SearchRecent comments
Democracy LinksMember's Off-site Blogs |
america vs america......
In 1988, a young professor of international relations at Fudan University in China travelled the length and breadth of the USA for half a year. He wanted to understand that great country in depth, at a time when the Soviet Union was coming to an end, Japan was challenging the US for the status of the world’s leading economy and the latter was intensifying its neoliberal process begun in the 70s. America versus America and the right path of China
Wang Huning, the ‘Chinese Tocqueville’, as he has since become known, warns in the preface to his ‘America against America’ (published in 1991) that ‘obviously, I have studied and seen the United States as a society, more as an observer than as a researcher’. A Nation of Contradictions This is an honest testimonial from someone who has managed to perceptively grasp many of the characteristics of the social reality of a diverse country at a particular historical moment. Probably inspired by the film Kramer vs Kramer (1979) – to which he makes a small reference – the drama of a child who sees his parents divorcing and going their separate ways could be a criticism of the extreme individualism of that society. This is a sociological document of great interest, timeless even though it was written almost four decades ago. It praises the many virtues of a country steeped in contradictions. Wang wants to absorb the good examples into China: entrepreneurship, a pragmatic spirit, respect for tradition, a compulsion for modernity, a symbiosis that is not always easy to understand. Right at the start of the book, the author recognises that although Marxism was correct in its analysis of capitalism, it was wrong in its focus. ‘For a long time, driven by the reinforcement of ideology, there was a total rejection of capitalism, which was influenced by dogmatism, which prevented people from judging capitalist society objectively and scientifically.’ To this self-criticism, he adds that under “left-wing ideology”, which took the class struggle as its outline, our perspective of the whole world was disturbed and people were prevented from learning from the advanced experience of other countries’. But he also sees in the American society of the 80s the seeds of a social disaster to come: ‘In a commodity economy, the power of money is irresistible. Without a force to guide it, people will orientate themselves towards profit. This will eventually lead to serious social problems.’ Any doubts about the accuracy of his prognosis? In his retrospective of the evolution of what was then the world’s largest economy, the author talks about the paradoxes that American society has experienced since the Mayflower arrived at the shores of New England. From the debate about the primacy of freedom over equality, to the then growing crises of values, poverty, extreme inequality, crime and drugs, Wang provides a frank critique of the dubious reality of the USA at the end of the 80s. The growing power of lobbies with ramifications in academia, the public service linked to the two-party system that controls everything, the large corporations, the lack of authority, the breakdown of nuclear institutions like the family. None of these are examples to be followed, but they are worth reflecting on. It doesn’t mention a number of other factors that have led to the current limit situation, such as financialisation, the plague of weapons, both internal and externally, endless wars or corruption, but it is a comprehensive and very descriptive text. Simple, but engaging. As far as international relations are concerned, Wang warned that ‘for a long time, the Americans didn’t want to recognise Japan’s success […] I think they will face a similar situation again’ and that it will be ‘then that the Americans will really reflect on their politics, economy and culture’, warning that ‘if we want to surpass the Americans, we have to do one thing: surpass them in science and technology.’ A Timely Reflection on Global Power Almost four decades later, China is now the leader in 37 of the 44 critical technologies covering defence, space, robotics, energy, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, advanced materials and the main areas of quantum technology, as well as being by far the country that produces the most STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) graduates each year. The author seems to criticise the decadent path taken by the US on the left, with capitalism and liberalism as its foundations. A path inversely parallel to the one China had already embarked on at the beginning of the 70s. He critically mentions the ‘growth of egalitarianism, nihilism and relativism in contemporary American culture’ and predicts the country’s decadence due to these germs. Wang is today one of the main figures in the Chinese system. A man very close to and considered one of President Xi Jinping’s top ideologues, and before Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao. He is often described in the Western press as the ‘éminence grise’ of the CCP, the ‘man behind the curtain’. Given the current geopolitical moment in which China’s rise coincides with a clear resizing of US global power, ‘America against America’ has attracted renewed interest from the Western public, particularly in the US. At the time of the pandemic, numbers of the original edition could be found on eBay for up to $3,500. Fortunately, new editions have been published so that we have access to this great testimony, which partly explains the complexity of relations between the world’s two largest economies today. On the eve of the US elections, at such a critical moment in international relations, this is an extremely well-timed book to understand much of what motivates the US to be in the situation it is in. ‘It can be said that Japan was only the first nation to challenge the United States. In the next century, more nations are likely to challenge the United States as well. That’s when the Americans will really reflect on their politics, economy and culture,’ he foreshadowed. In a kind of Hegelian dialectic, Wang’s book-experience has certainly helped to add to the Chinese journey that began in 1949, a correction of a traditionalist, conservative, but above all pragmatic slant, also absorbing for itself the best of the American experience. This is how the People’s Republic has been steering its unequivocally socialist path, but on the right side. Only those who don’t want to can’t see the outcome.
