This research was published just as the pandemic fear and control began to take over the world. I find it very informative. Relates to your post, fills in many blanks, answers many questions.
China's Vision for a New World Order
The National Bureau of Asian Research, January, 2020
• The Chinese leadership’s efforts to increase China’s discourse power should not be dismissed or misconstrued as mere propaganda or empty slogans. Rather, they should be seen as evidence of the leadership’s determination to alter the norms that underpin existing institutions and put in place the building blocks of a new international system coveted by the Chinese Communist Party.
• The Chinese leadership’s critique of the existing international order reveals its unswerving objection to the values on which this order has been built. At stake is not only the predominant position of the U.S. in the current system but more importantly the potential erosion of fundamental human rights, freedom of thought and expression, and self-government around the world."
"For fear of fueling potential counter-responses to its ambitions and international suspicions about its aspirations—often shorthanded in Chinese discourse with the “so-called China threat theory” label (suowei Zhongguo weixielun)—the party-state has for decades mobilized large-scale propaganda efforts and global influence campaigns to dispel and discredit any hint at the possibility that China’s rise might negatively affect the international system."
"If the National Planning Office of Philosophy and Social Sciences deems their work worthy of financial support, this fact indicates that their ideas are taken seriously within the system."
***NOTE: Both the US and UK established Social and Behavioral Science Teams in the early 2010's, called "Nudge Units." Which has been The Science (TM) of the pandemic restrictions on civil liberties and freedom (masking, social distancing, quarantines, lockdowns, vax mandates), "The Science (TM) of totalitarianism." Not a coincidence.
"In the Chinese leadership’s eyes, shaping the world is essentially about making sure that the international system accommodates the CCP’s ambitions for power as well as its anxieties about survival. Beijing’s vision for a new international order is an outward extension of what the party wants to secure (its perpetual rule and unchallenged power) and what it rejects as existential threats (democratic ideals and universal values). For fear of international counter-responses, the CCP appears reluctant to publicly acknowledge that its efforts to “move closer to the world’s center stage” and to “guide the reform” of the international order in a “fairer and more reasonable” direction are in reality an attempt to preempt and resist the transformative effects of liberalism and to make the world safer for its authoritarian model. Notwithstanding the sophisticated intellectual exercise and public campaign that claims that all China has in mind is the future peace and prosperity of mankind, the party’s existential obligation to perpetuate its rule is what primarily creates the imperative to alter the world in which it operates."
"Does Beijing intend to “rule the world”? Not entirely. Asserting its dominant position over a world where the influence of Western liberal democracies has been reduced to a minimum, and where a large portion of the globe resembles a Chinese sphere of influence, will suffice."
"At the National Propaganda and Ideology Work Conference in August 2013, Xi underlined that the “propaganda, ideological and cultural front” should “grasp the right to speak,” tell China’s stories, and spread China’s voice.""
***NOTE: Including from positions of influence within the US
"The CCP’s efforts to legitimize its absolute rule rest on an attempt to blur the demarcations that would otherwise estrange the party from China’s broader historical and cultural tradition. Its identity is increasingly based on an idiosyncratic amalgamation of Marxist-Leninist principles mixed with cherry-picked Confucian elements and implicit references to glorious dynasties of the past, something that may be called Sino-socialism."
***NOTE: Rewriting history and reappropriating language isn't unique to the recent American experience of statues being torn down, historical patriotic figures being discarded and the meaning of words like "freedom" and "democracy" being redefined to accommodate authoritarianism while denouncing the actual practices as dictatorial, i.e. CA Gov. Newsome declaring FL Gov. DeSantis a dictator for preserving freedom during the pandemic, Pres. Biden declaring MAGA Patriots "semi-Fascist."***
"In particular, the rejection of the universality of liberal democratic values, as envisioned and enacted by the current international order, has become the key element of China’s discourse power under Xi Jinping. The instrumentalization of Chinese cultural and historical traditions for political purposes is concomitant with a refutation of the West, which is portrayed as failing, dangerous, and chaotic. China’s achievements are presented as a validation that the development path chosen by the leadership is correct, viable, and efficient."
"For Han Zhen, a professor at Beijing Foreign Studies University, the current “systemic crisis” has proved the inferiority of the capitalist system, whereas the success of China’s approach to development and its “outstanding economic performance” present “West-centrism with a real challenge of historic significance.” The contest between the two models, including at the ideological level, is “self-evident.”"
***NOTE: When failing cities led by ideologues committed to "defunding the police" resulting in spikes in crime, homelessness, drug use, dependency, normalizing genital mutilation of minors and drag shows to toddlers is coordinated and intentionally facilitated by Marxist leaders it creates a self-fulfilling prophecy of a dangerous, chaotic and failing western liberal democratic system. A feature, not a flaw of these self-destructive policies.***
"Karl Marx believed that the role of philosophy was not only to understand the world but also to transform it. In a similar fashion, the CCP corrals Chinese experts in the humanities and social sciences and seeks to point them in a direction that is in line with its own political principles, thereby influencing the formulation of China’s foreign discourse power and vision for the world."
***NOTE: See The Science (TM) note above.***
"In addition, the party-state has traditionally put the work of “thinking circles, theoretical circles, and knowledge circles” under political tutelage, constraining their thoughts and expression in a variety of ways. Ideological control has markedly increased in recent years. When they do not conform to party orthodoxy, academics may find themselves banned from publishing, teaching, or promotion."
"Xi emphasized the political and strategic role “of the highest importance” that scholars have to play, noting that the purpose of their work as “advocates of advanced ideas, pioneers of academic research, leaders of social conduct, and staunch supporters of the party’s ruling” is to place China at the “leading edge of the world.” At a time when China is experiencing tremendous changes, scholars are expected not only to offer their expertise to inform and support CCP policymakers but also to contribute to theoretical innovations that build on China’s own practice and help attract global attention. Xi reminded scholars that “Marxism must always occupy the guiding position” in their deliberations, as it emphasizes “not only explaining the world but also changing it.” At the same time, he called them to accelerate the construction of a disciplinary field with “Chinese characteristics, style, and flair and of universal significance” that incorporates China’s “excellent culture,” “the most basic, profound, and lasting force.” Developing a Chinese system of social science discourse is necessary to “achieve the goal of a struggle that has lasted for two centuries and achieve the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.”
The development of distinctively Chinese social science theories is seen as integral to the party’s ideological and propaganda work and its soft appeal to the rest of the world. According to Xi, philosophy and social science are the “foundations that support the discourse system. Without our own philosophy and social science system, there will be no discourse power.” In this particular context, “theory” is understood as normative rather than scientific. Chinese scholars are not called to provide empirical, predictive, value-free theories but are asked to describe how the world system should be organized as a critique of the prevailing system’s faults and a validation of the party’s view."
***NOTE: Describes academia, medicine, and law in the US today, as well as cultural and industrial voices. No?***
"“Western constitutional democracy” and its appended principles of multiparty elections, the separation of powers, and an independent judiciary, among others, are essentially at odds with China’s system of government in which the party’s leadership is placed above everything else. The promotion of civil society (based on the idea that individual rights are paramount) and economic liberalism (relying on private property and markets to guide economic activity) contradicts the CCP’s dogma of tight socioeconomic control."
***NOTE: Uniparty? Political prisoners? Courts dispensing unequal justice?***
"This moment is defined by the conjunction of the current model’s many failures (such as democratic deficits, governance deficits, income gaps, populism, terrorism, and climate change) and the “unsustainability” of the United States’ “hegemonic game.” The remedy for the failures of Western civilization that the Chinese leadership would like to promote as the basis for reforming the international system draws on China’s own experience. “Every problem China has faced is a world-class problem,” and, therefore, every solution chosen by the Chinese government can become an inspiration for others."
"Calling for the Creation of a Community of Common Destiny
Xi Jinping has come close to candidly framing his vision for a new world order under China’s helm as a 21st-century version of the tianxia model. On multiple occasions, he has repeated his wish to see the world come together in harmony as one family under the same heaven (shijie datong tianxia yijia)."
"Politically, all countries should respect each other and conduct consultations on an equal footing in a common endeavor to promote democracy in international relations; economically, they should cooperate with each other, draw on each other’s strengths and work together to advance economic globalization in the direction of balanced development, shared benefits and win-win progress; culturally, they should learn from each other in the spirit of seeking common ground while shelving differences, respect the diversity of the world, and make joint efforts to advance human civilization; in the area of security, they should trust each other, strengthen cooperation, settle international disputes by peaceful means rather than by war and work together to safeguard peace and stability in the world; on environmental issues, they should assist and cooperate with each other in conservation efforts to take good care of the earth, the only home for human beings."
"China’s Vision for a New World Order: A Partial, Loose, and Malleable Hegemony
The only certainty that emerges is that, in this vision, the regnant power is China. Under the surface, the Chinese elites’ impatience is tangible: the “East is rising, and the West is subsiding; the New is rising while the Old is declining”; Western dominance is “unsustainable,” and the United States “cannot afford” to maintain its hegemony. Meanwhile, a “revolutionary change is brewing, profoundly reshaping the face of the world,” but the adjustments of the world order will bring “struggles” and “uncertainties.” Western countries, “accustomed to controlling the international discourse power will not only be unwilling to share with other countries but…also do their utmost to oppose and obstruct” the changes. Evidently, the “unprecedented changes” that are coming will bring China to the top of the world. Yet ambitions of power and domination cannot be publicly avowed. If the Chinese leadership wants to rally international support, it cannot come out and straightforwardly acknowledge that its main priority is to erode and replace the liberal norms and democratic governance rules that the CCP considers as threatening to its unrelenting rule and legitimacy. The leadership cannot blatantly assert that it envisions a world in which Western influence, soft and hard power, military presence, and moral authority have been pushed away and reduced to the margins. It cannot publicly describe what a world in which China has “moved closer to the center stage” exactly means.
