You write: "In my view, it is China’s increasingly bullying leadership style at home and abroad, its heads-we-win-tails-you-lose trade policies and the changing makeup of its economy that are largely responsible for this reversal."
Americans do not get to take the high ground when casting stones on the matter of bullying. Why do you think we broke another pick in Afghanistan? Why do you think we bungled into Iraq?
"What kind of a peace do I mean and what kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living . . . not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women — not merely peace in our time but peace in all time." (JFK Farewell Address, June 1963.)
Peace is not the absence of war; it is a frame of mind which I urge you to embrace. You have the power to influence many people. War with China would mean the end of life on earth as we know it. No good can come of edging us closer to that woeful outcome with people we should be doing business with, not making war on.
The only reason China is a threat is that it's about to overtake us. The ideology, human right, IP theft, trade imbalance, etc are just talking points which we use at our discretion to support the objective.
1. China had a glut off savings, the US and other western countries have a glut of debt to be financed.
2. The US has a long history of racism against the Chinese.
3. China has a lot of economic power and the US does not like sharing world power.
4. The US does not have the cheap labor to complete with China so let’s focus on intelligent labor. Instead of fighting the Chinese, let’s invest in our schools, colleges and universities so a college degree is affordable.
In the end, working with the Chinese will likely result in a better outcome that the current level of hostility.
Walk into a graduate STEM class in the United States and calculate the proportion of Chinese nationals in attendance. This has been going on for years now. While we prioritize diversity and bathroom privileges for transgenders, China is racing ahead in every technological area that counts. The reality is that China will soon surpass the United States both economically and militarily and there is nothing that we can do about it. When they annex Taiwan (within five years) they will gain the one of their missing pieces - capacity for state of the art chip fabrication (through TSMC). They will kick us out of the South China Sea - we will complain loudly and then back down.
The Unites States has enjoyed global hegemony for longer than most of our lives. Thus, Friedman (like many others) writes from this viewpoint. Unfortunately, it reads like Great Britain whining about the loss of their empire.
My question is how forcing US values has ever helped us. Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq...lots of blood and treasure spent for what? Let's clear the log out of our own eye instead of worrying about the mote in theirs. It is puritanical sickness trying to run the internal affairs of other countries, especially since we are doing rather poorly ourselves.
So now that the war in Afghanistan has failed--for which, let us recall, Tom was a huge booster--and he's wondering (20 years late) whether maybe we could have thought the whole business through a little better, it's time to pivot to a "war on China."
First, let's not bandy about so casually and irresponsibly the word "war." War with China would be an unmitigated disaster for all parties. Tom's parenthetical remark about an aircraft carrier (an obsolete technology in a world of drones) represents a not-very-veiled threat of violence.
But we should really think about what is most important for the next 20 years: dealing with climate change. That should be our focus, not some cat- and-mouse with China, another board game for neocons. When Miami is underwater no one will care who won the tariff war.
So let's set "war," metaphoric or real, aside, and for once spend our money, time, energy, and talents on facing a crisis of global proportions, addressing which will save, rather than sacrifice, lives, both human and non .
After 40 years of strong trade with China, let's have a look at the results in each country for one minute.
On the Chinese side: Poverty has been cut infrastructure is being built, China middle class has grown by hundreds of millions. Political system: Dictatorship
On the US side: Poverty has gone up. Infrastructure is crumbling, the Middle class is down and, difficult to reach for more and more Americans. Meanwhile the political class doesn't have a problem wasting $ trillions in wars of choices while giving tax cuts to the people who have profited the most from trade with China. Political system: Democracy.
I'm afraid that a lot of people in the world would see China as the victor and keep in mind that generally, people follow the Victor.
Earlier this year the Alliance for Democracies Foundation published a poll it commissioned that surveyed people all over the world. The poll found that more people regard the United States as a threat to democracy than regard China as such.
This may come as a surprise to most Americans who have been fed a steady diet of propaganda for most of our lives about how great and idealistic the United States is and how people around the world envy us for our democratic system and look to us stand up for democracy around the world.