Ricardo Nuno Costa ‒ geopolitical expert, writer, columnist, and editor-in-chief of geopol.pt, especially for «New Eastern Outlook»
https://journal-neo.su/2024/08/28/america-versus-america-and-the-right-path-of-china/
YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.
|
User login |
repression USA....
By Larry Johnson
My interview of Dimitri Simes is now available at my Counter Currents channel. It is quite a story. Dimitry fled the Soviet Union in 1973, shortly after being released from prison, and arrived in the United States seeking freedom. Now, 50 years later, Dimitry — who is a US citizen — was compelled, once again, to flee authoritarian rule. Only this type, the tyrant is the United States and the sanctuary is Russia.
Upon arriving in the United States without any savings, Dimitry set to work trying to establish a new life in America and he quickly found a niche as a genuine Soviet expert. He was mentored by such luminaries as Paul Nitze and Fred Ikle. (I realize those names are meaningless to you youngsters out there, but in the 1980s, they were major players in the realm of arms control and the US Department of Defense.) Thanks to serendipity (or the hand of God), Dimitry became friends with former President Nixon and was named President of the Nixon Center, a Washington, D.C. think tank.
Dimitry held that job for 30 years. That is where I first met him. I was invited to participate in a small seminar in December 2002, that included former CIA Director James Schlesinger, Fox News pundit Charles Krauthammer, Ambassador Joe Wilson and W. Patrick Lang, former head of DIA’s Middle East Division. There were only twelve of us, plus Dimitry, sitting around a conference table trying to ascertain what the George W. Bush Administration planned to do in Iraq.
Two weeks ago, the FBI raided and ransacked Dimitry’s home in Virginia. He was not there, thankfully. Scott Ritter got off light compared to what the FBI did to Dimitry’s home. They absconded with paintings and furniture, and they physically damaged portions of the house. The FBI did something that the KGB never did to Dimitry. I hope you take the time to watch our conversation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTNREy2qamY&t=1s
Meanwhile, the malevolent clown show that is Ukraine continues to shock and entertain. The Ukrainians are claiming that they — using a US-supplied Patriot missile battery — shot down their own F-16 and killed their own pilot. I didn’t see that coming. Maybe Zelensky and his cronies are so hard up for cash that they wanted to cash in on Russia’s promised reward for the first one to down an F-16. In Ukraine, anything is possible.
Ukraine’s prospects on the aid front ain’t looking too good. Germany announced a couple of weeks ago that it is not going to keep writing checks. This news sent Mohammed Soliman, Director of the Middle East Institute, over the edge. He wrote in Newsweek:
Several months after the U.S. approved a significant $61 billion Ukraine aid package, bringing total American aid to $175 billion, the German government is putting the brakes on new military aid to Ukraine as part of a plan to cut spending. This freeze is already in effect and will apply to future funding requests, not previously approved aid.
Berlin had previously decided to halve future military assistance to Ukraine, allocating €4 billion to address other pressing budgetary needs. Ukraine may need to rely more heavily on funding from “European sources” moving forward, according to German Finance Minister Christian Lindner.
These developments are but the latest in a longstanding trend: Berlin never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity at genuine leadership. It’s not just Europe that needs Germany to step up; the future of transatlantic relations hinges on whether it can take a defense leadership role in Europe. At stake is the future of the U.S.’ relationship with its allies across the Atlantic as Washington looks to free its resources and pivot into Asia—for real this time.
Then there is Poland, whose leaders apparently agree with Germany on the need to back away from supporting Ukraine:
Poland will not shoot down Russian drones or missiles over Ukraine, and it will not train Ukrainian forces on Ukrainian soil.
Source: Paweł Zalewski, Polish Deputy Minister of Defense, during a meeting of EU defence ministers, writes RMF24, as reported by European Pravda
Details: “One of Ukraine’s expectations we do not consider in any format, namely the possibility of shooting down missiles or drones from Polish territory,” Zalewski said. . . .
Zalewski strongly opposed Ukraine’s request that NATO allies, such as Poland, shoot down Russian missiles or drones in Ukrainian airspace flying towards them. Similarly, Zalewski strongly opposed Kyiv’s plan to train Ukrainian forces on Ukrainian territory.
France and a few other North European countries endorse this idea. However, it did not receive unanimous approval in the EU. First and foremost, Germany and Austria believe Russia will see this as a provocation. There are also concerns that the EU will be unable to secure the safety of European instructors in Ukraine.
Poland has joined the opponents of this concept. According to Zalewski, the current form of Ukrainian soldier training in EU nations (for example, in Poland or Germany) “is the most effective”. According to him, several EU countries can also conduct training in Ukraine, but “Poland is not one of them”.
I don’t think this is the type of unity among NATO states that Biden and Harris have been touting. I discussed these matters with my Brazilian buddy, Nima.
https://sonar21.com/dimitri-simes-battle-for-freedom-and-some-key-updates-on-ukraine/