Donald Hank
China an unreliable tool of the New World Order
By Donald Hank
It is helpful to look back at the way Americans thought not long ago and see how old analyses of events and old plots by the billionaires who think they own our planet come into focus in light of today's events.
This kind of comparison shows how far these manipulators have come in implementing their schemes, but also something else that most of us miss, and that is: it is now safe to say that they have failed.
A commentary from 2010 titled "Maurice Strong, Father of America's Destruction," is making the rounds on the internet again, forwarded by Americans fearful of the New World Order's sinister plans. Many think the plot is a fait accompli by now. Maurice was the father of Agenda 21, a UN initiative intended to reduce world population through stealthy measures that no one was supposed to notice even after they had been bruited about everywhere.
The article contains information on the elites behind the scenes engaged in the destruction of Western culture.
I wanted to focus on something that the article misses. It's about this now obsolete observation:
"Strong has been saying all along that China would someday soon replace the U.S. as world economic leader."
It was clear to me in the 70s when Nixon and Kissinger were pushing for free trade with China that the elites wanted China to take over the world economy but that these two schemers, and whoever was behind them, thought the US deep state could control China by careful manipulation via the government of the US, the most militarily and economically powerful country at the time. One reason for this was a desperate desire to rid the world of the Russian sphere of influence – then the Soviet Union and satellites – a desire that persists today in Neoconservative circles.
It was clear that the Western elites mentioned in this article, as well as others like Henry Kissinger, were convinced that China could be bought off and turned against Russia. They almost certainly expected that they could use money to make China a lapdog of the US.
But they forgot – or rather deliberately ignored – an important detail:
Culture.
The supranationals despise culture. To them it is like nationalism and patriotism, something that must be abolished to prevent war and bring about everlasting peace under the leadership of the world's richest men, who foolishly imagine themselves to be wise (Romans 1:22).
To better understand this, read the following excerpt from an interview with economist Michael Hudson:
"When [Neocon] Feith interviewed an experienced Pentagon Arabist, Patrick Lang, for a job in Iraq after the invasion, Feith asked: "Is it really true that you really know the Arabs this well, and that you speak Arabic this well? Is that really true?" Lang said, yes it was. "That's too bad" said Feith."
Feith was not hired and Hudson attributes this to a supposed anti-Arabic sentiment among the Neocons. That is a total misreading because it was none other than Neocon GW Bush who excused Islam as the religion of peace. Not only that, Bush was personal friends with the Saudi king. No, the State Department was never anti-Arab (though it is anti-Shia and opposed to secular leaders in the Arab world, based on its petrodollar agreement with the Saudis whereby the US government and military became Sunni-Saudi vassals). However, it was in fact anti-culture. The "experts" the State Department hires to analyze different regions of the world are supposed to be well versed in Neocon policies and the economic and political realities, but with minimal knowledge of the cultures of the respective regions.
One of the best examples of this anticulture mentality was Ludwig Zamenhof, a Polish supranationalist who invented his own language, Esperanto, in an attempt to avoid cultural clashes. In effect it was intended to be a step toward eliminating culture altogether, since Zamenhof, like all supranational thinkers, posited that culture is a wholly negative construct that divides humanity into mutually antagonistic groups. (Sort of like saying arteries must be eliminated from the body because they can become clogged with cholesterol).
Now, over 30 years after the start of this experiment with China, the supranationals have finally caught a glimpse of how abjectly wrong they all were.
Recently, it suddenly became abundantly clear that China was not really for sale after all, although it never revealed that fact until it was strong enough to shrug off US manipulation without resistance.
The Washington supranational elites were men who operated in secret and stealth to control the world economy and geopolitics. But being arrogant and unshakably convinced of their own infallibility, they became careless and ignored, as the years went by, the ominous signs all around them that China was not in fact becoming imbued with their ideals at all and was not shifting its deeply held allegiances, for example, to Russia.
Why?
Again, the answer is culture. An intractable and key component of Chinese culture that will not die – having even survived Mao's onslaught – is Confucianism. On one level, the Chinese saw the US as benefactors and hence, according to Confucian code, worthy of a certain outward show of respect, but not of sincere obedience or worship. Like the Russians, they never felt a natural organic bond with Washington's elites, only a deep seated mistrust that deepened with increasing contact. To know them was to despise them.