Friedman argues here for caution in going down the road of a new Cold War with China. Good. But he repeats a lot of nonsense that ignores the reasons people see the US as the greater threat to democracy than China.
He describes China as belligerent and blames that belligerence for the breakdown in US-China relations. On what planet is China anywhere near as belligerent as the US? How many overseas military bases does China have? ( One) How many countries has China bombed or invaded in the past 40 years? ( None) How many coup d'etats has China engineered in foreign countries? (None)
Friedman mentions China's statements and actions around Taiwan, Hong Kong, Tibet and Xinjiang as evidence of its belligerence. But all of those are territories recognized under international law as part of China and all of them are places where the U.S. and its allies have actively meddled to encourage separatist movements.
Let's be honest about who the belligerent power is.
China has never had extraterritorial ambitions, and likely never will. The Chinese are expert at living together cheek-by-jowl, whereas Europeans never learned the civilized way of loving thy neighbor, no matter how much Jesus' followers tried.
The Chinese have no interest in forcing their way of life and customs on others. There are enough of them to guarantee their culture is perennial. The French, English, Dutch, Belgians and later the Americans tried and failed to change people's customs, dress, language and even names, in a competition between each other over whose culture is superior.
One aspect of the China-US competition that amazes me is the issue of intellectual property. The workhorse of the US technological innovation economy is its university research corps, and the workhorses of US research universities are overwhelmingly Chinese, by number and by productivity. While IP registration is mainly American, the actual brainpower behind it is Chinese. It just isn't true that the Chinese innovation economy is based on "theft" of IP; it is more accurate to say that American IP is an accounting and business graft on top of Chinese foreign researchers on a temporary student or postdoc visa.
Finally, it is America's fault that it didn't provide retraining and a safety net to its laid off manufacturing labor force, and for letting its working and middle classes stagnate. That is due to a cultural deficiency in blaming the individual for a collective policy choice.
It's so ridiculous. China has done indefensible things. But the economic destruction of the industrial midwest is entirely a self-imposed injury. The US economy has been growing in the past 40 years. The amount of wealth possessed by this country has been growing. However, the benefits of the growth have not been shared by all. The income inequality is increasing. The working class literally hasn't seen wage increase in the past two decades when you account for inflation. Manufacture jobs have been lost. But it is the US that's supposed to have a government by the people of the people and for the people, and how come the US cannot solve this problem with the magic bullet it has been selling all the time, democracy? The political establishment is unable and unwilling to solve the real problem, which is the redistribution of wealth, but it is now trying to use China as a scapegoat. In the end, the US may very well destroy China, but it's not going to help the American people.
Friedman was certainly right, when most liberal pundits were way wrong, about Afghanistan.
But Tom is often mistaken about China, though he keeps trying. I think something about his intense experience at Tiananmen Square 30 years ago makes him feel that situation is somehow generalizable to what we see today.
The politburo back then was full of very old and very scared men who panicked at the student demonstrations and called in the Army to save them from the same fate they had seen unleashed on university professors and Buddhist monks during the Cultural Revolution.
That was a big mistake, and an embarrassment to the CCP who want all Chinese to forget, or never learn, that it happened.
Chinese people, only two generations removed from starvation and desperate poverty in nearly every family, want nothing more than financial security and good dining on their own food which they love more than almost anything else.
If we can continue to do business, fairly or unfairly, as Japan has done with us for a long time, they will continue to be one of the most peaceful nations on earth.
But Taiwan is another matter. They will fight for that, not only for the many Chinese who live there and continue to do business in China or visit relatives on the mainland, but for their pride.
The humiliation of Western powers forcing China to buy opium and cede enclaves at the point of a gun back in the 1800's will never be forgiven or forgotten.
China and USA have far more in common than many would like to believe. Strong military presence abroad? Check. Crumbling healthcare system? Check. Late stage capitalism burning out their people? Check. Widening income inequality? Check. Housing crisis? Check. Spotty human rights records within their own borders? Check.
China is nothing more than a reflection of the US was and is, and it's uncomfortable for Americans to come to terms with that fact. When Americans think of China, they see an authoritarian government with incredible military and manufacturing might pushing other countries around and committing human rights violations, but the reality is that this is exactly what the US has always done.
The fact that the US is a democracy means little in this context, and that's a terrifying thought to anyone who believes in US exceptionalism.
The apparent US obsession with declaring war on anything it opposes has never worked. The war on drugs, the war on cancer, the war on poverty, the war on crime and the war on terror have all failed. A war on China does not bode well for the US.
There is a distinct national psychopathology at work here and it’s the psychopathology of fear exacerbated by paranoia…. the notion that we can only be safe if we destroy or dominate everything that we feel threatened by. This psychopathology has infused the illiberal thinking behind American foreign policy for far too long. It leads to isolationism, domestic controls and a severe weakening of democratic values. It legitimizes the right wing perspective on militarisation and an over emphasis on security.
Several years ago I was asked to make a film for a European government to explain how the war on terror was self harming democracies and damaging core democratic values. It began by explaining that ISIS’s main outward looking purpose was not acts of terrorism per se but to cause the West to trash its values and way of life. They would be happy with saying, “look around you … look at what we made you do to yourselves.” The visual at that point flipped from military patrolling the streets to a cartoon… a soldier pointing to graffiti with the words Liberté, égalité, Fraternité crossed out and replaced by the word Sécurité.
A “war on China” would soon release the national paranoia that could fatally damage the US. Know yourselves.
You have confirmed my view that Americans have learnt absolutely nothing following Iraq and Afghanistan. Barely a month after the Kabul debacle and you’re talking about a war with China.
The ideological battle between democracy and authoritarian rule is a manufactured narrative for the war that we’re openly contemplating. By the way, only Americans openly debate which country they want to invade next, is it Iran? Maybe, depends on how badly Israel pushes for it.
Our upcoming war with China has nothing to do with human rights or democracy, it has everything to do with our declining hegemony. We’re used to overwhelming dominance across technology, economy, diplomacy and military. It’s obvious we’re slipping behind on the economy and certain areas of technology. We can still beat them in a military conflict though and there’s a sense that it will be too late if we don’t do it soon.
China got richer because its citizens are hardworking, smart, and honest and are willing to work jobs for much lower wages that no American will. Not because China is "authoritarian" or because of "forced" labor, the workers toil in the factories making your iPhones and computers and TV's and washing machines because they want a better life for their families through hard work. Enough with the fantasy that somehow manufacturing jobs will come back to the states if the US buys less from China. Unless the U.S. wants to levy 1000% tariffs on all imports and stop trading with the entire world, nothing will ever be made here. Americans are simply too lazy, uneducated and unproductive to ever be competitive in manufacturing anything, no matter what slogans the politicians yell. Wages in China will catch up, but someone will always be much more competitive than America in manufacturing. But while Friedman types on his computer made in China, and turns on his TV and AC made in China, he will never admit that, will he?
If you turn on the news to CNN/CNBC/FOX all you hear about now is the lab leak or bioweapon theory. Notice how the narrative has changed. In the early stages of the pandemic, the media was running the zoonotic origin theory.
CNN/CNBC/FOX run anti-China news 24/7. Prepping and priming American audiences for the possibility of a new cold war with China, thereby justifying trillions in military spending if this scenario comes to fruition. This isn't even that far-fetched, considering that we just recently pulled out of a two-decade long war in the Middle East. The military industrial complex needs the threat of perpetual war in order to justify funneling trillions of American taxpayer money into the hands of the corporate elite (Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrup Grumman, Blackrock, etc.).
纽约时报作家鼓吹美国对中国开战，但开战前需要想三个问题。
著名的纽约时报专栏作者，托马斯·弗里德曼最近发表文章称，20年前的反恐让美国入侵了阿富汗，也让美国脸面丢尽。历史不可重演，美国没法回到20年前，但是弗里德曼认为，现在却可以从20年后的角度去思考，该如何同中国开战。
弗里德曼认为，过去四十年中美关系的基本稳定，对世界和平和全球化都有不可磨灭的贡献。但最近这几年中美关系不稳了，台面上的合作少了，脚底下的掰手腕多了。这些判断应该说都非常合理，但这位美国人却接着说，现在中美关系的问题，主要是中国引起的。他说，中国太有野心了，不听话，不遵守规则，更有侵略性……总而言之，中美关系不稳，都是中国的错。
但弗里德曼认为要和中国不可避免的开战时，得想清楚三个问题。首先是，美国要想清楚，中国是不是真的要对外扩张，而且要搞明白，美国要是对中国开战，势必会激起中国更加猛烈的民族主义。第二，美国要确定和盟友的关系，美国对盟友发号施令多，但是否足够听取了他们意见，重视了他们和中国的利益关系？第三，当美国开始反思是否应该首先把自己国家搞好的时候，这会如何影响同中国的关系？是进一步增强和中国的合作，还是促进进一步脱钩？这些都是需要思考清楚的。
当然，这位作家鼓吹说，对中国嘴上要柔和，但决不能手软，一定要抡起军事大棒和关税大棒。他反对取消对中国施加的关税，认为这是个坏主意。
总之，在关于同中国开战问题上，弗里德曼还是表达了谨慎观点，他说这个问题要想清楚，要为20年后的美国后代着想。毕竟美国输了阿富汗，他不想再输给中国了。
这傻逼还不知道核弹下来把他全家变成烤火鸡吧
还以为中国是阿富汗，美国派大兵去就行了，家里很安全？
网络写手嘛，不哗众取宠哪里有人关注
You write: "In my view, it is China’s increasingly bullying leadership
style at home and abroad, its heads-we-win-tails-you-lose trade policies and the changing makeup of its economy that are largely responsible for this
reversal."
Americans do not get to take the high ground when casting stones on the
matter of bullying. Why do you think we broke another pick in Afghanistan? Why do you think we bungled into Iraq?
"What kind of a peace do I mean and what kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace
of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living . . . not merely
peace for Americans but peace for all men and women — not merely peace in
our time but peace in all time." (JFK Farewell Address, June 1963.)
Peace is not the absence of war; it is a frame of mind which I urge you to
embrace. You have the power to influence many people. War with China would mean the end of life on earth as we know it. No good can come of edging us closer to that woeful outcome with people we should be doing business with, not making war on.
The only reason China is a threat is that it's about to overtake us. The
ideology, human right, IP theft, trade imbalance, etc are just talking
points which we use at our discretion to support the objective.
A few simple comments.
1. China had a glut off savings, the US and other western countries have a glut of debt to be financed.
2. The US has a long history of racism against the Chinese.
3. China has a lot of economic power and the US does not like sharing world power.
4. The US does not have the cheap labor to complete with China so let’s
focus on intelligent labor. Instead of fighting the Chinese, let’s invest in our schools, colleges and universities so a college degree is affordable.
In the end, working with the Chinese will likely result in a better outcome that the current level of hostility.
关注他他就赢了
Walk into a graduate STEM class in the United States and calculate the
proportion of Chinese nationals in attendance. This has been going on for
years now. While we prioritize diversity and bathroom privileges for
transgenders, China is racing ahead in every technological area that counts. The reality is that China will soon surpass the United States both
economically and militarily and there is nothing that we can do about it.
When they annex Taiwan (within five years) they will gain the one of their
missing pieces - capacity for state of the art chip fabrication (through
TSMC). They will kick us out of the South China Sea - we will complain
loudly and then back down.
The Unites States has enjoyed global hegemony for longer than most of our
lives. Thus, Friedman (like many others) writes from this viewpoint.
Unfortunately, it reads like Great Britain whining about the loss of their
empire.
My question is how forcing US values has ever helped us. Vietnam,
Afghanistan, Iraq...lots of blood and treasure spent for what? Let's clear the log out of our own eye instead of worrying about the mote in theirs. It is puritanical sickness trying to run the internal affairs of other
countries, especially since we are doing rather poorly ourselves.
So now that the war in Afghanistan has failed--for which, let us recall, Tom was a huge booster--and he's wondering (20 years late) whether maybe we
could have thought the whole business through a little better, it's time to pivot to a "war on China."
First, let's not bandy about so casually and irresponsibly the word "war."
War with China would be an unmitigated disaster for all parties. Tom's
parenthetical remark about an aircraft carrier (an obsolete technology in a world of drones) represents a not-very-veiled threat of violence.
But we should really think about what is most important for the next 20
years: dealing with climate change. That should be our focus, not some cat-
and-mouse with China, another board game for neocons. When Miami is
underwater no one will care who won the tariff war.
So let's set "war," metaphoric or real, aside, and for once spend our money, time, energy, and talents on facing a crisis of global proportions,
addressing which will save, rather than sacrifice, lives, both human and non
.
After 40 years of strong trade with China, let's have a look at the results in each country for one minute.
On the Chinese side: Poverty has been cut infrastructure is being built,
China middle class has grown by hundreds of millions.
Political system: Dictatorship
On the US side: Poverty has gone up. Infrastructure is crumbling, the Middle class is down and, difficult to reach for more and more Americans.
Meanwhile the political class doesn't have a problem wasting $ trillions in wars of choices while giving tax cuts to the people who have profited the
most from trade with China.
Political system: Democracy.
I'm afraid that a lot of people in the world would see China as the victor
and keep in mind that generally, people follow the Victor.
估计蜜柚付了这个作者不少钱
【 在 Dashabi1 (大傻逼) 的大作中提到: 】
: 纽约时报作家鼓吹美国对中国开战，但开战前需要想三个问题。
: 著名的纽约时报专栏作者，托马斯·弗里德曼最近发表文章称，20年前的反恐让美国入
: 侵了阿富汗，也让美国脸面丢尽。历史不可重演，美国没法回到20年前，但是弗里德曼
: 认为，现在却可以从20年后的角度去思考，该如何同中国开战。
: 弗里德曼认为，过去四十年中美关系的基本稳定，对世界和平和全球化都有不可磨灭的
: 贡献。但最近这几年中美关系不稳了，台面上的合作少了，脚底下的掰手腕多了。这些
: 判断应该说都非常合理，但这位美国人却接着说，现在中美关系的问题，主要是中国引
: 起的。他说，中国太有野心了，不听话，不遵守规则，更有侵略性……总而言之，中美
: 关系不稳，都是中国的错。
: 但弗里德曼认为要和中国不可避免的开战时，得想清楚三个问题。首先是，美国要想清
: ...................
Earlier this year the Alliance for Democracies Foundation published a poll
it commissioned that surveyed people all over the world. The poll found that more people regard the United States as a threat to democracy than regard
China as such.
This may come as a surprise to most Americans who have been fed a steady
diet of propaganda for most of our lives about how great and idealistic the United States is and how people around the world envy us for our democratic system and look to us stand up for democracy around the world.
Friedman argues here for caution in going down the road of a new Cold War
with China. Good. But he repeats a lot of nonsense that ignores the reasons people see the US as the greater threat to democracy than China.
He describes China as belligerent and blames that belligerence for the
breakdown in US-China relations. On what planet is China anywhere near as
belligerent as the US? How many overseas military bases does China have? (
One) How many countries has China bombed or invaded in the past 40 years? (
None) How many coup d'etats has China engineered in foreign countries? (None)
Friedman mentions China's statements and actions around Taiwan, Hong Kong,
Tibet and Xinjiang as evidence of its belligerence. But all of those are
territories recognized under international law as part of China and all of
them are places where the U.S. and its allies have actively meddled to
encourage separatist movements.
Let's be honest about who the belligerent power is.
China has never had extraterritorial ambitions, and likely never will. The
Chinese are expert at living together cheek-by-jowl, whereas Europeans never learned the civilized way of loving thy neighbor, no matter how much Jesus' followers tried.
The Chinese have no interest in forcing their way of life and customs on
others. There are enough of them to guarantee their culture is perennial.
The French, English, Dutch, Belgians and later the Americans tried and
failed to change people's customs, dress, language and even names, in a
competition between each other over whose culture is superior.
One aspect of the China-US competition that amazes me is the issue of
intellectual property. The workhorse of the US technological innovation
economy is its university research corps, and the workhorses of US research universities are overwhelmingly Chinese, by number and by productivity.
