submarines and deadly antiship missiles that are targeted at the chinese Navy) At the same time Russia continues to assist china with defensive missile shield technology as they are doing for India and Turkey. In a military alliance with China, Russia wouldn’t be arming India during a hot confrontation china has entangled themselves into, nor would they give offensive weapons to Vietnam both of which will use these weapons against China. In addition, Russia ignores China’s claim to the south China Sea and continues to drill and extract oil and gas in partnership with Vietnam in an block that china claims.
Do you really think that china would intervene militarily to assist Russia if NATO were to attack Russia? The Russian General quoted above doesn’t believe it for minute.
Anonymous
“Your comment is filled with your personal opinion and speculation”. Read carefully my comment. I, of course, always give my personal opinions. However, I never speculate, as I always present facts.
In my above comment I stated “What in fact you do have is a de facto political, economic and military alliance between Russia and China, and one which – wisely – was not confirmed in writing.This is doubly practical. Not only are the neocons in the US prevented from screaming about a Russian-Chinese “threat”, but should the political and military situation in the world deteriorate, then neither Russia nor China would be drawn into such a conflict if one of them decides that it would not be prudent to do so”. I think I was perfectly clear here.
You also stated “Do you really think that china would intervene militarily to assist Russia if NATO were to attack Russia? The Russian General quoted above doesn’t believe it for minute”. Are you 100 % sure about this ? And what is China going to do in a potential nuclear attack against Russia ? Sit back and watch the show, waiting for the time when NATO would do the same thing to it ? Worse, would it permit Russia to be turned into a nuclear waste land, and one situated to it’s north, which provides it with food, energy and high tech ? What would China do in such a situation ? Pray that the US gives it some oil and gas, so it’s economy would not collapse ?
BF, I read your comments with interest. They are well informed and well-presented. Further, I rarely feel adequately sure about ‘what is true’, since we live in a world that seems to specialise, and with ever-greater capabilities, in deception. I have lived throughout the ‘Atomic Age’ (my Physics teacher was the first man to ‘split the atom’). I well remember the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan and, later, the Chernobyl disaster and the continent-wide spread of nuclear radiation. Since then, controlled nuclear explosive power has increased umpteen-fold and we lived with the spectre of nuclear annihilation.
Why do I write in reply to your posting? Because you seem to imply that a nuclear exchange between any two adversaries would leave others relatively unaffected (“sit back and watch the show”). Should any such occasion arise, I doubt that anyone, anywhere, would remain as spectators. The fortunate ones would no longer exist; the unfortunate would suffer agonies that don’t bear thinking about. No one would remain unaffected in the ensuing ‘nuclear winter’. Hence the term ‘mutually-assured destruction’. No one should think otherwise.
Well said, David.
David Kennedy
Yes, that is correct. I said so in my comment. China would not sit back and watch the show.
What you said makes common sense. What you should note is the possibility of people or a nation who have lost their common sense.
@Anonymous
My observation hasn’t changed much on this issue. My mainstay argument is the footage from inside these camps and city. What I much more discount are the “Xinjiang” documents dump on the NYT (…) and the Zenz stuff from the Georgetown foundation, albeit he’s basing his data on the official Xinjiang government reports (which I couldn’t verify, because it’s behind a paywall plus I don’t speak Chinese, so I don’t know if it’s the genuine government source). What I agree with many of the regulars on this forum is, that all of these mainstream media outlets have a very bad track record and are known to use fabricated documents. I had read before, that Chinese officials acknowledged these documents (Anglo sources), but this was denied by official sources in China (think this was the global times).
In the bigger context, I have not for one day doubted the Chinese national interest in defending its civilization especially with its historic experience of almost complete disintegration and exploitation. It would be a much bigger crime to let the Anglos/West use the Muslim territories to plunge China into a civil war. 1.2 billion lives are more important in this context. I have no doubt the West will pull any lever to destroy China’s sovereignty and civilization at the end of the day; turning it into a tourist theme park and low cost labor resource. This also doesn’t mean I’m for its globalist economic model, one that is much more of a resource extraction machine than equitable economic development. There is more, but I stop here. That’s why it may sound contradictory, but it isn’t; there are many political/economic/environmental levels and context to consider.