Instead, with the help of scholars and public intellectuals, the party-state is carefully honing its discourse power by crafting concepts and proposals that sound benign and potentially appealing to a greater international audience. Who, indeed, would refuse to endorse the noble idea of building a common future for mankind? Or who would reject the prospect of global everlasting peace, prosperity, and security? There is only one catch: in Beijing’s world, perpetual peace will not, as in the democratic peace theory that lies at the heart of the prevailing liberal concept of international order, be born out of a belief in the primacy of individual freedom or the spread of liberal democratic principles and universal values. According to the party’s theorists, this order will be born out of a “new type of international relations,” with “win-win cooperation” and the concepts of “justice and benefit” as the core and based on the construction of a “network of partnerships” that can ultimately form a “community of common destiny.” If these terms ring hollow, it is probably because, as Xu Zhangrun writes, since the collapse of Communist ideology, the CCP has found itself with no real belief system, bereft of ideals and reduced to using threadbare formulations. But even if, as the Tsinghua University professor believes, the regime’s ideological heart is dead, its avid thirst for power provides enough vitality to make it pulse and want the rest of the world to beat in unison. Instead of leadership and hegemony, the CCP’s outward-facing discourse focuses on themes such as harmony and community. These are clearly discursive stratagems meant to avoid suspicion about the party’s ambitions, but they are not completely devoid of substance. One participant at the workshop on China’s vision for a new world order noted that Beijing’s choice of words reflects actual aspirations. The words and themes carefully selected by the official rhetoric draw a virtual map of the world as seen by Chinese elites. Instead of the liberal uniformity sought by the United States—individual liberty, free expression, economic liberalism, and democracy—the Chinese elites envisage a world where authoritarian regimes and the prominent role of the state are not stigmatized. To invalidate the assumption that prosperity can only be achieved with a democratic system of government, the CCP only needs to point to its own achievements.The “China solution” can become an appealing example for developing countries.
The new international order that the Chinese political elites seem to have in mind may be defined as a partial, loose, and malleable hegemony. It is partial because the vision seems to imply the existence of a sphere of influence, as opposed to an ambition to “rule the world.” Left unclear is the size and extent of the sphere of influence on which China would exert its power. This order is loose because the vision does not seem to imply direct or absolute control over foreign territories or governments. And it is malleable because the countries included under China’s hegemony do not seem to be strictly defined along geographic, cultural, or ideological lines. Immediate neighbors and far-flung countries, Asian and non-Asian powers, and democracies and autocracies could all be included, as long as they recognize and respect the primacy of Beijing’s authority and interests."
"Taken together, the various components of China’s diplomacy under Xi—the priority given to the creation of a foreign discourse power system, the community of common destiny, BRI, the global network of partnerships, and the quest for institutional power—point to a vision in which China’s leadership is exercised over large portions of the “global South,” a space that would be free from Western influence and largely purged of the core liberal democratic beliefs supported by the West. The new hierarchical system, in which China would be akin to a massive, dazzling star pulling smaller planets into its orbit without necessarily exerting direct control over them, would not be traced along precise geographic or ideological lines. Rather, it would be defined by the degree of deference and respect that those within China’s sphere would be willing to offer Beijing. To some extent, China’s assertion of its position as the center of this parallel system is already underway."
***NOTE: The World Economic Forum's Great Reset expresses this same goal. It seems as though a great many in the west share China's vision of the future. And are committed to making it our reality. No. It's not a joke. Or a conspiracy theory. They tell us the truth of it in their own words. We ignore them at our own peril.
America’s dominance is over. By 2030, we'll have a handful of global powers
Excellent contributions, thank you. The end of USA dominance and the emergence of a multi-polar world is not my concern, truly. The emergence of the Biosecurity Administrative State as the default socio-political model is. Likewise, the sudden collapse of America as empire would have brutal domestic implications. I agree fully with your remarks about some in the West -- our globalist elites. I am deeply concerned with the "Great Reset" and the WEF agenda, but do think China as making more progress in turning their vision into reality.
In regard to China and the Global South, the BRI, and China's dominance of the Green Energy and Technology markets, I do have some data breakdowns here at AX (along with dashboards elsewhere):
Thanks. That's a 65-page document I teased out excerpts I thought important enough to share here. With your more intimate understanding of China I'm sure you'll find much more of note included in it.
My concerns with the West's enabling of this emerging authoritarian world governance goes back many decades. And has bipartisan multinational fingerprints all over it. None more consequential than George HW Bush's. Considered CCP China's "greatest friend." His father, Prescott, a supporter of Fascism, authoritarianism,, Hitler's international banker.
