When You Are Trying To Solve A Problem Not Everyone Understands

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has been pretty open about its eventual goal to dominate the world economically and politically. One of the major obstacles in their way in America and its free market economy. In recent years, the CCP has worked very hard to infiltrate American universities and educate future leaders about the ‘problems’ inherent in a free-market economy. The CCP has been buying silver reserves with the goal in mind of eventually ending the U.S. dollar’s role as the world’s reserve currency. The CCP has also quietly been cornering the market on the rare earth minerals and other natural resources needed to fuel the computer age. They are not sitting quietly by waiting for America to fall–they plan to help America fall.

Just the News posted an article today about some Congressmen who are planning to slow down some of the CCP’s progress in taking over America.

The article reports:

Members recently advanced legislation that warns that such purchases also increases China’s involvement in the American food system, posing a national security risk.

More broadly, Congress has recently taken up the issue of American reliance on China in industries including semiconductors and minerals – both of which are key parts of the U.S. supply chain.

Washington GOP Rep. Dan Newhouse says the situation is “leading us toward the creation of a Chinese-owned agricultural land monopoly.”

Newhouse drafted an amendment recently added to an Agriculture-FDA spending bill that attempts to blocks new agricultural acquisitions by companies that are controlled, in part or in whole, by the Chinese Communist Party.

Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren also supports legislative efforts similar to Newhouse’s amendment.

However, Rep. Grace Meng, a New York Democrat, says Newhouse’s amendment will “perpetuate already rising anti-Asian hate.”

She argued that if the focus of the amendment were truly about security, buyers from other foreign nations would be subjected to similar restrictions.

What Representative Meng does not understand is that China is the only foreign nation attempting to gain control of America’s food production. I don’t think wanting to keep the CCP out of American food production has anything to do with anti-Asian hate–I think it is an example of watching what is going on and predicting the next step. We have already experienced a microchip shortage, let’s not have a food shortage.

A Dark Prediction

Yesterday The Epoch Times posted an article about some of the plans that will impact America’s currency.

The article reports:

A controversial plan to boost global liquidity means the days of the U.S. dollar being the undisputed king of the international monetary system may be coming to a close, experts told The Epoch Times.

Losing that status could contribute to a serious crisis for the United States involving a dramatic loss of economic purchasing power, a geopolitical realignment and everything associated with those shocks.

The Biden administration-backed International Monetary Fund (IMF) proposal to issue an unprecedented $650 billion U.S. dollars’ worth of new “Special Drawing Rights” (SDRs) this year alone will also help re-shape the international financial system.

That is more than twice the total amount of SDRs created by the IMF throughout its entire history.

The SDR is a sort of proto-global currency, based on a basket of leading currencies, dubbed an “international reserve asset” by the IMF. Each government receives an amount of SDRs proportional to its stake in the international organization.

The unprecedented new issuance, which has the support of both Beijing and Washington, will contribute to sidelining the U.S. dollar’s role as the global reserve currency, analysts warned. The Chinese Communist Party is expected to be a leading beneficiary.

It’s time to take another look at the end goal of Cloward-Piven. A website called “James 4 America‘ explains:

First proposed in 1966 and named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, the “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Inspired by the August 1965 riots in the black district of Watts in Los Angeles (which erupted after police had used batons to subdue a black man suspected of drunk driving), Cloward and Piven published an article titled “The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty” in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation. Following its publication, The Nation sold an unprecedented 30,000 reprints. Activists were abuzz over the so-called “crisis strategy” or “Cloward-Piven Strategy,” as it came to be called. Many were eager to put it into effect.

In their 1966 article, Cloward and Piven charged that the ruling classes used welfare to weaken the poor; that by providing a social safety net, the rich doused the fires of rebellion. Poor people can advance only when “the rest of society is afraid of them,” Cloward told The New York Times on September 27, 1970. Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, wrote Cloward and Piven, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system; the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation; poor people would rise in revolt; only then would “the rest of society” accept their demands.

America’s role as the global reserve currency is what has kept us afloat during the runaway spending Congress had undertaken during the past sixty years. There was never any thought given to the amount of debt they were creating and who would eventually have to pay that debt off. Eventually the chickens were bound to come home to roost. It looks like eventually is getting very close.

 

 

A Scary Statement

Yesterday One America News posted an article about a recent statement made by Charles Munger, Vice Chairman of Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway.