While IP registration is mainly American, the actual brainpower behind it is Chinese. It just isn't true that the Chinese innovation economy is based on "theft" of IP; it is more accurate to say that American IP is an accounting and business graft on top of Chinese foreign researchers on a temporary
student or postdoc visa.
Finally, it is America's fault that it didn't provide retraining and a
safety net to its laid off manufacturing labor force, and for letting its
working and middle classes stagnate. That is due to a cultural deficiency in blaming the individual for a collective policy choice.
It's so ridiculous. China has done indefensible things. But the economic
destruction of the industrial midwest is entirely a self-imposed injury. The US economy has been growing in the past 40 years. The amount of wealth
possessed by this country has been growing. However, the benefits of the
growth have not been shared by all. The income inequality is increasing. The working class literally hasn't seen wage increase in the past two decades
when you account for inflation. Manufacture jobs have been lost. But it is
the US that's supposed to have a government by the people of the people and for the people, and how come the US cannot solve this problem with the magic bullet it has been selling all the time, democracy? The political
establishment is unable and unwilling to solve the real problem, which is
the redistribution of wealth, but it is now trying to use China as a
scapegoat. In the end, the US may very well destroy China, but it's not
going to help the American people.
I would like to add a few comments on "China’s increasingly bullying
leadership":
Since 2001, China and its allies have dropped over 300k bombs on foreign
territories, that is 40 bombs a day for 20 years.
Since 2001, China has 0 days of peace.
In 2020, Chinese police shoot over 1000 people (minority) to death.
In 2021, a southern state in China (Texas) passed a voter suppression bill.
Friedman was certainly right, when most liberal pundits were way wrong,
about Afghanistan.
But Tom is often mistaken about China, though he keeps trying. I think
something about his intense experience at Tiananmen Square 30 years ago
makes him feel that situation is somehow generalizable to what we see today.
The politburo back then was full of very old and very scared men who
panicked at the student demonstrations and called in the Army to save them
from the same fate they had seen unleashed on university professors and
Buddhist monks during the Cultural Revolution.
That was a big mistake, and an embarrassment to the CCP who want all Chinese to forget, or never learn, that it happened.
Chinese people, only two generations removed from starvation and desperate
poverty in nearly every family, want nothing more than financial security
and good dining on their own food which they love more than almost anything else.
If we can continue to do business, fairly or unfairly, as Japan has done
with us for a long time, they will continue to be one of the most peaceful
nations on earth.
But Taiwan is another matter. They will fight for that, not only for the
many Chinese who live there and continue to do business in China or visit
relatives on the mainland, but for their pride.
The humiliation of Western powers forcing China to buy opium and cede
enclaves at the point of a gun back in the 1800's will never be forgiven or forgotten.
We would be wise to remember it as well.
China and USA have far more in common than many would like to believe.
Strong military presence abroad? Check. Crumbling healthcare system? Check. Late stage capitalism burning out their people? Check. Widening income
inequality? Check. Housing crisis? Check. Spotty human rights records within their own borders? Check.
China is nothing more than a reflection of the US was and is, and it's
uncomfortable for Americans to come to terms with that fact. When Americans think of China, they see an authoritarian government with incredible
military and manufacturing might pushing other countries around and
committing human rights violations, but the reality is that this is exactly what the US has always done.
The fact that the US is a democracy means little in this context, and that's a terrifying thought to anyone who believes in US exceptionalism.
The apparent US obsession with declaring war on anything it opposes has
never worked. The war on drugs, the war on cancer, the war on poverty, the
war on crime and the war on terror have all failed. A war on China does not bode well for the US.
There is a distinct national psychopathology at work here and it’s the
psychopathology of fear exacerbated by paranoia…. the notion that we can
only be safe if we destroy or dominate everything that we feel threatened by. This psychopathology has infused the illiberal thinking behind American
foreign policy for far too long. It leads to isolationism, domestic controls and a severe weakening of democratic values. It legitimizes the right wing perspective on militarisation and an over emphasis on security.