The Clinton's approval of the Panama Canal port authority to CCP China control. Multiple shipyards and US ports like San Francisco under CCP China control. And CCP Chinese donor infiltration of Democratic Party.
Bush 45's surreptitious transfer of Middle East oil control of Iraq to CCP China, development of domestic surveillance technology systems, designations of US citizens as "domestic terrorists" and transformation of military from warfighters to occupation forces specialized in quelling rebellions.
Along with bipartisan multinational corporations without loyalty or commitment to constitutional individual liberty and freedom acting as government enforcers in public-private partnerships facilitated by bipartisan flood of antitrust waivers that killed American-centered competition in markets, amplifying CCP China's global power.
Constitutional freedom and liberty has its back up against the wall. In all Western liberal democracies. A Hitler-Stalin-esque pact between global Fascists and global Marxists exists. Who's lesson learned from history is don't break the pact until individual liberty and freedom is extinguished across the globe. Only then deciding which authoritarian model will prevail. Quite a pickle for deplorable bitter clingers, wouldn't you say?
The emergence of our biosecurity administrative state with the "transformation of military from warfighters to occupation forces specialized in quelling rebellions" seems well underway. Not everyone in the military is going along quietly with this, but Covid has provided great opportunity to purge the ranks.
In an earlier post, I quoted the outstanding Tom Burgis on Africa:
“Where once treaties signed at gunpoint dispossessed Africa’s inhabitants of their land, gold, and diamonds, today phalanxes of lawyers representing oil and mineral companies with annual revenues in the hundreds of billions of dollars impose miserly terms on African governments and employ tax dodges to bleed profit from destitute nations. In the place of the old empires are hidden networks of multinationals, middlemen, and African potentates. These networks fuse state and corporate power. They are aligned to no nation and belong instead to the transnational elites that have flourished in the era of globalization. Above all, they serve their own enrichment.”
The same players, corporations, and now established practices are being used against the USA and much of the EU. The "networks which fuse state and corporate power", "aligned to no nation and belong instead to the transnational elites," and "serve [only] their own enrichment." Had a 6-hour conversation last night with a friend from Portugal. Portugal has an entire diaspora generation -- economic refugees. Due to EU policies, EU wealth disparities, and more. I had no idea it was so bad.
It is a Leviathan. A Goliath. It will be David's armed with slingshots who bring down the giant.
This is a spiritual war that will take divine intervention for humanity to prevail. There are stories handed down in Scripture for us to find guidance. Stories like Mordechai the Righteous, who helped awaken the Jews to the peril they faced, first awakening the minds of the children to embrace the teachings of Torah and give glory to and worship God.
God gives us free will, choice. We can worship him and obey his rules. Or worship institutions of man and obey man's laws. He knows man's laws are far worse and harsher than his. Our choice.
Our action plan must include a big spiritual component. A return to faith and devotion to our Creator. Spreading knowledge of our predicament, the depravity of fallen men in positions of far too much power, unworthy of our trust, placing our trust in only God, using our own discernment in applying natural law to our governance, rejecting positive law, man's cruel law.
We share knowledge and faith and appeal to our shared humanity within our families, friends, colleagues and communities. And with our local leaders. Millions of beacons of light for the lost souls among us to find their way home.
Having contemplated the severity of the threat I do not see a better plan. We are not in control. Thing is, we never have been. Control is an illusion. Man's self-deception. God is and always has been in control, even the most powerful evil men serve his purpose: to wake us up so we return to God's loving Grace. The sooner we do the sooner our shared existence improves.
US Grand Jury petition, deadline Monday, Sept 12th - https://www.beyondthecon.com/ - Please sign / share
Alleging fraud via death certificates - https://coquindechien.substack.com/p/patriot-virtue
https://etana.substack.com/p/demanding-accountability
Thank you, Ellen. We need accountability for the Covid debacle. Whatever we can get.
This research was published just as the pandemic fear and control began to take over the world. I find it very informative. Relates to your post, fills in many blanks, answers many questions.
China's Vision for a New World Order
The National Bureau of Asian Research, January, 2020
https://www.nbr.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/publications/sr83_chinasvision_jan2020.pdf
"POLICY IMPLICATIONS
• The Chinese leadership’s efforts to increase China’s discourse power should not be dismissed or misconstrued as mere propaganda or empty slogans. Rather, they should be seen as evidence of the leadership’s determination to alter the norms that underpin existing institutions and put in place the building blocks of a new international system coveted by the Chinese Communist Party.
• The Chinese leadership’s critique of the existing international order reveals its unswerving objection to the values on which this order has been built. At stake is not only the predominant position of the U.S. in the current system but more importantly the potential erosion of fundamental human rights, freedom of thought and expression, and self-government around the world."
"For fear of fueling potential counter-responses to its ambitions and international suspicions about its aspirations—often shorthanded in Chinese discourse with the “so-called China threat theory” label (suowei Zhongguo weixielun)—the party-state has for decades mobilized large-scale propaganda efforts and global influence campaigns to dispel and discredit any hint at the possibility that China’s rise might negatively affect the international system."