The article reports:

Charles Munger, Vice Chairman of Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway, has suggested the U.S. needs to act more like the Chinese Communist Party when it comes to banking. In an interview on Wednesday, the 97-year-old billionaire claimed American free enterprise led to mass suffering from the 2008 crash.

When asked about the mysterious disappearance of Alibaba CEO Jack Ma as an issue with Chinese economics, Munger doubled down on his pro CCP rhetoric.

“Well yes, but Jack Ma’s one of the swingers. So they just cut his, they said to hell with you,” he expressed. “He basically gave a speech when he said to one party state, you guys are a bunch of jerks, don’t know what you’re doing and I know what I’m doing and I’m going to do it better.”

…Munger went on to criticize the U.S. free-market economy by saying too many people have the ability to “go to this gross excess,” which he argued the Chinese Communist Party takes beneficial preventative measures against.

Mr. Munger needs to be reminded that it is not the government’s job to prevent “gross excess.” It should also be noted that it is very unlikely that Mr. Munger would be allowed to amass a billion dollars under the rule of the Chinese Communist Party or that he would be able to achieve success based on the merits of his own efforts rather than simply finding political favor. The man has obviously forgotten that the very freedom he is condemning is what allowed him to become the success that he became. Would Mr. Munger like to live under the policies of the  Chinese Communist Party as an ordinary citizen?

Who Is Funding American Magazines?

The Washington Free Beacon is reporting today that the Chinese government is funding content published in Time magazine.

The article reports:

Time magazine failed to disclose Chinese government funding for content published in its most recent print edition.

The magazine’s June 21-28 double issue included an insert from China Daily, a media outlet controlled by the Chinese Communist Party. Disclosures on the insert label it as an advertisement from China Daily in Beijing and note that additional “information is on file with the DOJ, Washington DC.” Chinese government funding for China Daily is not mentioned. China Daily registers with the Justice Department under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, a law aimed at tracking foreign government influence.

Advocacy groups have criticized news outlets for partnering with China Daily out of concerns that the organization is spreading propaganda in the West. Some companies, including the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, have ended content-sharing deals with China Daily because it is controlled by the Chinese government. The outlet has paid millions of dollars to publish content in Western magazines’ and newspapers’ print and online editions.

Time began working with China Daily last year. Foreign-agent disclosures filed by China Daily in May show the outlet paid Time $700,000 over the past six months, by far the highest outlay to any American news company. In addition to the print inserts, the magazine publishes sponsored China Daily content on its website, which also does not acknowledge Chinese government funding.

Much of the China Daily content does not appear to be aggressive Chinese propaganda, with many of the articles portraying life in China and Chinese culture in a positive light. But some of the paid China Daily content has drawn criticism from advocacy groups because of its clear political agenda.

The article also noted:

China Daily also sponsored content in the Financial Times, the Los Angeles Times, and Foreign Policy magazine, according to foreign agent disclosures. Two Tibetan advocacy groups criticized Foreign Policy over a series of China Daily articles last month that touted Communist Party policies in Tibet. The International Campaign for Tibet called the articles an “affront” to Tibetans who oppose Communist Party rule.

Let’s be clear. The articles do not have to be aggressive Chinese propaganda–all they have to do is paint an idyllic picture of life in Communist China. As young Americans see the illusion of a utopian society where they get free education and have all of their needs met by the state, they are misled about the lack of freedom that goes along with those ‘benefits.’ The Chinese have engaged in a propaganda war with America for some time now. Chinese money has been flowing into American colleges for years, and recently a few professors have been arrested for spying for China. When you read an article in the mainstream media, you need to know if someone is paying for it.

The Enemy Within

Yesterday The Epoch Times reported the following:

Hundreds of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) members are embedded within the Chinese divisions of major U.S. corporations, from IBM to PepsiCo to 3M, a leaked CCP-member database revealed.

The existence of Party units within foreign companies in China is hardly surprising, given that the regime mandates any organization with at least three CCP members to form a Party branch. But the 1.95 million CCP member list, which includes names, levels of education, ethnicity, and the Party branches they belong to, was to date the biggest revelation on the scale of the CCP’s influence on international companies.

Most of the members in the database are from the country’s southeastern coastal metropolis of Shanghai.

New York-headquartered tech firm IBM has at least two dozen Party units with 808 members in China.

