Tag: China

By on

For those still wondering why Trump got elected, look no further than the news that a lab leak was the likely cause of COVID19. Liberals and Democrats greeted this seemingly bombshell revelation with a sang froid that borders on indifference.

Now things would be different for me if the government scientists, at the time, were open to the possibility of lab leak being a possible explanation but they weren’t. They vehemently denied the possibility of a lab leak and accused any one who suggested it of being a racist. There is a big difference between an I don’t know and a they are wrong and shouldn’t be spreading such nonsense.

It is a big problem and the Left is ignoring it as if it never happened. Like if we don’t talk about it, it will somehow go away. Why would Trump and his buddies drop such a good example of government malfeasance? These people are not idiots. They also seem to have their pulse on a large segment of the American people. So I guess underestimating Trump and the wreckers will go on for the foreseeable future.

This is the only conclusion you can have when you consider:

  1. Trump was right about something very important. He claims that Dr. Fauci and the government scientists were lying about COVID and, it turns out, he was correct, at least about the lab leak theory. Yes there is still a low confidence that a lab leak is the culprit but it is now considered the most likely explanation of all the known possibilities. This isn’t what the government was saying in 2020. They were saying a Lab leak couldn’t be responsible and people who claim that a lab leak was responsible are racists. Trump has every right to gloat.
  2. It gives credence to every new crackpot theory that comes down the pike. All the crackpot has to say is well they lied about the lab leak theory. How do your respond to that? They are correct which is really bad news because too many people already listen to these crackpots. Now the voters have evidence that the crackpots are right. This is why the truth is important when dealing with people in a democracy. How does it help your cause to lie today when people will eventually discover you are in fact a liar?
  3. Belief in Government is already painfully low. This admission confirms every bad thing that the anti-government types claim our government does. If the Government wanted to momentarily placate the Chinese government while they got more information, I get it. This is a completely reasonable position. Withholding information, however, is different from a lie. The government could have said, and rightfully so, that they just don’t have enough information to determine the source of COVID and they are keeping an open mind. I can live with that. But no they aggressively denied any possibility of a lab leak. This turned into an overkill involving character assassination and dissembling. This was wrong especially since many of these scientists knew that a lab leak was the likely cause.
  4. Finally, it is an incredibly stupid lie to tell. If many scientists believed that a lab leak was responsible for COVID then this information was destined for revelation. Someone eventually was going to spill the beans. This should have been obvious as soon as scientists began sharing their suspicions with other scientists. So why lie in the first place? To keep the Chinese happy? Why? The Chinese stopped co-operating with UN officials fairly early in the crisis. Once this occurred what possible benefit could come from keeping the Chinese happy? But everybody in the know just kept their mouths shut. They may know a lot about biology but they are crap at public relations. They have damaged their reputation for being trustworthy. Why would the world believe these people when they announce the next pandemic?

This bothers me personally. I put my trust in these people because I saw no reason for them to lie and they knew more about viruses. Boy was I wrong. It is an unforced error that has done great harm to Liberalism, Science and Government — pillars of our democracy that are already under siege.

And, yes, I hold people on the Left to a higher standard which makes this so much more disappointing. I think democracy and liberalism are the best route to take for a better world. It hurts when my own side fucks up so royally. The good news is that you can’t say you don’t understand why some people voted for Trump. They believed they were being lied to and it turns out, in this case, they were right.

By on

Tom Cotton repeatedly asked TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew whether he was Chinese and/or a Chinese Commie. Chew should be complimented for his remarkable restraint when faced with such monumental stupidity and/or rudeness. Mr. Chew told Cotten numerous times that he was from Singapore, not China and not a Communist.

When someone repeatedly asks something, there is a suspicion that the Senator is setting a trap for the person. Giving his prey several chances to admit the truth and when he doesn’t, springing into action with evidence that Chew was both Chinese and a Commie. This did not happen, so all Cotton discovered was that Chew was from Singapore and not a Communist. All facts that were known before Chew sat down for the hearing.  