"If the National Planning Office of Philosophy and Social Sciences deems their work worthy of financial support, this fact indicates that their ideas are taken seriously within the system."
***NOTE: Both the US and UK established Social and Behavioral Science Teams in the early 2010's, called "Nudge Units." Which has been The Science (TM) of the pandemic restrictions on civil liberties and freedom (masking, social distancing, quarantines, lockdowns, vax mandates), "The Science (TM) of totalitarianism." Not a coincidence.
https://behavioralscientist.org/executive-order-formally-establishes-us-nudge-unit/
https://web.archive.org/web/20210519003131/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/14/scientists-admit-totalitarian-use-fear-control-behaviour-covid/ ***
"In the Chinese leadership’s eyes, shaping the world is essentially about making sure that the international system accommodates the CCP’s ambitions for power as well as its anxieties about survival. Beijing’s vision for a new international order is an outward extension of what the party wants to secure (its perpetual rule and unchallenged power) and what it rejects as existential threats (democratic ideals and universal values). For fear of international counter-responses, the CCP appears reluctant to publicly acknowledge that its efforts to “move closer to the world’s center stage” and to “guide the reform” of the international order in a “fairer and more reasonable” direction are in reality an attempt to preempt and resist the transformative effects of liberalism and to make the world safer for its authoritarian model. Notwithstanding the sophisticated intellectual exercise and public campaign that claims that all China has in mind is the future peace and prosperity of mankind, the party’s existential obligation to perpetuate its rule is what primarily creates the imperative to alter the world in which it operates."
"Does Beijing intend to “rule the world”? Not entirely. Asserting its dominant position over a world where the influence of Western liberal democracies has been reduced to a minimum, and where a large portion of the globe resembles a Chinese sphere of influence, will suffice."
"At the National Propaganda and Ideology Work Conference in August 2013, Xi underlined that the “propaganda, ideological and cultural front” should “grasp the right to speak,” tell China’s stories, and spread China’s voice.""
***NOTE: Including from positions of influence within the US
https://thenationalpulse.com/2021/03/04/politifact-founder-chinese-communist-group/ ***
"The CCP’s efforts to legitimize its absolute rule rest on an attempt to blur the demarcations that would otherwise estrange the party from China’s broader historical and cultural tradition. Its identity is increasingly based on an idiosyncratic amalgamation of Marxist-Leninist principles mixed with cherry-picked Confucian elements and implicit references to glorious dynasties of the past, something that may be called Sino-socialism."
***NOTE: Rewriting history and reappropriating language isn't unique to the recent American experience of statues being torn down, historical patriotic figures being discarded and the meaning of words like "freedom" and "democracy" being redefined to accommodate authoritarianism while denouncing the actual practices as dictatorial, i.e. CA Gov. Newsome declaring FL Gov. DeSantis a dictator for preserving freedom during the pandemic, Pres. Biden declaring MAGA Patriots "semi-Fascist."***
"In particular, the rejection of the universality of liberal democratic values, as envisioned and enacted by the current international order, has become the key element of China’s discourse power under Xi Jinping. The instrumentalization of Chinese cultural and historical traditions for political purposes is concomitant with a refutation of the West, which is portrayed as failing, dangerous, and chaotic. China’s achievements are presented as a validation that the development path chosen by the leadership is correct, viable, and efficient."
"For Han Zhen, a professor at Beijing Foreign Studies University, the current “systemic crisis” has proved the inferiority of the capitalist system, whereas the success of China’s approach to development and its “outstanding economic performance” present “West-centrism with a real challenge of historic significance.” The contest between the two models, including at the ideological level, is “self-evident.”"
***NOTE: When failing cities led by ideologues committed to "defunding the police" resulting in spikes in crime, homelessness, drug use, dependency, normalizing genital mutilation of minors and drag shows to toddlers is coordinated and intentionally facilitated by Marxist leaders it creates a self-fulfilling prophecy of a dangerous, chaotic and failing western liberal democratic system. A feature, not a flaw of these self-destructive policies.***
"Karl Marx believed that the role of philosophy was not only to understand the world but also to transform it. In a similar fashion, the CCP corrals Chinese experts in the humanities and social sciences and seeks to point them in a direction that is in line with its own political principles, thereby influencing the formulation of China’s foreign discourse power and vision for the world."
***NOTE: See The Science (TM) note above.***
"In addition, the party-state has traditionally put the work of “thinking circles, theoretical circles, and knowledge circles” under political tutelage, constraining their thoughts and expression in a variety of ways. Ideological control has markedly increased in recent years. When they do not conform to party orthodoxy, academics may find themselves banned from publishing, teaching, or promotion."