3M, a manufacturer of consumer and health care goods, including N95 respirators and other medical products critical to preventing COVID-19 spread, employs at least 230 CCP members within five Party units.

PepsiCo, the multinational snack and beverage company, has 45 employees listed under the company’s Party branch committee.

The article concludes:

Xu Tao, the hotel’s Party branch secretary, said that he had tried to “incorporate political things into activities accepted by both Chinese and Western employees” to give Westerner staff the impression that “Party branch work are infusing more Chinese elements into the Westin brand and thus make the hotel more locally competitive,” according to a report by state media Xinhua. Xu had organized events to have workers stitch national flags together and to study the “spirit of the Long March,” the CCP army’s retreat in the 1930s.

The “membership in the Chinese Communist Party makes those people devoted not to the nation of China, or to the people of China, but to the political party of the CCP,” said Journalist Gertz. He called such efforts the CCP’s “ideological drive” to “basically take over the world.”

“They [CCP members] see themselves as besieged by the capitalist world, they see themselves as, basically, at ideological war with a non-communist world,” he said on The Epoch Times’ American Thought Leaders program.

“Now the West, the free world, needs to wake up and start fighting back against the Chinese Communist Party.”

3M declined to comment. IBM, PepsiCo, Dow Chemical, Marriott, Nielsen, Mars, MetLife, Boeing, and Pfizer didn’t respond to a request for comment by press time.

The CCP has funded our colleges to influence the way our future leaders are educated and infiltrated our major corporations in order to further their goals–not American’s goals, but the CCP’s goals. Please follow the link to read the entire article. I don’t know how much time we have to turn this around, but it is a grave threat to our country and to our freedom.

Playing Politics With National Security

It is troubling that someone on the House Intelligence Committee was in bed (literally) with a Chinese Communist Party spy. It is even more troubling that those in the House leadership on the Democrat side chose to keep that information secret.

The Conservative Treehouse posted an article yesterday about one disturbing aspect of this situation.

The article notes:

….. As noted in this interview segment Nancy Pelosi is claiming she was briefed on the Chinese spy compromise around Swalwell with McCarthy. However, simultaneously House Leader Kevin McCarthy states he found out through the media. Keep in mind McCarthy has only been part of the ‘Gang of Eight’ since Jan 2019 (he as minority leader and Pelosi taking over from Paul Ryan as House Speaker).

A Pelosi briefing prior to 2019 was in her role as Minority leader with Ryan as speaker (Nunes/Schiff as Chair/Ranking on HPSCI). Therefore either Pelosi was briefed outside the Go8 structure, or she is lying about briefing with McCarthy. While Pelosi is a notorious liar, the former explanation of a defensive briefing seems more likely.

That means U.S. intelligence officials during the Obama administration kept the Swalwell compromise secret and outside the Gang-of-Eight. Accepting that reality is further evidence the U.S. intel apparatus -writ large- was operating through the prism of politics.

This is yet another illustration of how the deep state works–they are willing to compromise national security in order to do anything that reflects negatively on one of their own.

A Much Needed Executive Order

There are a lot of reasons why people strongly dislike President Trump. A lot of the dislike is the result of the lies told about him in the mainstream media. If you believe President Trump is a racist, you might want to look into his history and the awards he has received for not being racist. Among other things, President Trump literally fought city hall to allow African-Americans and Jews to join Mar-a-lago. I suspect you won’t find a report of that on the mainstream media. Aside from the horrific picture the mainstream media has painted of this man, there are a lot of status quo financial interests that his presidency threatens. Corruption and payoffs in Washington have been part of the game for a long time, and obviously President Trump is not playing. A recent Executive Order is one example of why the Washington insiders hate President Trump.

The Epoch Times posted an article today with the headline, “US Invested Billions Into Companies With Ties to Chinese Military.”

The article reports:

President Donald Trump’s latest executive order bars U.S. investors from holding ownership stakes in a list of 31 Chinese companies designated to have ties with various Chinese Communist Party (CCP) military apparatuses.

This order, while somewhat limited in scope, ensnares several well-known Chinese companies including non-public companies such as Huawei and publicly traded companies such as China Mobile and Hangzhou Hikvision. The 31 companies were previously designated by the Pentagon as being “owned or controlled” by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the official name of the Chinese military. (The list of companies can be found here and here.)

The action could be a sign of things to come for Chinese companies with close ties to the CCP; U.S. capital could prove increasingly hard to come by. In addition, examining the foreign ownership base of these companies reveals that a number of them are partially owned by prominent U.S. investment firms, insurance companies, and pension funds.

Four more years of President Trump will not be kind to these investments. A Joe Biden presidency will allow business as usual to continue despite the threat to national security.

The article reports:

An analysis by The Epoch Times of ownership of these 31 Chinese companies reveals that billions of U.S. capital have already flowed into shares of these companies, all of which allegedly have ties to the CCP military or intelligence agencies.

Of the 16 publicly-traded firms either on the list or are subsidiaries and related parties of companies on the list, U.S. entities currently hold shares worth approximately $14.9 billion, based on closing prices as of Nov. 20 and latest available public filings data compiled by Bloomberg.

The vast majority of the $15 billion is invested in two of China’s biggest telecommunications giants. The first is China Mobile Ltd. with $8.1 billion invested via both the New York-listed ADR shares as well as the Hong Kong-listed shares. The company with the second-largest amount of U.S. capital is New York-listed China Telecom Corp with $2.3 billion of investments. Both firms are believed to have links to the PLA, according to the U.S. defense department.

Third on the list is surveillance equipment manufacturer Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Co. Ltd., with $1.7 billion of investments from U.S.-domiciled sources. Hikvision has been criticized in the West for producing equipment used to monitor Uighur Muslims in the northwestern region of Xinjiang.

Unsurprisingly, investment advisors and fund management firms are the biggest single group investing into these Chinese companies—with $13.5 billion invested—by way of their actively managed mutual funds or passively managed exchange-traded funds (ETFs). They are followed by government and pension funds with $466 million invested, and hedge funds with $406 million invested. Other investor classes with large stakes include insurance companies (for their own accounts) and banks and brokers (likely on behalf of client accounts).

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. It really makes you wonder about the loyalty to America of some of our financial people.

Know Your Sources

Yesterday The Washington Free Beacon posted an article about the British magazine the Economist.

The article reports:

The Economist provided sympathetic coverage of a Chinese tech giant widely considered a national security risk without disclosing the publication’s lucrative business relationship with the firm that spanned nearly a decade.

Huawei Technologies commissioned the Economist‘s business consulting division to advance its policy agendas and deflect cybersecurity concerns raised by Western governments. The influential British magazine produced reports on a wide range of subjects—including a report on broadband access in the United Kingdom that Huawei credits to have influenced British policy. The publication has also run numerous Huawei advertisements, and its editors have cohosted several global forums with the company, helping the tech firm boost its public image as it faced growing scrutiny from the developed world for its close ties with the Chinese government.

The Economist defended Huawei in a front-page cover story in 2012—the year the publication’s consulting division started working with the company—that accused Western countries of using cybersecurity concerns as a pretense to oppose legitimate competition from Huawei. The publication’s coverage of the tech company has become less overtly pro-Huawei in recent years, but the Economist‘s coverage of the company is seen as friendly enough that Huawei’s PR division has cited several of the magazine’s articles to deflect criticism.

The article concludes:

While the Economist‘s coverage of Huawei has become more skeptical of the Chinese firm over the years, the magazine continues to criticize U.S. efforts to sanction Huawei. The company has been all too happy to cite some of the Economist‘s coverage in its “facts” section, which seeks to assuage concerns about Huawei. Its CEO, Ren Zhengfei, also gave open-ended interviews with the publication in December 2019 and January 2020, the latter with the Economist‘s editor in chief.

None of the Economist‘s coverage of Huawei mentioned the publication’s long-standing business relationship with the tech firm.

Nile Gardiner, a foreign policy expert at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said that Huawei’s relationship with the Economist appears to be part of its multifaceted campaign to influence British and European public opinion.

“Huawei has a large propaganda operation in Europe and invests vast sums of money to influence thinking in Europe,” he said. “It is very disappointing that some European media organizations and businesses chose to collaborate with an entity that is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party.”

This relationship is important to note because it illustrates one way the Chinese Communist Party peddles influence. All of the shenanigans we see going on between the Biden family and the CCP generally relate to gaining access and peddling influence. The CCP uses its money and businesses to infiltrate western media and politics to gain advantages in trade and policy decisions. The thing to remember is that no business is successful in China unless it follows the wishes of the Communist Party.