Correction of the name of the foundation:
It’s called Jamestown Foundation not Georgetown. Adrian Zenz is a Senior Fellow in China Studies at the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, Washington, D.C.
It sounds like a typical propaganda organization, probably sub-sub-devision of an intel-agency. Still, I judge on the merit of the information itself, notwithstanding that all of this could turn out to be bs.
I ask everyone concerned to stop the patronizing insolence, to always try to teach us/me who to listen to and what to read. Most in this forum show the ability to perfectly think for themselves and make up his/her mind.
One last thing about the Chinese. I do not agree with the officially declared ideology (as far as their brand of Marxism), their treatment of some minorities and the neo-colonial style of globalism. This doesn’t exclude that the leadership is competent in many spheres and I’m sure you can find many faults there too, if you look close enough. This also doesn’t exclude their right to self determination and protection of their national interest. Lastly, I’ve known many Chinese and can only tell, that I was always warmly received and that many positive stereotypes do apply to them like very hard working/educated… and one should mention the Chinese (migrant) worker, who made the rise of China possible by working under very hard conditions – almost under slave labor, certainly wage slave, conditions. This made, first and foremost, American and European elites insanely rich and Chinese elites trailing not so much behind. The Chinese have earned to live well.
If you want to know the truth, then you have to be able to assume different point of views and endure anything, even if you hate to listen to your opposition.
Nachtigall
“Russia is still dominated by a “liberastic” elite”. This is highly debatable. Yes, liberals are present in Russia, but to state that they dominate the economy is certainly an exaggeration. If this was the case, Putin would not have succeeded in extricating Russia from the economic and financial nightmare created by Yeltsins liberals.
I believe it’s been pointed out several times by many readers that Putin is basically Yeltsin minus the booze and with better public relations savvy. They follow the same neoliberal capitalist policies and the only real difference is that Putin crushed those oligarchs who got too big for their boots and began interfering in politics. This is one of several reasons that Belarus should be extremely cautious before signing on to a Union State. It must ensure that it’s not looted by Russian capitalist interests, who are just as eagerly waiting to loot it as are Western capitalist interests.
People crave hope. Many disillusioned with liberal globalism saw what they wanted to see in Putin, and a Russia that once opposed Capitalism.
Russia no more seeks fairness for the wealth creators (workers) as opposed to the wealth amassers (oligarchs) than does the West. President Putin is one of the oligarchs. Why should he change? He simply removed, or expelled, his competitors. Russian yuppies identify with the West, support the West, and want to be part of the West. The poor remain the poor wherever they are in the world. They dream of a Saviour – someday? But modern-day Russia is NOT that (as the Saker has frequently reminded us).
What if, in reality, there really is no “saviour”, that god only saves those who save themselves economically, physically, and spiritually, what if that were true?
“What if, in reality, there really is no “saviour” …. what if that were true?”
The answer is very easily answered: we would have the world just as it is.
We would be ruled by psychopaths. Selfishness would be the ‘golden rule’.
And there would be no altruistic love (agape) in the world. Capitalism would rule.
Above all else, Putin is a Russian Nationalist. He’s not going to allow Russia to be looted and severed into pieces. Beyond that, he’s pretty hollow, but wily, nonetheless.
China and Russia don’t vote! They know US foreign policy won’t change no matter who is the next POTUS is!
In essence, they have cast a vote against Trump by stonewalling his and Pigpeo’s nonsense.
A transition of administrations is also an operational win for Washington’s “adversaries”. Transitions cost time+resources and cause internal discord.
But yeah. Politically, same old Uncle Scam.
At the top of Russian and Chinese cooperative To-Do list, should be the following: How to separate the mad monkey from its hand grenade? That is, how to deal with a deranged, collapsing country with a large arsenal of aging nuclear weapons pointed at Russia and China and, in fact, the entire global surface?
This is exactley what I keep thinking about… It is a scary situation.
For all: What obstacles are there to Russia easing into a China model in light of this total collapse of the Western model? Is there any play for “Socialism with Russian Characteristics”?
Does Russia benefit from its geopolitical proximity to China more than it possibly suffers from its historical proximity to the Late USSR? Is there any attempt to, say, un-demonize/rehabilitate the Soviet tradition?
***
I see Pepe has been drawing strongly from my and laodan’s (and other Sakerite’s) commentaries ;)
/can-you-smell-what-the-chinese-are-cooking/#comment-868726
There is no crying need for a theory to justifythe existence or or describe the entire agenda of a state. Russia can exist without a theory or model or even with multiple models and it would probably suit them fine.
@what kind of “choice” is offered by Trump-Biden?
I find the solution of Andrei Martianov compelling:
“Trump is a bad choice, in fact–he sucks, but he is the lesser of the two evils totally corrupted and dysfunctional US political system produces regularly. So, basically the choice is between floating in shit with the head above the surface and drowning in it. Simple as that”.
1. To me the most important in Pepe’s article today is the following :
” Big Capital – from East and West – is very much in tune with where all of this is going, a process that also implicates the core hubs of the New Silk Roads. In tune with the 21st century “land of opportunity” script, Big Capital will increasingly move towards East Asia, China and these New Silk hubs. ”
This is indeed what is going on and India will rapidly have to adjust to this reality otherwise it will discover too late that it is marginalized in the Great Game of the Century.
When we talk about the “governance-world” in a world governed by power, or Geo-politics in traditional terms, it is important to recognize that the core of power is capital (money that is invested is what generates the wealth of nations). Too often the academic world loses itself in the surface appearances. In the case of studies about power by academics I wrote the following in 2018 in “A growing disconnect between East and West” (in 8.3.1.Global capital or control by the biggest Western capital holders) :
” The Swiss Federal Institute published a study in 2011 that analyzed the different forms of ownership between 43,060 trans-national corporations (TNCs). The team of researchers found that some 1,318 companies form the core of the global economy while 147 control 40% of their total wealth. What’s more the top 25 among these 147 are the world’s top asset management firms. These 25 can “be thought of as an economic ‘super-entity’ in the global network of corporations”.
By pointing to the role of asset management firms as the real decision makers, the authors of the Swiss Federal Institute are hiding the role of the minority, among capital holders, that owns the controlling stake of the world’s total capital base. The owners, of the assets played by asset management firms, are indeed hidden. Furthermore their investments outside of those asset management firms are invisible in the study.
But there is no escaping the fact that the ownership, of the controlling stake of the world’s total capital base, procures its holders with ‘the ownership’ of the game of power. ”
In his study titled “Giants” Peter Phillips further states that some 66% of the world’s wealth is owned by EU and US capital holders! This shows how the weight, of past capital accumulation, is still weighing very heavily on the present reality…
So we are in a situation where we know for a fact that — big capital exists and is represented by a few families — big capital owns the Western decision making — but we can’t put family names on what is “big capital” because those family names are hidden by the world’s top asset management firms…
What does this imply in terms of Geo-political security ?
I venture to suggest that — in the short term we’ll see Western big capital imposing a quietening of the tone in the public discourses of its servants’ (realism will trump ideology) — within a few short years Western big capital and Chinese state capital will eventually find a ‘modus operandi’ — that ‘modus operandi’ will initially be managed within Regional Economic Blocks and then the interactions between blocks will generate a new global architecture in which East-Asia will be the dominant actor
2. Today’s “governance-world”, or “Geo-politics”, is driven by the competition between “Western big capital holders” and “China’s state capital”. But this never appears front page in the mainstream media because, while deciding for the future of the world, Western big capital holders want to remain hidden. And so the Western media shows us the “surface appearance” of Western power but political decision-makers, and the rest of the Western establishment, are merely the servants of “Western big capital holders”.
