Connect with us

NEWS

Can America be saved? It would have to start with some TRUTH-TELLING and unselfishness, so…not so much

Published

on

For those who hadn’t noticed the obvious, the January 6 “insurrection” at the Capitol verified that America is at war with itself – long divorced from its principles of government “of the people, by the people and for the people.”

Ironically, it was during the last civil war when President Abraham Lincoln spoke those eloquent words at Gettysburg, asserting that the honored dead had fallen in battle so America could have a “new birth of freedom” and govern with such dedication to the will of its people that it “shall not perish from the earth.”

There are no Abraham Lincolns today. There are no statesmen. There is no one who sees any kind of picture bigger than a selfie. And eloquence? The new figurehead can’t even tell his lies in coherent sentences or keep his hands to himself.

There are selfish grifters who govern entirely on a me-first-me-last basis, seeing only their agendas and opportunities to seize more power. There are billionaires and foreign or otherwise special interests that buy and sell the egomaniacal hucksters. There are basement dwellers who burn, loot and brutalize to fight for disingenuous, racist causes. There are people in horned hats or tactical gear who break into the Capitol to sit at Nancy Pelosi’s desk or take souvenirs.

At this moment of crisis, we get the usual crass opportunism. President-elect Joe Biden – the guy who vowed to heal and unify – essentially blames the failure of police to defend the Capitol on racism. These are the same police who have protected him for nearly five decades. But Biden and other Democrats can’t resist the chance to falsely slash at and exploit America’s Achilles heel, the race weapon.

Mainstream media outlets suddenly learn how to use words such as “riot” and “domestic terrorism,” and discover that violent protests aren’t noble. They forget the talking points of last summer, when Black Lives Matter and Antifa rioters torched America’s cities on false pretenses. They even help lead the effort to hunt down the perpetrators and destroy their lives. They and their social media partners work in unison to further silence non-conforming voices and brand them as dangerous villains.

No longer do the propagandists quote Martin Luther King, saying that “a riot is the language of the unheard.”That’s because this time, the quote applies accurately. People fed up with being betrayed, lied to and falsely demonized have such little remaining hope in the system that pushing through a line of police at the Capitol can seem like a good idea.

Many of these unheard manifested previously as the Tea Party, which sprung up in 2009 to fight overreaching government, deficit spending and open borders. The response was predictable: lies. Brand the movement as being about, what else? Racism. Falsely accuse, then say it over and over and over again until the zombie armies believe it.

Never, ever, ever listen to – let alone heed – the demands of the people. Keep the fake wars going. Keep the boot of illegal immigration on the throats of wage earners. Keep the government growing. Keep globalist interests on the front burner. If necessary, distract with some fake issues, like transgender restrooms and Koran burning.

Deflected, belittled and falsified, the people were so unheard by 2016 that they elected a reality show star. Most weren’t foolish enough to think that he was a righteous man, but they saw him punch back at the so-called elites and stand up to manipulators in the media. More than anything, they were convinced that, unlike the Democrat and Republican rulers and media mouthpieces, Donald Trump didn’t hate them. In fact, he showed love for them and vowed to govern in America in the best interests of its citizens.

The usual tactics were deployed – have we mentioned skin color? – but the people were so excited at the prospect of having a president who’s at least a little bit on their side that they revolted. No media-pollster CONfidence game could keep them away from voting to Make America Great Again.

They stood by Trump through the ups and downs and self-inflicted wounds of his presidency. Wave after wave of largely deceptive attacks failed to move them. Being called bigots, Russian agents and cultists didn’t scare them away. And when Trump alleged that his re-election was stolen through massive fraud, they rallied to “stop the steal.”

With those allegations dismissed by the courts mostly on procedural grounds – and any evidence supporting them quashed by the media and Big Tech without being seriously investigated – the people are so angry and unheard in 2021 that we have a powder keg.

The only way to diffuse it would be to start telling some truths and have a real reckoning with disenfranchised, working-class Americans. Auditing the election would be a good starting point.

Biden himself should call for it. Tens of millions of people believe the result to be fraudulent. That alone is a crisis big enough to merit a real and independent investigation. If the allegations are as baseless and absurd as the media says, Biden has nothing to lose. He can build credibility and restore confidence in the nation’s political system by taking the magnanimous route and demanding a true accounting of the votes.

That’s not where we’re going. As in a Banana Republic, the ruling party is now seeking to prosecute its defeated political enemy while dehumanizing and destroying his supporters. With nine days left until Biden takes office, the corporatist-globalist establishment will race to impeach Trump again, and surely, he will need to be prosecuted for other alleged crimes after leaving office.

His supporters also must be ruined to never rise again. The sins of individual wrongdoers will be overstated, such as when incoming Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer likens the Capitol breach to Japan’s 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor. Those sins also will be applied to the whole populist-constitutionalist movement. The phrase “mostly peaceful” is forgotten. Corporations and governments are in the process of a witch hunt to fire those who are found to have participated in the protests, including those who merely demonstrated legally. Cancel mobs will seek to out them and destroy their lives.

The absurd Pearl Harbor comparison illustrates the ruling class’ visceral hatred of flyover-country Americans. Former CIA intern Anderson Cooper, the Vanderbilt heir and CNN host, revealed that hatred further, looking at footage of the protesters and saying with disgust that they will “go back to the Olive Garden and to the Holiday Inn” and discuss “the great day they had in Washington.”

This doesn’t end well. Deflecting and defaming people rather than honestly confronting their legitimate grievances has gotten America to this untenable point. The revolt has already escalated from the Tea Party uprising to electing Trump to violent protest.

Do the Bidens, Schumers and Coopers of the world – and their backers in finance, Big Tech and arms manufacturing – really think that tens of millions of freedom-demanding Americans are going to curl up and obey because they’re being called names again? How’s that working out so far?

What comes next will be far uglier. America as we know it is over if it remains on this track. The present predicament hearkens back to another Lincoln speech, in which he used a line from the Bible to make his point: “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

NEWS

China is raising its retirement age, now among the youngest in the world’s major economies

Published

on

Starting next year, China will raise its retirement age for workers, which is now among the youngest in the world’s major economies, in an effort to address its shrinking population and aging work force.

The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, the country’s legislature, passed the new policy Friday after a sudden announcement earlier in the week that it was reviewing the measure, state broadcaster CCTV announced.

The policy change will be carried out over 15 years, with the retirement age for men raised to 63 years, and for women to 55 or 58 years depending on their jobs. The current retirement age is 60 for men and 50 for women in blue-collar jobs and 55 for women doing white-collar work.

“We have more people coming into the retirement age, and so the pension fund is (facing) high pressure. That’s why I think it’s now time to act seriously,” said Xiujian Peng, a senior research fellow at Victoria University in Australia who studies China’s population and its ties to the economy.

The previous retirement ages were set in the 1950’s, when life expectancy was only around 40 years, Peng said.

The policy will be implemented starting in January, according to the announcement from China’s legislature. The change will take effect progressively based on people’s birthdates.

For example, a man born in January 1971 could retire at the age of 61 years and 7 months in August 2032, according to a chart released along with the policy. A man born in May 1971 could retire at the age of 61 years and 8 months in January 2033.

Demographic pressures made the move long overdue, experts say. By the end of 2023, China counted nearly 300 million people over the age of 60. By 2035, that figure is projected to be 400 million, larger than the population of the U.S. The Chinese Academy of Social Sciences had previously projected that the public pension fund will run out of money by that year.

Pressure on social benefits such as pensions and social security is hardly a China-specific problem. The U.S. also faces the issue as analysis shows that currently, the Social Security fund won’t be able to pay out full benefits to people by 2033.

“This is happening everywhere,” said Yanzhong Huang, senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations. “But in China with its large elderly population, the challenge is much larger.”

That is on top of fewer births, as younger people opt out of having children, citing high costs. In 2022, China’s National Bureau of Statistics reported that for the first time the country had 850,000 fewer people at the end of the year than the previous year , a turning point from population growth to decline. In 2023, the population shrank further, by 2 million people.

What that means is that the burden of funding elderly people’s pensions will be divided among a smaller group of younger workers, as pension payments are largely funded by deductions from people who are currently working.

Researchers measure that pressure by looking at a number called the dependency ratio, which counts the number of people over the age of 65 compared to the number of workers under 65. That number was 21.8% in 2022, according to government statistics, meaning that roughly five workers would support one retiree. The percentage is expected to rise, meaning fewer workers will be shouldering the burden of one retiree.

The necessary course correction will cause short-term pain, experts say, coming at a time of already high youth unemployment and a soft economy.

A 52-year-old Beijing resident, who gave his family name as Lu and will now retire at age 61 instead of 60, was positive about the change. “I view this as a good thing, because our society’s getting older, and in developed countries, the retirement age is higher,” he said.

Li Bin, 35, who works in the event planning industry, said she was a bit sad.

“It’s three years less of play time. I had originally planned to travel around after retirement,” she said. But she said it was better than expected because the retirement age was only raised three years for women in white-collar jobs.

Some of the comments on social media when the policy review was announced earlier in the week reflected anxiety.

But of the 13,000 comments on the Xinhua news post announcing the news, only a few dozen were visible, suggesting that many others had been censored.

Continue Reading

NEWS

Russia warns NATO of ‘direct war’ over Ukraine

Published

on

Moscow’s envoy to the UN has reiterated where the Kremlin’s red line is

Granting Kiev permission to use Western-supplied long-range weapons would constitute direct involvement in the Ukraine conflict by NATO, Russia’s envoy to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, has said.

Moscow will treat any such attack as coming from the US and its allies directly, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday, explaining that long-range weapons rely on Western intelligence and targeting solutions, neither of which Ukraine is capable of.

NATO countries would “start an open war” with Russia if they allow Ukraine to use long-range weapons, Nebenzia told the UN Security Council on Friday.

“If such a decision is made, that means NATO countries are starting an open war against Russia,” Moscow’s envoy said. “In that case, we will obviously be forced to make certain decisions, with all the attendant consequences for Western aggressors.”

Putin issues new warning to NATO

“Our Western colleagues will not be able to dodge responsibility and blame Kiev for everything,” Nebenzia added. “Only NATO troops can program the flight solutions for those missile systems. Ukraine doesn’t have that capability. This is not about allowing Kiev to strike Russia with long-range weapons, but about the West making the targeting decisions.”

Russia considers it irrelevant that Ukrainian nationalists would technically be the ones pulling the trigger, Nebenzia explained. “NATO would become directly involved in military action against a nuclear power. I don’t think I have to explain what consequences that would have,” he said.

The US and its allies placed some restrictions on the use of their weapons, so they could claim not to be directly involved in the conflict with Russia, while arming Ukraine to the tune of $200 billion.

Multiple Western outlets have reported that the limitations might be lifted this week, as US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and British Foreign Secretary David Lammy visited Kiev. Russia has repeatedly warned the West against such a course of action.

 

Continue Reading

NEWS

China makes its move in Africa. Should the West be worried?

Published

on

Beijing maintains a conservative economic agenda in its relations with the continent, while finding it increasingly difficult to avoid a political confrontation with the West

The ninth forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) and the FOCAC summit held in Beijing on September 4-6 marked a significant phase in Africa’s relations with its global partners in the post-Covid era. China is the last major partner to hold a summit with African nations following the end of the pandemic; Africa summits were held by the EU and the US in 2022, and by Russia in 2023. The pandemic, coupled with rising global tensions, macroeconomic shifts, and a series of crises, underlined Africa’s growing role in the global economy and politics – something that China, which has undergone major changes (both internal and external) as a result of the pandemic, is well aware of.

It is clear that the relationship between China and Africa is entering a new phase. China is no longer just a preferential economic partner for Africa, as it had been in the first two decades of the 21st century. It has become a key political and military ally for many African countries. This is evident from China’s increasing role in training African civil servants and sharing expertise with them, as well as from several initiatives announced at the summit, including military-technical cooperation: officer training programs, mine clearing efforts, and over $100 million which China will provide to support the armed forces of African nations.

In the political arena, however, Beijing is proceeding very cautiously and the above-mentioned initiatives should be seen as the first tentative attempts rather than a systematic strategy.

While China strives to avoid political confrontation with the West in Africa and even closely cooperates with it on certain issues, it is becoming increasingly difficult to do so. Washington is determined to pursue a policy of confrontation with Beijing in Africa – this is evident both from US rhetoric and its strategic documents.

Dirty tactics: How the US tries to break China’s soft power in Africa

A “divorce” between China and the West is almost inevitable. This means that Chinese companies may lose contracts with Western corporations and won’t have access to transportation and logistics infrastructure. Consequently, China will need to develop its own comprehensive approach to Africa, either independently or in collaboration with other global power centers.