I first thought what an idiot but, after viewing the video, I realized Cotton was trying to connect Chew and TikTok to China and Communism without having to actually provide any facts that proves his point. Cotton will say he was just asking questions, that he in no way was saying that Chew was a Chinese Communist, he was just verifying whether this was indeed true. So without actually saying that Chew was a Chinese Commie, Cotton gets to paint Chew as a Chinese Communist because why would a US Senator ask about that unless Chew was a Chinese Commie. Cotton’s mission accomplished.

Cotton then highlighted how Chew’s views on Chinese political issues didn’t match Cotton’s which then, especially if the person is Asian, makes that person a potential Chinese Commie even if that person is a Singaporean businessman. Now I am not saying that Chew’s position are particularly brave but remember he is a businessman doing business with China. He needs to be careful how he addresses these issues. I doubt that Chew’s position on these issues are that different from any other Western business person working in China. Indeed, I would expect that Cotton would pursue this line of questioning anytime he had an opportunity to question someone.

So what did we learn from Cotton’s aggressive grilling of Chew — that Chew is not a Chinese Communist and the Chinese government is a dictatorship that Chew won’t criticize in a manner that would make Cotton happy. None of this is exactly new information but thank you Sen Cotton for confirming what we already knew while also subtly undermining Chew’s reputation in the process.

This is sad because there were legitimate questions about China and TikTok. Maybe Cotton’s colleagues addressed them with Chew in their questioning. But, of course, none of that was reported on because the exciting news was Cotton trying to get Chew to admit being a Chinese Commie.

I can’t help but to be reminded of Joe McCarthy badgering his witnesses about being Commies. For most Americans this is a bad look but, unfortunately, for ambitious Republicans it is a way to get seen by the constituencies that matter in the GOP. They want to see people who will take on the Chinese Communists head on so Cotton did everything he needed to show them he is their man and that is all that matters.

By on

I recently saw a film clip from last year of Bill Maher comparing the U.S and China. Here is the link: https://www.thewrap.com/bill-maher-china-dominating-us/ China, of course, comes out on top. Maher’s comparison was akin to the praise that European fans of Mussolini gave “At least the trains run on time.” You see, the Chinese are getting things done while the US is mired in trivial disputes. Well, yeah thats what happens when you have a democracy. Democracies are messy businesses because democracies care about their people and have to hear from them before making a move. In China some autocrat makes a decision. Nobody gets to disagree or question it. The Chinese just do what they are told.

Maher did suggest that there might be some middle way between our present chaotic and efficient democracy and the Chinese dictatorship. But what is that middle way? It would have been helpful if Maher had chosen a democracy that is getting things done instead of a dictatorship that is getting things done. With a democracy I could see if he had something to say and an idea of how to make things better. Instead he raves about China. Yes, China. The China that locks people into their apartment blocks, the China that uses Uyghurs as slave labor, the China that is shutting down democracy in Hong Kong, the China that is threatening democratic Taiwan, the China that builds cities where no one wants to live? That is, indeed, the China Maher is talking about.

What’s really frustrating is that I keep hearing the similar comments from a lot of smart people. Particularly, since the reason they are giving up is they believe that the other half of the country are numbskulls undeserving of democracy. They are not going to waste their time persuading idiots to change their minds. This willingness to forego democratic institutions for dictatorial edicts because I am right is troubling. It is as simple as that — I am right and they are wrong. Which is all good and well as long as the dictator agrees with you, but what if he doesn’t.

Another argument is that our democracy isn’t really a perfect democracy. A minority has taken hold of our institutions through antidemocratic processes ( the Electoral College, the Senate, gerrymandering, the filibuster) and that the only way to change them is through dictatorial edict. I agree that the present system is unfair but it is still the system. A system that is difficult to change. Next to impossible to change unless your party elects a President, controls the House, has a super-majority in the Senate, controls a super-majority of the individual states legislatures, and has a working majority on the Supreme Court. And then, and only then, can you think about making big changes to the rules. And even if you have control of all of these institutions, even then, it will be really difficult to get all the changes you want enacted.

So barring a revolution, there is no way a lot of these processes are going to change soon. I hear those mutterers who believe that maybe a revolution is in order here, at least until we can change to a fairer system. Revolutions are bloody and acrimonious and, given the divisions in this country, comes with very real difficulties that does real harm to good people on both sides of the divide. You may think you want a civil war but you really don’t and, unlike the last civil war, there will be two sides who could possess nuclear weapons. Think about it. Who gets the nuclear weapons in this divorce? It may depend on where those warheads are located.