"Xi emphasized the political and strategic role “of the highest importance” that scholars have to play, noting that the purpose of their work as “advocates of advanced ideas, pioneers of academic research, leaders of social conduct, and staunch supporters of the party’s ruling” is to place China at the “leading edge of the world.” At a time when China is experiencing tremendous changes, scholars are expected not only to offer their expertise to inform and support CCP policymakers but also to contribute to theoretical innovations that build on China’s own practice and help attract global attention. Xi reminded scholars that “Marxism must always occupy the guiding position” in their deliberations, as it emphasizes “not only explaining the world but also changing it.” At the same time, he called them to accelerate the construction of a disciplinary field with “Chinese characteristics, style, and flair and of universal significance” that incorporates China’s “excellent culture,” “the most basic, profound, and lasting force.” Developing a Chinese system of social science discourse is necessary to “achieve the goal of a struggle that has lasted for two centuries and achieve the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.”
The development of distinctively Chinese social science theories is seen as integral to the party’s ideological and propaganda work and its soft appeal to the rest of the world. According to Xi, philosophy and social science are the “foundations that support the discourse system. Without our own philosophy and social science system, there will be no discourse power.” In this particular context, “theory” is understood as normative rather than scientific. Chinese scholars are not called to provide empirical, predictive, value-free theories but are asked to describe how the world system should be organized as a critique of the prevailing system’s faults and a validation of the party’s view."
***NOTE: Describes academia, medicine, and law in the US today, as well as cultural and industrial voices. No?***
(1 of 2)
(2 of 2)
"“Western constitutional democracy” and its appended principles of multiparty elections, the separation of powers, and an independent judiciary, among others, are essentially at odds with China’s system of government in which the party’s leadership is placed above everything else. The promotion of civil society (based on the idea that individual rights are paramount) and economic liberalism (relying on private property and markets to guide economic activity) contradicts the CCP’s dogma of tight socioeconomic control."
***NOTE: Uniparty? Political prisoners? Courts dispensing unequal justice?***
"This moment is defined by the conjunction of the current model’s many failures (such as democratic deficits, governance deficits, income gaps, populism, terrorism, and climate change) and the “unsustainability” of the United States’ “hegemonic game.” The remedy for the failures of Western civilization that the Chinese leadership would like to promote as the basis for reforming the international system draws on China’s own experience. “Every problem China has faced is a world-class problem,” and, therefore, every solution chosen by the Chinese government can become an inspiration for others."
"Calling for the Creation of a Community of Common Destiny
Xi Jinping has come close to candidly framing his vision for a new world order under China’s helm as a 21st-century version of the tianxia model. On multiple occasions, he has repeated his wish to see the world come together in harmony as one family under the same heaven (shijie datong tianxia yijia)."
"Politically, all countries should respect each other and conduct consultations on an equal footing in a common endeavor to promote democracy in international relations; economically, they should cooperate with each other, draw on each other’s strengths and work together to advance economic globalization in the direction of balanced development, shared benefits and win-win progress; culturally, they should learn from each other in the spirit of seeking common ground while shelving differences, respect the diversity of the world, and make joint efforts to advance human civilization; in the area of security, they should trust each other, strengthen cooperation, settle international disputes by peaceful means rather than by war and work together to safeguard peace and stability in the world; on environmental issues, they should assist and cooperate with each other in conservation efforts to take good care of the earth, the only home for human beings."
"China’s Vision for a New World Order: A Partial, Loose, and Malleable Hegemony
The only certainty that emerges is that, in this vision, the regnant power is China. Under the surface, the Chinese elites’ impatience is tangible: the “East is rising, and the West is subsiding; the New is rising while the Old is declining”; Western dominance is “unsustainable,” and the United States “cannot afford” to maintain its hegemony. Meanwhile, a “revolutionary change is brewing, profoundly reshaping the face of the world,” but the adjustments of the world order will bring “struggles” and “uncertainties.” Western countries, “accustomed to controlling the international discourse power will not only be unwilling to share with other countries but…also do their utmost to oppose and obstruct” the changes. Evidently, the “unprecedented changes” that are coming will bring China to the top of the world. Yet ambitions of power and domination cannot be publicly avowed. If the Chinese leadership wants to rally international support, it cannot come out and straightforwardly acknowledge that its main priority is to erode and replace the liberal norms and democratic governance rules that the CCP considers as threatening to its unrelenting rule and legitimacy. The leadership cannot blatantly assert that it envisions a world in which Western influence, soft and hard power, military presence, and moral authority have been pushed away and reduced to the margins. It cannot publicly describe what a world in which China has “moved closer to the center stage” exactly means.
Instead, with the help of scholars and public intellectuals, the party-state is carefully honing its discourse power by crafting concepts and proposals that sound benign and potentially appealing to a greater international audience. Who, indeed, would refuse to endorse the noble idea of building a common future for mankind? Or who would reject the prospect of global everlasting peace, prosperity, and security? There is only one catch: in Beijing’s world, perpetual peace will not, as in the democratic peace theory that lies at the heart of the prevailing liberal concept of international order, be born out of a belief in the primacy of individual freedom or the spread of liberal democratic principles and universal values. According to the party’s theorists, this order will be born out of a “new type of international relations,” with “win-win cooperation” and the concepts of “justice and benefit” as the core and based on the construction of a “network of partnerships” that can ultimately form a “community of common destiny.” If these terms ring hollow, it is probably because, as Xu Zhangrun writes, since the collapse of Communist ideology, the CCP has found itself with no real belief system, bereft of ideals and reduced to using threadbare formulations. But even if, as the Tsinghua University professor believes, the regime’s ideological heart is dead, its avid thirst for power provides enough vitality to make it pulse and want the rest of the world to beat in unison. Instead of leadership and hegemony, the CCP’s outward-facing discourse focuses on themes such as harmony and community. These are clearly discursive stratagems meant to avoid suspicion about the party’s ambitions, but they are not completely devoid of substance. One participant at the workshop on China’s vision for a new world order noted that Beijing’s choice of words reflects actual aspirations. The words and themes carefully selected by the official rhetoric draw a virtual map of the world as seen by Chinese elites. Instead of the liberal uniformity sought by the United States—individual liberty, free expression, economic liberalism, and democracy—the Chinese elites envisage a world where authoritarian regimes and the prominent role of the state are not stigmatized. To invalidate the assumption that prosperity can only be achieved with a democratic system of government, the CCP only needs to point to its own achievements.The “China solution” can become an appealing example for developing countries.
The new international order that the Chinese political elites seem to have in mind may be defined as a partial, loose, and malleable hegemony. It is partial because the vision seems to imply the existence of a sphere of influence, as opposed to an ambition to “rule the world.” Left unclear is the size and extent of the sphere of influence on which China would exert its power. This order is loose because the vision does not seem to imply direct or absolute control over foreign territories or governments. And it is malleable because the countries included under China’s hegemony do not seem to be strictly defined along geographic, cultural, or ideological lines. Immediate neighbors and far-flung countries, Asian and non-Asian powers, and democracies and autocracies could all be included, as long as they recognize and respect the primacy of Beijing’s authority and interests."
"Taken together, the various components of China’s diplomacy under Xi—the priority given to the creation of a foreign discourse power system, the community of common destiny, BRI, the global network of partnerships, and the quest for institutional power—point to a vision in which China’s leadership is exercised over large portions of the “global South,” a space that would be free from Western influence and largely purged of the core liberal democratic beliefs supported by the West. The new hierarchical system, in which China would be akin to a massive, dazzling star pulling smaller planets into its orbit without necessarily exerting direct control over them, would not be traced along precise geographic or ideological lines. Rather, it would be defined by the degree of deference and respect that those within China’s sphere would be willing to offer Beijing. To some extent, China’s assertion of its position as the center of this parallel system is already underway."
***NOTE: The World Economic Forum's Great Reset expresses this same goal. It seems as though a great many in the west share China's vision of the future. And are committed to making it our reality. No. It's not a joke. Or a conspiracy theory. They tell us the truth of it in their own words. We ignore them at our own peril.
America’s dominance is over. By 2030, we'll have a handful of global powers
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/america-s-dominance-is-over/ ***
Excellent contributions, thank you. The end of USA dominance and the emergence of a multi-polar world is not my concern, truly. The emergence of the Biosecurity Administrative State as the default socio-political model is. Likewise, the sudden collapse of America as empire would have brutal domestic implications. I agree fully with your remarks about some in the West -- our globalist elites. I am deeply concerned with the "Great Reset" and the WEF agenda, but do think China as making more progress in turning their vision into reality.
In regard to China and the Global South, the BRI, and China's dominance of the Green Energy and Technology markets, I do have some data breakdowns here at AX (along with dashboards elsewhere):
Buying the Copper Mountain was only the Beginning: China and South America @ https://americanexile.substack.com/p/buying-the-copper-mountain-was-only
Chinese International Investment: Energy and Metals Sectors @ https://americanexile.substack.com/p/chinese-international-investment
Chinese Investment in Africa @ https://americanexile.substack.com/p/chinese-investment-in-africa
Thank you again for your detailed and helpful contributions to a vital discussion.
This is where we are headed without a dramatic reversal of current power dynamics:
"The global pandemic revealed an opportunity for technological surveillance" tyranny. WEF Fascist/CCP Marxist China style.
$16.1 billion invested in a social credit system being deployed across the US and the world by 2026...that's just 3.5 years from now.