The shit show of Western governance these last few years are now concluding with a new reality in the “governance-world” field that can be summed up as follows :
2.1. the Western Geo-political architecture imposed to the world after 1945 has been dynamited by Trump and there is no going back to this architecture. In its unbearable lightness China is confirming this with its “dual circulation” concept while it is reaffirming the priority of state owned enterprises in the Chinese economy (see the saga of the last public humiliation of Jack Ma and Aunt financial = the state applies the precautionary principle against the financial adventurism of Ali Baba and Jack Ma manipulated by some Western big capital holders).
This is a world changing game…
2.2. the only remaining semblance of Int’l order today is found in the Regional Economic Blocks [ North-America, South-America, EU, African Union, Eurasian Economic Union, East-Asia (ASEAN, Chinese civilizational space, North-East Asia), … ]. Over the following years these blocks are going to go into overdrive trying to strengthen the relations among their participant nations, their internal institutional build-up while also trying to coordinate their activities with neighboring blocs.
The ‘China-Russia entente’ has to be analyzed in this particular context to discover what is really going on… and also to understand why the US is trying so intently to destabilize this great game of the century (India, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Turkey, … + the anti-China propaganda, Xinjiang, Tibet, Mongolia, Hong Kong, Taiwan,…).
Thank you laodan for your essay.
I agree with much of it. Capital and its movements underlie all history. But the history books omit that for a good reason – because it might wake us up. Money is only a manifestation of capital. It is useful for starting new political movements, bribing politicians and so on. But capital is much more than just money. One should not forget intellectual and social capital, for example.
I think that Martin Armstrong’s computer predictions of the movement of the centre of finance from New York to Shanghai ties in with your opinion.
We are at a turning point where old technologies and industries are being left behind. If those hidden holders of the majority of the worlds capital have grown senile, their capital can rapidly disappear. Just look at all the rich yet moronic investors of softbank. We are entering a new age and it is time for the nerds to shine.
I don’t see discussion on where the IT revolution is headed, and why it’s continued evolution is considered not only good, but inevitable. The Regional Economic Blocks described are Orwell’s vision in 1984, and the spiritual and economic outcome of that was control and destruction of the Human Spirit. What if the US decided to pursue an anti-IT revolution, and develop a progressive hybrid of IT and independence? For instance,in a lame example, a car that has comfort and tech for the individual, (eg. heated seats,and media) but no computerization that turns your car into a brick because of a sensor malfunction? I, for one, would support that with my pocketbook! I think the “West” is missing out on capitalizing on the thing that the whole world admired most about the New World; it’s love of freedom and independence.
Regarding which candidate each adversary would prefer:
China wants Biden.
Russia prefers not-Biden, showing no desire for Trump, also.
The reasons? China will suffer less from Biden and the Wall Street financial boys who the Chinese want for investment in country (FDI). Russia will suffer less from no Dems who hate Russia (Trump doesn’t).
However, the institutional geopolitical policy of containment and Infowar, Cyberwar and Sanctions on both will continue regardless of who wins the election.
I fail to see how even a hardened war criminal like Kissinger could imagine that this had any chance of coming true. Do they imagine that Russians are deaf, dumb, blind, and congenitally lacking a brain?
Like all psychopath Zionists, Kissinger really does believe in his own insane delusions. The entire U.S. arms race and proxy war strategy during the Cold War against the Soviet Union demonstrated to what lengths they are willing to go to utterly collapse and destroy the other side.