Several years ago I was asked to make a film for a European government to
explain how the war on terror was self harming democracies and damaging core democratic values. It began by explaining that ISIS’s main outward looking purpose was not acts of terrorism per se but to cause the West to trash its values and way of life. They would be happy with saying, “look around you
… look at what we made you do to yourselves.” The visual at that point
flipped from military patrolling the streets to a cartoon… a soldier
pointing to graffiti with the words Liberté, égalité, Fraternité crossed out and replaced by the word Sécurité.
A “war on China” would soon release the national paranoia that could
fatally damage the US. Know yourselves.
You have confirmed my view that Americans have learnt absolutely nothing
following Iraq and Afghanistan. Barely a month after the Kabul debacle and
you’re talking about a war with China.
The ideological battle between democracy and authoritarian rule is a
manufactured narrative for the war that we’re openly contemplating. By the way, only Americans openly debate which country they want to invade next, is it Iran? Maybe, depends on how badly Israel pushes for it.
Our upcoming war with China has nothing to do with human rights or democracy, it has everything to do with our declining hegemony. We’re used to
overwhelming dominance across technology, economy, diplomacy and military.
It’s obvious we’re slipping behind on the economy and certain areas of
technology. We can still beat them in a military conflict though and there’s a sense that it will be too late if we don’t do it soon.
China got richer because its citizens are hardworking, smart, and honest and are willing to work jobs for much lower wages that no American will. Not
because China is "authoritarian" or because of "forced" labor, the workers
toil in the factories making your iPhones and computers and TV's and washing machines because they want a better life for their families through hard
work. Enough with the fantasy that somehow manufacturing jobs will come back to the states if the US buys less from China. Unless the U.S. wants to levy 1000% tariffs on all imports and stop trading with the entire world,
nothing will ever be made here. Americans are simply too lazy, uneducated
and unproductive to ever be competitive in manufacturing anything, no matter what slogans the politicians yell. Wages in China will catch up, but
someone will always be much more competitive than America in manufacturing. But while Friedman types on his computer made in China, and turns on his TV and AC made in China, he will never admit that, will he?
这厮是大名鼎鼎的普利策奖获得者，蜜柚新闻领域的主要人物之一， 叔20多年前出名
了，世界是平的那本畅销书就是他写的。
这货水平是有的， 但是也同样不乏蜜柚的自私和邪恶。 比如当年鼓吹网络自由
blahblah，不论出处都应该有发声的机会。 但在同一篇文章里就对当时网络一些有关
他的言论（他定义为谣言）就大加笔伐，说谣言就像把枕头撕开，里面的棉絮出来后就再也放不回去了， 一定要严惩不殆，扑灭在萌芽阶段，不能让其有一点机会露头。
【 在 ChaoRen (叔还能战) 的大作中提到: 】
: 网络写手嘛，不哗众取宠哪里有人关注
【 在 AQ14 (魁猪) 的大作中提到: 】
: 这厮是大名鼎鼎的普利策奖获得者，蜜柚新闻领域的主要人物之一， 叔20多年前出名
: 了，世界是平的那本畅销书就是他写的。
: 这货水平是有的， 但是也同样不乏蜜柚的自私和邪恶。 比如当年鼓吹网络自由
: blahblah，不论出处都应该有发声的机会。 但在同一篇文章里就对当时网络一些有关
: 他的言论（他定义为谣言）就大加笔伐，说谣言就像把枕头撕开，里面的棉絮出来后就
: 再也放不回去了， 一定要严惩不殆，扑灭在萌芽阶段，不能让其有一点机会露头。
:
没错， 我也想说这托马斯以前不这样，我还看过他以前写的书。 看来中国一发展这些人的本性全暴露， 就是白人至上那一套， 包括BILL MAHER 都有这问题， 中国一好， 全变成SOUR LOSER， 这些人需要调整一下心理， 否则容易走极端。
【 在 AQ14 (魁猪) 的大作中提到: 】
: 这厮是大名鼎鼎的普利策奖获得者，蜜柚新闻领域的主要人物之一， 叔20多年前出名
: 了，世界是平的那本畅销书就是他写的。
: 这货水平是有的， 但是也同样不乏蜜柚的自私和邪恶。 比如当年鼓吹网络自由
: blahblah，不论出处都应该有发声的机会。 但在同一篇文章里就对当时网络一些有关
: 他的言论（他定义为谣言）就大加笔伐，说谣言就像把枕头撕开，里面的棉絮出来后就
: 再也放不回去了， 一定要严惩不殆，扑灭在萌芽阶段，不能让其有一点机会露头。
:
If you turn on the news to CNN/CNBC/FOX all you hear about now is the lab
leak or bioweapon theory. Notice how the narrative has changed. In the early stages of the pandemic, the media was running the zoonotic origin theory.
