Trump fell a few dots shy of declaring all out war against China in his State of the Union address. He spoke kindly of China, then brought back Cold War era talk of “defeating Communism”. He also said he wanted China to have to play by the same rules as Russia and the US where nuclear missiles are concerned. The Chinese won’t like that because they genuinely believe they are better than everyone else.
China’s ancient, recently best-kept-secret, aspiration of saturating the world with the “Han” bloodline is in full swing. The recent spotlight has been the Han migration that threatens to dilute and eventually eliminate Uyghurs from the Xinjiang Uyghur “autonomous region” in China—one of many “provinces under protest” that reject forced assimilation into China’s bossy political ideology—an ideology Trump threatened in announcing his goal that China come down to the lowly level of having to play by the same rules as everyone else.
Then, there was military defense. Trump’s speech was patriotic. He celebrated “American exceptionalism” and the US’s role in helping save people in other countries from tyranny. Some call it a “messiah complex”. Some call it “American charity”. Whatever it was, Trump stirred the hearts of Americans to remember their roots of militarily helping those in need, announcing massive military investment, and reviving America’s old war on Communism.
The US is already preparing for war with China—in the old fashioned, soft, “humble” way, according to its Christendom roots of Chivalry. Without the pomp and parade, China’s imperialistic culture may not even notice. But, war drums are sounding on the horizon. Trump’s trade talks are either an irritant or a stall tactic—probably both.
If the border wall dispute goes to a point of emergency, there would be implications. How deeply the administration and Congress will want to pursue those implications is a question to itself, with a likely answer of, “Not far.” But, the implications will remain.
Declaring a national emergency at the border is basically a declaration of being invaded by a civilian army. Like any army, this army also has a purpose and a moral cause they think to be right and fair. What invading army doesn’t? But, it would be an invading army of some kind or another because that’s what Constitutional powers the president would need to use to declare the emergency: repel against invasion.
The Constitutional language here compels Congress to act. If Trump were to declare an emergency to deal with the border situation—then a Federal judge stopped him—that judge would be just as implicated as Congress.
The implication?—Conspiracy with the enemy.
If an invasion can be stopped, but won’t be stopped by Congress or a judge, then they are conspirators with that invasion. This is because they are Constitutionally required to stop any force from invading, not only a deputized army sanctioned by a recognized state.
Trump might not be able to do much. Presidents can’t impeach anyone and members of Congress don’t answer for anything they do as elected officials to anyone except the electorate. He might be able to fire the Federal judge, but that won’t achieve anything because another treacherous scoundrel is sure to pop up elsewhere.
But, the implication will be there. What to do about it will be left up to the voters.
The PDT Symphony Asian Mad Scientist Theorem is hard at work—that history unfolds as if a mythical mad scientist has finished societal experimentation on North Korea and has now decided to implement the same principles in China, this time with a seemingly faster canter toward communist calamity. Rather than nukes, China makes noises of sinking US aircraft carriers and invading Taiwan.
The theorem is not truth, but it helps to accurately anticipate how history will unfold, and anticipate it has. It foretold that the mythical “miracle of China” would be exposed for the myth it always was.
The so-called “China miracle” seduced too many. There was no miracle happening inside China. There was no invention, no innovation, no new ideas. Even China’s socioeconomic framework was reverse-engineered from Russian Marxism. Now, government requires itself to be the head of even religion; an Atheist government wants to define the truth for a religion that believes in a God that the government does not. How can that not be a course for calamity?
China gained its money, not from its own human ingenuity—since the Confucian education culture purges all ingenuity inclinations. No, the money came from Americans who would drive half a dollar’s distance in gasoline to save a nickel—thinking that this made sense. It didn’t make sense, it didn’t save cents, but it did make dollars for China. But, now, those dollars are all gone—the dollars China believed in, and the dollars that made Western saps believe in China. The “miracle” was never from China, but from the United States’ innovative, free-thinking, God-fearing economy.
China continues to grab for power—not because it feels powerful. While its economy and international respect have taken a nosedive, China is all the more adamant about “reclaiming” what is China’s ostensibly by rite. The looming invasion of Taiwan won’t happen because China believes it is economically strong enough to win, but that reclaiming Taiwan would solve all other problems to make China economically strong again. China believes China is a poor nation only because it hasn’t yet “retaken” more control of more lands, such as Taiwan—an island that the Communist Party never once controlled.
Even King Belshazzar feared the writing on the wall without understanding it. But, Western saps didn’t fear the writing written in their own economic language. Now, three Canadians are shocked and caught off guard. They should have known better than to put themselves in such peril during our dangerous times. So should the coupon clippers in America’s consumer base have known better. So should the American companies about to watch their investments get “appropriated” have known better.
And, China should have known such a trade war was coming. Lack of reciprocity started the Opium Wars. China should have researched America’s history books for the phrase “Indian giver”, which often described America’s government much more than it described America’s Natives. China should have known that American consumers would respond in wrath when their jobs had been exported from their homes and imported into a country that prohibits free speech and religion. China should have known that a trade war was in the making from the first day that American manufacturers outsourced their labor to the Chinese.