If you recall, back then U.S. warmongering propaganda constantly beat the drum to the American public that the USSR was an “Evil Empire” out to conquer the entire world and not only willing to use nukes to achieve this goal, but just itching to launch a first strike. In reality, never in a million years would the USSR have ever even considered a first strike against the U.S. For all its problems and the corruption of the bureaucracy, the USSR’s foreign and military policy was led by rational thinkers who went to extreme lengths to avoid edging anywhere close to World War III.
The U.S. on the other hand was the diametric opposite and went to extreme lengths to do everything in its power to spark global nuclear war. Nothing has changed in this regard. Americans, like their Zionist overlords, are addicted to war. Theirs is a gospel of inhumanity, perversion, and terror.
The Russians today will always have the advantage against the Americans because they are led by a radically different gospel.
“There is no peace for the wicked: They are like the troubled sea which cast out mire and dirt. There is no peace saith the Lord to the wicked.” — Isaiah 57:20-21
“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.” — Proverbs 9:10
Pepe wrote an entire article giving space for an taiwan “expert”advocating change in chinese political system because…..it is called COMMUNIST.
/will-confucius-marry-marx/#comments
I’m still trying to figure it out the reasons behind that article clearly not reasonably.
So, in this article here there is a link agreeing with my comment in that Pepe piece of Sweet article.
“Here is a standard Chinese think tank interpretation:”
“And this is only possible because China’s political system does not suffer from the defect of needing to pander for votes or to score political points that burdens countries with two-party systems. Instead, China’s government can devote its complete and undivided energy and attention to realizing the Chinese people’s aspirations for a better life.”
Is that hard to recognize? Really?
Who cares if it’s called communist?
Democracy, rule by the people, does not demand, nor require, a multiplicity of parties. It requires reliable information, knowledge and wisdom in arriving at decisions that affect the many. Actions speak louder than words. ‘The people’ can best judge how actions affect them, for good or ill and feed this into further discussions affecting decisions.
This is fine, if the rule is “the greatest good for the greatest number”, but breaks down when corruption results in selfish manipulation of decision-making by lies and hypocrisy.
Such is our present state. Utopia = freedom from corruption.
“Neoliberalism’s abject failure in dealing with Covid-19 is manifestly evident all across the West.”
The whole world failed except, in a way, maybe the Swedish government who decided not to interfere much in the freedom its population to protect its economy. It was a fairly successful move because only briefly the numbers of deaths did rise above those of other EU countries who chose for confinement. Then those numbers came down faster then elsewhere and now the numbers in Sweden go to near zero while those where people where confined are rising again for obvious reasons. China did well but at what cost? Sheer dictatorship, police state and fascist methods were used.
Spanish research on Corona patients on intensive care shows that prescribing high enough dosed vitamin D3 to a population will keep 98% of the high risk group out of intensive care. But of course vitamin D can’t be patented and there’s no big money in keeping people healthy at very low cost, not for western BIG pharma neither for big Chinese companies.
It’s there where we will be able to see whether the Chinese model will be ‘win-win’ to all, if they will try to reverse a century of western health care lies and not go for the same BIG money keeping up the same lies.
To be honest, I do not have high hopes…
https://www.rt.com/news/485206-tb-vaccine-covid-19/
‘Striking’ evidence emerges that TB vaccine may be effective against Covid-19 — countries that use it have TEN TIMES fewer cases.
The use of a Zinc dietary supplement also enhances the effectiveness of Vitamin D
Belarus also resisted the global Zionist lockdown (which is a fundamental stage of the “Great Reset” insanity) and they have been doing fine: “… the country’s death rate is among the lowest in Europe—just over 700 in a population of 9.5 million with over 73 000 confirmed cases.”
Source: https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3543
Some have mentioned Japan and South Korea as countries that managed to perform better than the USA, UK or the EU (I don’t know much about Australia or New Zealand) – assuming that they’re part of the ‘West’ as some in this site assert. I don’t know if they can serve as good counterexamples to Pepe’s assertion.
Mr. Escobar stated:
Neoliberalism’s abject failure in dealing with Covid-19 is manifestly evident all across the West.
The US election dystopia is now sealing the abject failure of Western liberal “democracy”: what kind of “choice” is offered by Trump-Biden?”
We rarely disagree with P. Escobar, but the above quotes needs to be addressed.
Firstly, Western Neo-liberals think years in advance. Consider their latest plan, “The Great Reset” as drawn up by one of their own: Karl Schwab in the EU along with thsy demented figure, Bill Gates: the Eugenics guy.
These folks along with Big Pharma & other Western Oligarchs have purposely propagandized Covid-19. For we few who spend time reading/listening to virologists, immunologists, epidemeologists in the Western World, they ALL agree the PCR Tests are infamously inaccurate while most governments and their media in Europe are busily increasing Lockdowns: a 2nd, 3d time over.
It’s a purposeful fraud because Covid-19 is a prelude to The Great Reset. If Biden wins this election, we’ll see far more lockdowns in the States, along with The Fed instituting a digital currency. Then, when a “vaccine” is discovered, we’ll be forced into being micro-chipped. The Consequence: anyone who steps out of line, will be denied access to their money. It’s Eugenics on steroid. They want to eliminate millions of Western citizens.
As a result, this will streamline their focus on Russia, China, other parts of Asia, and Latin America.
Never,ever underestimate these Western Oligarchs. More than ever, they will never relent in their Dystopian Dreams.
You’ve written the leading view of what is going on. The Trump-Biden or USA issue must be seen in this light. I’m glad Putin pegged gates for the runt he is.
I fail to understand or decipher your paranoia? How much more control does the gubment want when they already have it both politically and economically? Digital currency already exists, discounting all the crypto hoopla which is a micro percentage of the financial system which has long been ‘digitized’. What benefit would be achieved in spending trillions on micro-chipping and monitoring useless and largely law abiding citizens? They are already monitored via the blob like social media and if necessary via the humongous NSA web? I don’t understand any logic in that statement. Why on earth would the western gubments want to eliminate its tax and revenue base of largely law abiding working ‘western citizens’ who are defacto already so well ‘conditioned’……?……to me this paranoid vision evokes what an anarchist or somebody from Antifa would say. How would eliminating western citizens better position the west in confronting Russia or China? Who would join the US/ Nato military’s if you eliminate the lower middle class?
I can assure you the South is not interested in theoretical models but in pragmatically getting positive things done (a la Putin) which China has demonstrated to the persuasion of, certainly, the majority of African states. With the new, large co-op between Iran and China, it is clear that the Muslim world states, the thinking ones, will understand where productive co-op in the 21st century lies. The events and variables of the 21st century are not just about traditional GEO-Politics of Russia-USA-China-City of London, they are also about a new factor of collective transformation of peoples attitudes and future expectations brought about by communication, information and internet technology (CII.) This CII dynamic, for lack of a better word, has the power to crush all states and their plans, It must therefore be studied continuously, understood so that its implications are grasped, and harnessed towards building a Westphalian order (Security and independence of the state and the citizens.)
“That is the rationale behind the Chinese leadership actively studying the convergence of quantum physics and information sciences”
The Chinese are certainly on the right track, while the West is committing economic suicide under the rubric of fake “Climate Change”… furthermore,the US in particular is so rife with the Predator Class monopolies and cartels that our country is unable to keep pace with Chinese innovation that will dominate the globe for the rest of the century.
That said, while a “quantum-info tech economy” sounds real sexy, China is threatened by far more existential challenges in the form of unsecured
-Energy supplies
-Food supplies (owing to a backward and disease ridden agro-industrial sector)
-Potable water supplies.
For all the talk of “economic self-reliance”, dire food-water and energy vulnerabilities were almost completely ignored in the recently released Five Year Plan. Catastrophic Failure (or strategic sabotage by the West ) within any one of these sectors will bring China to her knees… all the quantum info-tech won’t mean a damn thing.