Therefore, unlike the Western actors in the New World Order who harbor an irresistible desire to tout their exploits or discuss amongst themselves the ways and means of achieving their ends, Chinese leaders cannot even bring themselves to enunciate their intentions, even if they wished to. Thus they could not say aloud that they would never obey these sneaky Western task masters, for whom they could have no inward respect because they sensed that these manipulators, thinking themselves cunning, were in fact their inferiors. Because, for one thing, unlike the manipulators, the Chinese, like their Russian soul brothers, do not have a price. Though both the Russians and Chinese want money, they are not driven by money. This is a subtlety the supranationals can't grasp because such alien characteristics as integrity or spiritual bonding are absent from their mental code, which catalogues human traits like these as weaknesses. Being good Confucians, however, the Chinese leaders would show Washington respect in public and never hint that they had the economic and military advantage. This is illustrated by the interview with Chinese monetary expert Chen Yulu, who while touting the benefits of the RMB (Chinese yuan) as a world-trade currency, and reporting that RMB clearing centers were springing up like mushrooms in Europe, insisted that the RMB did not aim to challenge the dollar.
Even the Chinese people would remain unaware that their leaders secretly intended to break with Washington and go their own way as soon as they had their Peking ducks in a row. Nor was there even a need for the leaders to discuss this amongst themselves. Asians need not exchange words to come to an understanding. Their organic cultural code determines how they will behave in a group, the kinds of decisions they will make, their responses to stimuli from Western partners. Nothing need be discussed. But their responses were firmly embedded in their mental code, in their very DNA as it were, from the outset.
Much of their modus operandi is based on something akin to instinct. It's like that mysterious something that causes a flock of starlings to suddenly veer off to the right or left without any signal in sight. They just know when and how to turn.
When and how was seen just recently, 43 years after Nixon's historic visit to China, when an impressive contingent of Chinese troops marched in a military parade in Red Square on Victory Day (May 9, 2015) in a breath taking show of solidarity, followed by joint Russian-Chinese naval drills in the Mediterranean from May 17-21.
Contrast this with the indiscreet rhetoric of NATO and US officials constantly chattering about how outrageous the Russians are behaving, or US presidential candidates prattling about China "manipulating its currency" (cheeky irony for a nation that has launched three trillion-dollar money printing campaigns, QE 1, 2 and 3, with QE 4 in the pipeline and no end in sight!).
By contrast, after waiting patiently in silence for decades, the Eurasians simply show what they've got, without a word of rhetoric, while the opponent shrieks its scripted outrage at them, like the limbless Black Knight in the Monty Python film "The Holy Grail," who after being reduced to a trunk and a head, keeps shouting "come back here, cowards" to King Arthur riding off in the distance.
What I am trying to tell you, Dear Reader, is in fact good news in disguise for the long term. While some still theorize that our only enemies are in foreign lands, more and more Americans are waking up to the fact that there is no enemy more hostile or dangerous to our freedoms than the Satanists who control Washington, DC.
While the twisted billionaire elites once openly discussed how they would use "pawns" such as China to impose a stealth plan on its own people to reduce our population, that nation, while pretending to be our vassal, never once had any intention of complying with these babbling fools.
The main goal of the New World Order and Agenda 21 was to reduce world population, possibly by as much as 80%, as suggested here.
However, the new AIIB bank founded by China and sponsored by the BRICS, is working against this goal, helping Third World countries become more prosperous even as Western investment banks seek to bankrupt them. Thus, population reduction is not in the cards. After all, what Third World government would choose the World Bank or IMF as a potential lender when their loans come with a series of distasteful conditions such as forced privatization of the funded project (which usually adds to the cost) or acceptance of the LGBT agenda rejected notably by many majority-Christian African countries. As for war, another card in the New World Order population reduction deck, China and Russia have shown both iron resolve and formidable power, so much so that, since the above-described dazzling shows of Sino-Russian strength and solidarity in Red Square and the Mediterranean, famously Russophobic supranationalist George Soros warned, that there is no way the US and NATO can afford a war with Russia at this point. It seems clear that he fears what some ill-advised fellow Neocons might do to provoke war. Though he didn't mention China, everyone with a pulse now knows that Russia does not stand alone. Thus if war with Russia is unthinkable, war with China and Russia fighting in tandem is, well, unthinkably unthinkable. Clearly, Agenda 21, which was envisioned as a joint project with China, will not happen with China pulling the other way.