But, the Americans never told China because the Americans were too consumed with their own consumerism.
The obvious has been ignored. Now, the inevitable results are playing out. Whatever course history takes, the results must run their course, but we know it won’t be pretty, not for a while anyway. But, of all the things it never was, it was always foreseeable to those who wanted to look at what was right in front of them.
It takes two to start a war, so everyone should have known the war that was starting because everyone was starting it long, long ago.
Apple can crackdown on Google and Facebook, but America can’t crack down on it’s own private property and protection for citizens?
This week, the president’s State of the Union Address will convene on schedule. The guest list is said to be interesting, though at press time, the president had not yet announced his guests. The regular speech is one way of fulfilling a Constitutional requirement that the president:
…shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.
The normal way of fulfilling this Constitutional requirement (the speech) was under threat by the government shutdown. That shutdown ended with a temporary budget, while Congressional Republicans proved that they saw “shutdown” as the strategy, while Congressional Democrats and President Trump—each in their own way—proved the shutdown as an unintended consequence of their “wall” or “anti-wall” strategy. Now, the State of the Union is confirmed on the calendar. The interesting parts won’t be about the wall as much as they will be about China.
China—the one thing that could unite all sides of American debates. Beware the peace of a nation in need of an enemy to unify them, for that peace may be shortlived.
Hot on the Capitol Hill agenda is Obama’s DACA program (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals). The argument basically goes that young trees can be transplanted, but once they have grown, re-transplanting them again can kill them. Children are innocent and—though beneficiaries of the free economy, free speech, and freedom of America’s wonderful and ought-to-be-sought socioeconomic system—children would not be at-fault for receiving the great benefit of America’s growing greatness. So, why punish the children? That’s the argument in DACA’s defense.
One example that isn’t used enough to defend DACA is the Back-to-Africa movement, of the 1800s, which sought to return Black Americans to Africa. The idea was absurd, demonstrating no knowledge of international life and culture. Though an injustice, forcing a reversal after history has moved on only makes the injustice worse. DACA was such an injustice and the way forward cannot be explained in, shall we say, “black and white”.
From the Conservative perspective, the best solution to DACA claimants (the children in question) is to punish the perpetrators, not the children. In other words, punish the parents. The following course would do just that: Any illegally entered parents must report themselves and prepare for deportation or, with a clean criminal record, be given 30 days to prepare for a speedy and unconditional return to their home country. Then, children wishing to claim DACA status must meet minimum age and circumstantial requirements that prove returning to a life in their family’s country would cause a lower-quality life, such as not knowing the language or already having developed American credentials, must not have citizenship with that nation, and be banned from any dual citizenship with that nation for ten years.
This would cut off the parents from their children. If they wanted their children to be American because of America’s greatness, this would give them that at a price worth paying. For anyone who thinks the price is not worth paying, the DACA benefits would not be necessary. Let the people choose themselves and let America be a place of immigrants willing to pay the price of freedom that never comes free.
The conclusion of the current media analysis of Trump is clear: the Democrats and media sing in unison. Their song is one of contradiction—that Obama’s routine use of executive authority and the Clinton’s scandals should have been ignored—but not Trump, who uses executive authority to obey the Constitution to defend the nation’s borders when Congress will not. His dedication to obey the Constitution is his crime, the lesser-than Obama-Clinton scandals are just the means of punishing him for doing what is right.
At a time when America’s enemies make threats, the people have a president who won’t play the “surrender” role expected by the “great surrenderers” of society. The Russianewsgategate fiasco is about to hit the fan and spray mud all over the Left. Media criticism of the president’s speech at CPAC makes no sense. He celebrates heroes, explains the inside baseball of trade, listens to the wisdom of our military’s generals, and gave the microphone to a young man who was punched in the face for his beliefs. The news media is being seen more and more for the villain it is—and the people know all about it.
Buffoons became naysayers this week, arguing that tit-for-tat military drill concessions would be the path to peace and that progress without finality in Hanoi surmounted to failure.
Trump knows exactly what he is doing. Progress without “too much too fast”, passing up the invitation to stop in China while visiting Kim Jong-Un in Vietnam, replacing large military drills with detailed tactical exercises in South Korea, standing with the Philippines against “an armed attack” from China in the South Sea, delaying a tariff hike with China while inviting Xi to Mar-a-Lago, scrutinizing Chinese-funded “learning centers” in America—it all plays right into a larger overall strategy of strength and resolve in Asia.
As the US and China inch toward a trade agreement, Taiwan makes larger and larger strides asserting its independent activity. Backed by a recent US court ruling, Taiwan’s presence will only irritate China. Trade talk is part of the precarious path ahead. No trade agreement is enough to mitigate other disagreements between the US and China. The only way would require the US to surrender, and that’s not about to happen.