CNN/CNBC/FOX run anti-China news 24/7. Prepping and priming American
audiences for the possibility of a new cold war with China, thereby
justifying trillions in military spending if this scenario comes to fruition. This isn't even that far-fetched, considering that we just recently pulled out of a two-decade long war in the Middle East. The military industrial
complex needs the threat of perpetual war in order to justify funneling
trillions of American taxpayer money into the hands of the corporate elite (Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrup Grumman, Blackrock, etc.).
【 在 offlimit (nothing) 的大作中提到: 】
: 没错， 我也想说这托马斯以前不这样，我还看过他以前写的书。 看来中国一发展这些
: 人的本性全暴露， 就是白人至上那一套， 包括BILL MAHER 都有这问题， 中国一好，
: 全变成SOUR LOSER， 这些人需要调整一下心理， 否则容易走极端。
就是我高高在上看着你的时候， 会说两句你还不错的好话， 一旦发现接近我的水平了那怎么行？一定有猫腻。 就像丫鼓动全球化，但前提是中国必须在全球化的下端或底
层喝汤， 稍微想吃点肉了就是大逆不道。
【 在 offlimit (nothing) 的大作中提到: 】
: 没错， 我也想说这托马斯以前不这样，我还看过他以前写的书。 看来中国一发展这些
: 人的本性全暴露， 就是白人至上那一套， 包括BILL MAHER 都有这问题， 中国一好，
: 全变成SOUR LOSER， 这些人需要调整一下心理， 否则容易走极端。
(((弗里德曼)))
LMAO
【 在 Dashabi1 (大傻逼) 的大作中提到: 】
: 纽约时报作家鼓吹美国对中国开战，但开战前需要想三个问题。
: 著名的纽约时报专栏作者，托马斯·弗里德曼最近发表文章称，20年前的反恐让美国入
: 侵了阿富汗，也让美国脸面丢尽。历史不可重演，美国没法回到20年前，但是弗里德曼
: 认为，现在却可以从20年后的角度去思考，该如何同中国开战。
: 弗里德曼认为，过去四十年中美关系的基本稳定，对世界和平和全球化都有不可磨灭的
: 贡献。但最近这几年中美关系不稳了，台面上的合作少了，脚底下的掰手腕多了。这些
: 判断应该说都非常合理，但这位美国人却接着说，现在中美关系的问题，主要是中国引
: 起的。他说，中国太有野心了，不听话，不遵守规则，更有侵略性……总而言之，中美
: 关系不稳，都是中国的错。
: 但弗里德曼认为要和中国不可避免的开战时，得想清楚三个问题。首先是，美国要想清
: ...................
世界是平的，翻过，没觉得哪好。
这种专栏作家，和本版老将很像，啥话题都“懂”，啥话题都敢发表高见。
【 在 AQ14 (魁猪) 的大作中提到: 】
: 这厮是大名鼎鼎的普利策奖获得者，蜜柚新闻领域的主要人物之一， 叔20多年前出名
: 了，世界是平的那本畅销书就是他写的。
: 这货水平是有的， 但是也同样不乏蜜柚的自私和邪恶。 比如当年鼓吹网络自由
: blahblah，不论出处都应该有发声的机会。 但在同一篇文章里就对当时网络一些有关
: 他的言论（他定义为谣言）就大加笔伐，说谣言就像把枕头撕开，里面的棉絮出来后就
: 再也放不回去了， 一定要严惩不殆，扑灭在萌芽阶段，不能让其有一点机会露头。
:
这楼可以。评论不错。