The Plan, not a "theory"
- Thread starter Kamala Trump
- Start date
Kamala Trump
Verified User
They are one and the same. Capitalism is fine. I'm a capitalist. Capitalism unhinged from all previous moral constraints and all other considerations is not good. It may seem to be a good idea to allow china to make everything, but one should also FACTOR IN the inherent and obvious risks to self suffiency and the subsequent national security position one is placed in when their resources supply chains can be cut at will.
Kamala Trump
Verified User
The neocon faction of the right is definitely illuminati. They channel the basically positive energy of patriotism into a lethal expression of zionism. The are doing the grunt work necessary to build their new world order, and using patriotism to expand the power of their world banking organization. The left primarily exists to propagate the social and psychological agenda of the new world order, eroding "nationalism", the new dirty word, eroding white solidarity, dumbing down the school system, propagating every sort of known behavioral pathology as merely "another choice, to be respected".
Last edited:
Kamala Trump
Verified User
I remember the "oh gee, isn't the UN great" filmstrips at school. Now that's indoctri-tainment!
Kamala Trump
Verified User
You think money and hierarchy (the lesson of occultism)are different things. They're not. The purpose of abstract value (fiat currency) is control.
Last edited:
uscitizen
Villified User
He who controls the media controls the world. Why do you think the neos have been working so hard to take control of the media and supress what they can't control (PBS).
Remember the duck and cover drills ? Aka Bend over and kiss your *&^ goodbye.
School books are full of sickeningly sweet Yankee Doodle Dandy propaganda.
Bush and Dixie actually believed it all
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
No. You're not willing to discuss things openly. Sanctions do work to control behavior. We didn't sustain russia with huge production contracts, we let them crumble from the inside. THe real question is "why did we abandon a successful strategy when it came to china"
Sanctions didn't work, we tried it prior to 1972. From at least WWI until 1972, the US did not trade with Red China. Did the human rights abuses stop or decline? No! Why? Because China is a huge country, and is able to sustain itself internally for the most part, and they can always rely on Russia for trade dollars.
Also, with regard to the former Soviet Union, we did indeed engage in trade and diplomacy with them, do you not remember the grain deals? This is not what caused the Soviet economy to collapse, it was the inability of Communism to thrive in a global market place, and their inability to compete with ever-advancing US technologies.
The bottom line is we're empowering our enemies with trade dollars. YOu can call it other words, but that doesn't change the inherent stupidity of this current policy.
Again, we aren't "empowering" anyone, China is already "empowered" and self-sustaining as a world superpower. We can't affect that, really. Whether we trade with China or not, is irrelevant to their empowerment and ability to abuse humans.
You're basically suggesting america act powerless, act like we've been defeated, act like we have no choice but to accept totalitarianism as something to be partnered with and profitted from instead of something to be excluded from the brotherhood of man. You've lost your way and are hurting the nation with your brainwashed neocon pseudologic.
No, again... "powerless" would be enacting of policies that isolate us from China, and remove any and all leverage we have with them, like trade. This is what YOU advocate, not ME! I favor a policy in which we are tied economically to China, and can effect some political leverage through mutual economic interests. See... with your plan, we are powerless, with my plan, we have some means of leverage and a bargaining chip to utilize our power... we are thus, more powerful.
Brainwashing and pseudo-logic is also what you are doing. You continue to repeat the same baseless argument and points, you continue to ignore the facts of the matter and historic proof that your ideas have failed, and you keep resorting to the classic liberal tactic of over-dramatizing and characterizing your points, in an attempt to appeal to the emotive ones. AKA: Bleeding Heart Syndrome!
Sanctions didn't work, we tried it prior to 1972. From at least WWI until 1972, the US did not trade with Red China. Did the human rights abuses stop or decline? No! Why? Because China is a huge country, and is able to sustain itself internally for the most part, and they can always rely on Russia for trade dollars.
Also, with regard to the former Soviet Union, we did indeed engage in trade and diplomacy with them, do you not remember the grain deals? This is not what caused the Soviet economy to collapse, it was the inability of Communism to thrive in a global market place, and their inability to compete with ever-advancing US technologies.
The bottom line is we're empowering our enemies with trade dollars. YOu can call it other words, but that doesn't change the inherent stupidity of this current policy.
Again, we aren't "empowering" anyone, China is already "empowered" and self-sustaining as a world superpower. We can't affect that, really. Whether we trade with China or not, is irrelevant to their empowerment and ability to abuse humans.
You're basically suggesting america act powerless, act like we've been defeated, act like we have no choice but to accept totalitarianism as something to be partnered with and profitted from instead of something to be excluded from the brotherhood of man. You've lost your way and are hurting the nation with your brainwashed neocon pseudologic.
No, again... "powerless" would be enacting of policies that isolate us from China, and remove any and all leverage we have with them, like trade. This is what YOU advocate, not ME! I favor a policy in which we are tied economically to China, and can effect some political leverage through mutual economic interests. See... with your plan, we are powerless, with my plan, we have some means of leverage and a bargaining chip to utilize our power... we are thus, more powerful.
Brainwashing and pseudo-logic is also what you are doing. You continue to repeat the same baseless argument and points, you continue to ignore the facts of the matter and historic proof that your ideas have failed, and you keep resorting to the classic liberal tactic of over-dramatizing and characterizing your points, in an attempt to appeal to the emotive ones. AKA: Bleeding Heart Syndrome!
Kamala Trump
Verified User
These are all false conclusions. In your scenario we look the other way while the whole world is enslaved by a mad race to the bottom, as we pit freemen against slaves.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
These are all false conclusions.