© Donald Hank
July 10, 2015
It is helpful to look back at the way Americans thought not long ago and see how old analyses of events and old plots by the billionaires who think they own our planet come into focus in light of today's events.
This kind of comparison shows how far these manipulators have come in implementing their schemes, but also something else that most of us miss, and that is: it is now safe to say that they have failed.
A commentary from 2010 titled "Maurice Strong, Father of America's Destruction," is making the rounds on the internet again, forwarded by Americans fearful of the New World Order's sinister plans. Many think the plot is a fait accompli by now. Maurice was the father of Agenda 21, a UN initiative intended to reduce world population through stealthy measures that no one was supposed to notice even after they had been bruited about everywhere.
The article contains information on the elites behind the scenes engaged in the destruction of Western culture.
I wanted to focus on something that the article misses. It's about this now obsolete observation:
"Strong has been saying all along that China would someday soon replace the U.S. as world economic leader."
It was clear to me in the 70s when Nixon and Kissinger were pushing for free trade with China that the elites wanted China to take over the world economy but that these two schemers, and whoever was behind them, thought the US deep state could control China by careful manipulation via the government of the US, the most militarily and economically powerful country at the time. One reason for this was a desperate desire to rid the world of the Russian sphere of influence – then the Soviet Union and satellites – a desire that persists today in Neoconservative circles.
It was clear that the Western elites mentioned in this article, as well as others like Henry Kissinger, were convinced that China could be bought off and turned against Russia. They almost certainly expected that they could use money to make China a lapdog of the US.
But they forgot – or rather deliberately ignored – an important detail:
Culture.
The supranationals despise culture. To them it is like nationalism and patriotism, something that must be abolished to prevent war and bring about everlasting peace under the leadership of the world's richest men, who foolishly imagine themselves to be wise (Romans 1:22).
To better understand this, read the following excerpt from an interview with economist Michael Hudson:
"When [Neocon] Feith interviewed an experienced Pentagon Arabist, Patrick Lang, for a job in Iraq after the invasion, Feith asked: "Is it really true that you really know the Arabs this well, and that you speak Arabic this well? Is that really true?" Lang said, yes it was. "That's too bad" said Feith."
Feith was not hired and Hudson attributes this to a supposed anti-Arabic sentiment among the Neocons. That is a total misreading because it was none other than Neocon GW Bush who excused Islam as the religion of peace. Not only that, Bush was personal friends with the Saudi king. No, the State Department was never anti-Arab (though it is anti-Shia and opposed to secular leaders in the Arab world, based on its petrodollar agreement with the Saudis whereby the US government and military became Sunni-Saudi vassals). However, it was in fact anti-culture. The "experts" the State Department hires to analyze different regions of the world are supposed to be well versed in Neocon policies and the economic and political realities, but with minimal knowledge of the cultures of the respective regions.
One of the best examples of this anticulture mentality was Ludwig Zamenhof, a Polish supranationalist who invented his own language, Esperanto, in an attempt to avoid cultural clashes. In effect it was intended to be a step toward eliminating culture altogether, since Zamenhof, like all supranational thinkers, posited that culture is a wholly negative construct that divides humanity into mutually antagonistic groups. (Sort of like saying arteries must be eliminated from the body because they can become clogged with cholesterol).
Now, over 30 years after the start of this experiment with China, the supranationals have finally caught a glimpse of how abjectly wrong they all were.
Recently, it suddenly became abundantly clear that China was not really for sale after all, although it never revealed that fact until it was strong enough to shrug off US manipulation without resistance.
The Washington supranational elites were men who operated in secret and stealth to control the world economy and geopolitics. But being arrogant and unshakably convinced of their own infallibility, they became careless and ignored, as the years went by, the ominous signs all around them that China was not in fact becoming imbued with their ideals at all and was not shifting its deeply held allegiances, for example, to Russia.
Why?
Again, the answer is culture. An intractable and key component of Chinese culture that will not die – having even survived Mao's onslaught – is Confucianism. On one level, the Chinese saw the US as benefactors and hence, according to Confucian code, worthy of a certain outward show of respect, but not of sincere obedience or worship. Like the Russians, they never felt a natural organic bond with Washington's elites, only a deep seated mistrust that deepened with increasing contact. To know them was to despise them.