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20211223005270/en/
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/worldwide-social-credit-industry-infrastructure-131500901.html
Companies investing:
ACTi
Alibaba
Amazon
Analog Devices
Apple
Aratek
Axis
Baidu
Bosch Security Systems
Broadcom Limited (Avago)
Canon
China Rapid Finance
Cisco
Deep Vision AI
Facebook
Google
Honeywell
IBM
Infineon Technologies
Knightscope
Logitech
NEC
Netradyne
Neurotechnology
NEXT Biometrics
NVidia Corporation
NXM Semiconductors
Omron Corporation
Panasonic
Points
Robert Bosch GmbH
Samsung
Sony
STMicroelectronics
Tencent
Texas Instruments
Toshiba
Thanks. That's a 65-page document I teased out excerpts I thought important enough to share here. With your more intimate understanding of China I'm sure you'll find much more of note included in it.
My concerns with the West's enabling of this emerging authoritarian world governance goes back many decades. And has bipartisan multinational fingerprints all over it. None more consequential than George HW Bush's. Considered CCP China's "greatest friend." His father, Prescott, a supporter of Fascism, authoritarianism,, Hitler's international banker.
The Clinton's approval of the Panama Canal port authority to CCP China control. Multiple shipyards and US ports like San Francisco under CCP China control. And CCP Chinese donor infiltration of Democratic Party.
Bush 45's surreptitious transfer of Middle East oil control of Iraq to CCP China, development of domestic surveillance technology systems, designations of US citizens as "domestic terrorists" and transformation of military from warfighters to occupation forces specialized in quelling rebellions.
Along with bipartisan multinational corporations without loyalty or commitment to constitutional individual liberty and freedom acting as government enforcers in public-private partnerships facilitated by bipartisan flood of antitrust waivers that killed American-centered competition in markets, amplifying CCP China's global power.
Constitutional freedom and liberty has its back up against the wall. In all Western liberal democracies. A Hitler-Stalin-esque pact between global Fascists and global Marxists exists. Who's lesson learned from history is don't break the pact until individual liberty and freedom is extinguished across the globe. Only then deciding which authoritarian model will prevail. Quite a pickle for deplorable bitter clingers, wouldn't you say?
The emergence of our biosecurity administrative state with the "transformation of military from warfighters to occupation forces specialized in quelling rebellions" seems well underway. Not everyone in the military is going along quietly with this, but Covid has provided great opportunity to purge the ranks.
In an earlier post, I quoted the outstanding Tom Burgis on Africa:
“Where once treaties signed at gunpoint dispossessed Africa’s inhabitants of their land, gold, and diamonds, today phalanxes of lawyers representing oil and mineral companies with annual revenues in the hundreds of billions of dollars impose miserly terms on African governments and employ tax dodges to bleed profit from destitute nations. In the place of the old empires are hidden networks of multinationals, middlemen, and African potentates. These networks fuse state and corporate power. They are aligned to no nation and belong instead to the transnational elites that have flourished in the era of globalization. Above all, they serve their own enrichment.”
The same players, corporations, and now established practices are being used against the USA and much of the EU. The "networks which fuse state and corporate power", "aligned to no nation and belong instead to the transnational elites," and "serve [only] their own enrichment." Had a 6-hour conversation last night with a friend from Portugal. Portugal has an entire diaspora generation -- economic refugees. Due to EU policies, EU wealth disparities, and more. I had no idea it was so bad.
The emergence of Neo-Feudalism is real. The threat to "Constitutional freedom and liberty" as you phrase it, also severe. @ https://americanexile.substack.com/p/six-notes-on-neo-feudalism
Wish I could offer some clear answers or an action plan. Still processing it all.
It is a Leviathan. A Goliath. It will be David's armed with slingshots who bring down the giant.
This is a spiritual war that will take divine intervention for humanity to prevail. There are stories handed down in Scripture for us to find guidance. Stories like Mordechai the Righteous, who helped awaken the Jews to the peril they faced, first awakening the minds of the children to embrace the teachings of Torah and give glory to and worship God.
God gives us free will, choice. We can worship him and obey his rules. Or worship institutions of man and obey man's laws. He knows man's laws are far worse and harsher than his. Our choice.
Our action plan must include a big spiritual component. A return to faith and devotion to our Creator. Spreading knowledge of our predicament, the depravity of fallen men in positions of far too much power, unworthy of our trust, placing our trust in only God, using our own discernment in applying natural law to our governance, rejecting positive law, man's cruel law.
We share knowledge and faith and appeal to our shared humanity within our families, friends, colleagues and communities. And with our local leaders. Millions of beacons of light for the lost souls among us to find their way home.
Having contemplated the severity of the threat I do not see a better plan. We are not in control. Thing is, we never have been. Control is an illusion. Man's self-deception. God is and always has been in control, even the most powerful evil men serve his purpose: to wake us up so we return to God's loving Grace. The sooner we do the sooner our shared existence improves.
There are simple and concrete things that we can do *today* to fight --
https://fatrabbitiron.substack.com/p/secede-privacy-badger
https://fatrabbitiron.substack.com/p/secede-social-media
https://fatrabbitiron.substack.com/p/secede-home-gym
https://fatrabbitiron.substack.com/p/secede-cash
Yes. Nailed it.