So let’s stop talking about revolution and dictatorships and support democratic institutions because even unfair ones are better than dictatorships. A good example of the benefit of democratic institutions is the storming of the capital on January 6. The rebels thought they could stop the process and change the result of an election. Much to the dismay of the rebels, possessing the capital building, only delayed the process. Enough good people at various points did the right thing and saved us. Keep in the mind this wasn’t one person acting heroically. It was many different people seeing what the right thing to do was and behaving responsibly. A lot of people, with varying degrees of power, following the rule of law, made the decisions for us. This is the biggest strength of democracy. We all play a part and, if change comes, the matter has gone through a lot of duplicate, chaotic and often unnecessary processes but the people have had their say.

Can our democracy be better? Undoubtedly. If Maher has any suggestions on how to make these changes through democratic means, I am all ears. But China is neither a fair comparison nor particularly relevant. China is not a democracy and we can glean little from studying their processes. That they can put up a building overnight is neither something to value nor emulate if it came about from the whim of one person.

This leaves us with a difficult and a messy bunch of often unfair democratic institutions that we need to plow through in order to make changes. Democracy is extremely hard work and, if you are looking for quick changes, it is likely to meet with failure more often than not. Democracy is neither efficient nor particularly fast. It is certainly messy but in the end it is always better than a dictatorship. And I mean always.

By on

I attach this link for your perusal: https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trump-says-us-should-just-mark-its-planes-with-chinese-flag-and-bomb-russia

Every time a Republican complains about Biden being too old and weak to hold his position, I stop and think: would I make the same decision today. After thinking about it for a second and a half, I come back with a resounding yes. When I read that Trump thinks the American military should disguise our planes like Chinese planes and then bomb the Russians you know that you are definitely better off with Slow Joe.

I don’t know where to begin there is so much wrong with what Mr. Trump is saying. But I will put this one out first: Who would believe that the Chinese would bomb the Russians? I didn’t know that there was that much animosity between the two that would warrant an attack. Why would the Chinese suddenly and without provocation attack the Russians? Wouldn’t this cause someone in the Russian government to think something is a bit fishy.

Modern technology. Radar would point fingers in the right direction and then, fairly quickly, the Russians would, through the other wonders of modern technology, figure out who the real culprit was. So we would move from one nuclear power a little pissed at us but nowhere near mad enough to go nuclear to two nuclear powers really pissed at us and more than willing to press the nuclear button.

Nuclear fallout. Mr. Trump thinks it is a good idea to provoke the Chinese and the Russians into a shooting nuclear war. Yes, I can see that he might experience a small cathartic thrill of eliminating two rivals in one swoop but the rest of us would suffer from the radioactive material blowing across Europe and Asia. And we aren’t talking Chernobyl levels, we are talking a nuclear fallout from two well armed nuclear powers. It won’t be pretty for anyone.

Ethical. The Chinese government is evil. But we are risking the Russians launching nuclear warheads on the Chinese people. Millions of innocent people could die based on our trickery.

More ethical. If we bomb a country, and by doing it, putting the whole world in danger — we need to have the balls to admit it. Though I don’t think it is wise, given the present circumstances, I can see a case for bombing the Russians. They are behaving like a bunch of assholes and, if Putin didn’t have nuclear arms, the Russians would be facing more than just sanctions right now. A country of our size and stature needs to come clean when we use our power in war. We need to show we have nothing to hide and we had good reasons.

One more ethical consideration. Besides the whole world is watching. Someone somewhere will figure it out. Until they do, good people will have to lie to protect the lie. And, what happens when someone can prove it was a lie? It is lie upon lie upon lie. Not all people are as comfortable with lying as Mr. Trump and it is terrible to needlessly put them in that position of having to lie.

This man was our president.

So, when some nitwit says Biden voters need to apologize for our choice, I say make me. Biden was not my first choice, Hell, he wasn’t even my one hundredth choice, but I can say I am happy with my vote. Joe may be slow but, at least, he isn’t an unprincipled idiot.