Therefore, unlike the Western actors in the New World Order who harbor an irresistible desire to tout their exploits or discuss amongst themselves the ways and means of achieving their ends, Chinese leaders cannot even bring themselves to enunciate their intentions, even if they wished to. Thus they could not say aloud that they would never obey these sneaky Western task masters, for whom they could have no inward respect because they sensed that these manipulators, thinking themselves cunning, were in fact their inferiors. Because, for one thing, unlike the manipulators, the Chinese, like their Russian soul brothers, do not have a price. Though both the Russians and Chinese want money, they are not driven by money. This is a subtlety the supranationals can't grasp because such alien characteristics as integrity or spiritual bonding are absent from their mental code, which catalogues human traits like these as weaknesses. Being good Confucians, however, the Chinese leaders would show Washington respect in public and never hint that they had the economic and military advantage. This is illustrated by the interview with Chinese monetary expert Chen Yulu, who while touting the benefits of the RMB (Chinese yuan) as a world-trade currency, and reporting that RMB clearing centers were springing up like mushrooms in Europe, insisted that the RMB did not aim to challenge the dollar.
Even the Chinese people would remain unaware that their leaders secretly intended to break with Washington and go their own way as soon as they had their Peking ducks in a row. Nor was there even a need for the leaders to discuss this amongst themselves. Asians need not exchange words to come to an understanding. Their organic cultural code determines how they will behave in a group, the kinds of decisions they will make, their responses to stimuli from Western partners. Nothing need be discussed. But their responses were firmly embedded in their mental code, in their very DNA as it were, from the outset.
Much of their modus operandi is based on something akin to instinct. It's like that mysterious something that causes a flock of starlings to suddenly veer off to the right or left without any signal in sight. They just know when and how to turn.
When and how was seen just recently, 43 years after Nixon's historic visit to China, when an impressive contingent of Chinese troops marched in a military parade in Red Square on Victory Day (May 9, 2015) in a breath taking show of solidarity, followed by joint Russian-Chinese naval drills in the Mediterranean from May 17-21.
Contrast this with the indiscreet rhetoric of NATO and US officials constantly chattering about how outrageous the Russians are behaving, or US presidential candidates prattling about China "manipulating its currency" (cheeky irony for a nation that has launched three trillion-dollar money printing campaigns, QE 1, 2 and 3, with QE 4 in the pipeline and no end in sight!).
By contrast, after waiting patiently in silence for decades, the Eurasians simply show what they've got, without a word of rhetoric, while the opponent shrieks its scripted outrage at them, like the limbless Black Knight in the Monty Python film "The Holy Grail," who after being reduced to a trunk and a head, keeps shouting "come back here, cowards" to King Arthur riding off in the distance.
What I am trying to tell you, Dear Reader, is in fact good news in disguise for the long term. While some still theorize that our only enemies are in foreign lands, more and more Americans are waking up to the fact that there is no enemy more hostile or dangerous to our freedoms than the Satanists who control Washington, DC.
While the twisted billionaire elites once openly discussed how they would use "pawns" such as China to impose a stealth plan on its own people to reduce our population, that nation, while pretending to be our vassal, never once had any intention of complying with these babbling fools.
The main goal of the New World Order and Agenda 21 was to reduce world population, possibly by as much as 80%, as suggested here.
However, the new AIIB bank founded by China and sponsored by the BRICS, is working against this goal, helping Third World countries become more prosperous even as Western investment banks seek to bankrupt them. Thus, population reduction is not in the cards. After all, what Third World government would choose the World Bank or IMF as a potential lender when their loans come with a series of distasteful conditions such as forced privatization of the funded project (which usually adds to the cost) or acceptance of the LGBT agenda rejected notably by many majority-Christian African countries. As for war, another card in the New World Order population reduction deck, China and Russia have shown both iron resolve and formidable power, so much so that, since the above-described dazzling shows of Sino-Russian strength and solidarity in Red Square and the Mediterranean, famously Russophobic supranationalist George Soros warned, that there is no way the US and NATO can afford a war with Russia at this point. It seems clear that he fears what some ill-advised fellow Neocons might do to provoke war. Though he didn't mention China, everyone with a pulse now knows that Russia does not stand alone. Thus if war with Russia is unthinkable, war with China and Russia fighting in tandem is, well, unthinkably unthinkable. Clearly, Agenda 21, which was envisioned as a joint project with China, will not happen with China pulling the other way.
© Donald Hank
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