An important sign of the growing confrontation between the US and China in Africa was the signing of a trilateral memorandum of understanding between China, Tanzania, and Zambia regarding the reconstruction of the Tanzania-Zambia Railway (TAZARA), which was originally built by China in the 1970s. If it is expanded, electrified, and modernized, TAZARA has the potential to become a viable alternative to one of the key US investment projects in the region: the Lobito Corridor, which aims to enhance logistics infrastructure for exporting minerals (copper and cobalt) from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Zambia by modernizing the railway from the DR Congo to the Angolan port of Lobito.

In inland regions such as Eastern Congo, transportation infrastructure plays a crucial role in the process of mineral extraction. Considering the region’s shortage of rail and road networks, even a single non-electrified railway line leading to a port in the Atlantic or Indian Ocean can significantly boost the operation of the mining sector and permanently tie the extraction and processing regions to specific markets.

It appears that China’s initiative holds greater promise compared to the US one, particularly because Chinese companies control major mines both in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Zambia. This gives them a clear advantage in working with Chinese operators and equipment, facilitating the export of minerals through East African ports. Overall, this indicates that East Africa will maintain its role as the economic leader on the continent and one of the most integrated and rapidly developing regions for imports.

A former colonial European power returns to Africa. What is it after now?

The highlight of the summit was China’s pledge to provide $50 billion to African countries over the next three years (by 2027). This figure echoes the $55 billion commitment to China made by the US (for 3 years) at the 2022 US-Africa Summit and the $170 billion that the EU promised to provide over seven years back in 2021. Consequently, leading global players allocate approximately $15-20 billion annually to Africa.

In recent years, there has been noticeable growth in such promises. Nearly every nation is eager to promise Africa something – for example, Italy has pledged $1 billion annually. However, these large packages of so-called “financial aid” often have little in common with actual assistance, since they are typically commercial loans or corporate investments. Moreover, a significant portion of these funds is spent in the donor countries (e.g. on the procurement and production of goods), which means that they contribute to the economic growth of African nations in a minimal way.

As for China, it will provide about $11 billion in genuine aid. This is a substantial amount which will be used for developing healthcare and agriculture in Africa. Another $30 billion will come in the form of loans (roughly $10 billion per year) and a further $10 billion as investments.

The overall financial framework allows us to make certain conclusions, though it’s important to note that the methodology for calculating these figures is unclear, and the line between loans, humanitarian aid, and investments remains blurred. In terms of investments (averaging around $3 billion per year), Beijing plans to maintain its previous levels of activity – in recent years, China’s foreign direct investments (FDI) have ranged from $2 billion to $5 billion annually. Financial and humanitarian aid could nearly double (from the current $1.5 billion-$2 billion per year) while lending is expected to return to pre-pandemic levels (which would still be below the peak years of 2012-2018).

Can Africa seize control of its own energy?

China’s economic plan for Africa seems to be quite conservative. It’s no surprise that debt issues took center stage during the summit. During the Covid-19 pandemic, macroeconomic stability in African countries deteriorated, which led to challenges in debt repayments and forced Africa to initiate debt restructuring processes assisted by the IMF and the G20. Starting in 2020, a combination of internal and external factors led China to significantly cut its lending to African countries – from about $10-15 billion down to $2-3 billion. This reduction in funding has triggered economic reforms in several African countries (e.g. Ghana, Kenya, and Nigeria), which have shifted toward stricter tax and monetary policies. While promises to increase lending may seem like good news for African nations, it’s likely that much of this funding will go toward interest payments on existing obligations and debt restructuring, since China wants to ensure that its loans are repaid.

Despite China’s cautious approach to Africa, its interaction with the continent will develop as a result of external and internal changes affecting both Africa and China. Africa will gradually become more industrialized and will reduce imports while the demand for investments and local production will increase. China will face demographic challenges, and its workforce will decrease. This may encourage bilateral cooperation as some production facilities may move from China to Africa. This will most likely concern East African countries such as Ethiopia and Tanzania, considering China’s current investments in their energy and transportation infrastructure. Additionally, with Africa’s population on the rise and China’s population declining, Beijing is expected to attract more African migrant workers to help address labor shortages.

Continue Reading

Trending