What is a false conclusion? That we didn't trade with China until 1972? That our lack of trading with China for decades, didn't end or curtail human rights abuses? That having a mutual interest aids in negotiation of any kind? That China can thrive and prosper just fine without US trade? What IS my false conclusion here?
In your scenario we look the other way while the whole world is enslaved by a mad race to the bottom, as we pit freemen against slaves.
Perhaps you missed the articulated point about having a bargaining chip, a mutual economic interest, something to leverage and negotiate with? This is hardly "looking the other way" ...which would be to ignore China, refuse to trade with them, and allow them to continue another 100 years of the status quo.
Your suggestion does not address the problem you are claiming exists, that is just the fact of the matter here, and you need to accept it. If you are genuinely concerned with the human rights conditions in China, it would seem you'd support America having some means of leverage and some way of influencing the Chinese to change their ways, rather than promoting continued isolationist practices that haven't worked.
What is a false conclusion? That we didn't trade with China until 1972? That our lack of trading with China for decades, didn't end or curtail human rights abuses? That having a mutual interest aids in negotiation of any kind? That China can thrive and prosper just fine without US trade? What IS my false conclusion here?
In your scenario we look the other way while the whole world is enslaved by a mad race to the bottom, as we pit freemen against slaves.
Perhaps you missed the articulated point about having a bargaining chip, a mutual economic interest, something to leverage and negotiate with? This is hardly "looking the other way" ...which would be to ignore China, refuse to trade with them, and allow them to continue another 100 years of the status quo.
Your suggestion does not address the problem you are claiming exists, that is just the fact of the matter here, and you need to accept it. If you are genuinely concerned with the human rights conditions in China, it would seem you'd support America having some means of leverage and some way of influencing the Chinese to change their ways, rather than promoting continued isolationist practices that haven't worked.
we are looking the other way at very bad human rights conditions in China...we are not USING THIS TRADE LEVERAGE to help the actual workers of china get to a humane condition sooner for the Chinese people....if we did that, God forbid, our prices in the usa would be higher....just say it like it really is instead of dancing around the two faceness of our country when it comes to trade.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Cuba and North Korea are nowhere near the size of China, and are completely unable to self-sustain their countries without outside trade partners. Cuba has survived without US trade, because of Russia, so this is a great example of why refusing to trade with China will never work to effect a change.
Here's how it works... If we are providing vital trade with a country, we can effect some economic strain on them by withdrawing trade, and we have done so before. This doesn't work with China, they have no vital interest regarding our trade, it makes no difference to them if we trade with them or not. Now, if we foster strong trade alliances with them, and in 20-30 years, they become economically dependent on those trade agreements, perhaps we can threaten to embargo, or withdraw trade with them, and perhaps it would have enough economic impact to effect a change. As it stands now, it's like you threatening to not ever call Tom Cruise! I don't think he is going to be devastated by that news.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
we are looking the other way at very bad human rights conditions in China...
....but could give a fuck about human rights abuses in China.
As I have articulated, and no one has offered a counter to... we aren't 'looking the other way' or 'not giving a fuck' by fostering trade relations which can be used as an economic bargaining chip to effect political change. The concept of isolation and trade embargoes against China, are paramount to turning our back and not giving a fuck, because they do not offer any opportunity to gain any leverage or means to effect any change in China. At least with the Neocon's idea, there is that opportunity.
Now, you pinheads can keep yammering the same stupid shit over and over, I really don't care, but you have not addressed my points or the issue at hand, and I am getting tired of going around in circles here. If you have something to show for your idiotic ideas and viewpoints, now would be the time to divulge it. Otherwise, I am going to have to assume my points stand, and you couldn't refute them with substance. In other words, I have completely owned your asses!
....but could give a fuck about human rights abuses in China.
As I have articulated, and no one has offered a counter to... we aren't 'looking the other way' or 'not giving a fuck' by fostering trade relations which can be used as an economic bargaining chip to effect political change. The concept of isolation and trade embargoes against China, are paramount to turning our back and not giving a fuck, because they do not offer any opportunity to gain any leverage or means to effect any change in China. At least with the Neocon's idea, there is that opportunity.
Now, you pinheads can keep yammering the same stupid shit over and over, I really don't care, but you have not addressed my points or the issue at hand, and I am getting tired of going around in circles here. If you have something to show for your idiotic ideas and viewpoints, now would be the time to divulge it. Otherwise, I am going to have to assume my points stand, and you couldn't refute them with substance. In other words, I have completely owned your asses!
Worked real well there didn't it, Care?
Worked so well that the same leaders are still in office or their son, and the abuses continue. Even on such a level that people sail across the ocean gap on car doors, desperate to get away from one of the wonderful places our trade sanctions created, and I firmly believe that they don't do it from the other place because that ocean gap is just too wide.
Sanctions very rarely have the actual result we wish, they unnecessarily punish the populace and actually end up keeping the strong in power as the weak have no access to what can make them strong....
There has been more positive change in China since we began working with them. The idea that it "punishes" the governments for doing bad things to put sanctions on another nation is simply frivolous when there are so many examples of where they simply have not worked, but actual trade actually got the changes we want to see started. It may take a while, but it is getting better, not worse in China because of our trade agreements.
Sometimes Greed isn't the only need for trade to become relevant to people's lives.
Kamala Trump
Verified User
There has been no substantive increase in human rights in china. That is just a rosy hue you like to paint on things. It's not happening.
You too are refusing to consider the long term relevant security and sovereignty issues.
read about the laogai, the slave labor camps in china.
Last edited: