21st Century’s Most Epic Geopolitical Earthquake – Trump’s Presidency And His Strategic Vision.
[FF Editorial: Below is an email reply by our editor Matthias Chang to a trusted friend who sent him an article by Dick Eastman, a brilliant geopolitical analyst. This reply by Matthias Chang was necessary because Mr. Eastman’s analysis while correct, missed out on an important chapter in the present geopolitical history as it unfolds before our very eyes. Wishing all readers a Merry Christmas and a successful 2017.]
End of Editorial
Dear XXXXXXXXXX,
May I wish you in advance a Happy and Fruitful New 2017 and a Merry Christmas.
Way, way before Trump’s Election Victory, I spoke and wrote (via whatsapp messages etc.) about the deal between of China and USA in 1981 (which Eastman did not compare in his article – a major oversight) with the Kissinger’s deal with the Arabs especially the Wahhabist Saudis, in exchange for Protection and Survival as absolute Monarchs – i.e. all the filthy riches and trillions that would pour into the coffers of these corrupt and false MUSLIMS arising from the controlled hike in oil prices, THE US DOLLAR WOULD REMAIN SUPREME AS THE UNDISPUTED GLOBAL RESERVE CURRENCY AND THE ARABS MUST REMIT THE DOLLARS BACK TO THE USA TO BUY USA DEBTS VIA US TREASURIES ETC. TO FINANCE THE US ECONOMY AS THE OIL INDUSTRY IN USA WOULD BE “HOLLOWED OUT FOR CHEAPER MIDDLE EAST PRODUCTION” with the tacit connivance of the oil giants in the USA.
SINCE DENG’s ASCENDANCY IN 1981, THIS DEAL WHICH KISSINGER ORCHESTRATED DURING NIXON’S PRESIDENCY, WAS ACCELERATED WITH CHINA, WITH THIS DIFFERENCE – THE ENTIRE MANUFACTURING IN USA WOULD BE HOLLOWED OUT, FOR THE DOMINANCE OF FINANCE CAPITALISM AND THE SUPREMACY OF THE BANKER FACTION. CHINA WOULD GROW BY LEAPS AND BOUNDS ON ONE SIMILAR CONDITION WITH THE ARABS – DON’T SCREW UP THE US DOLLAR AND THE US’s UNRIVALLED SUPREMACY IN GLOBAL FINANCE. CHINA MUST BUY US DEBTS VIA US TREASURIES ETC.
THIS IS AS OBVIOUS AS DAY FROM NIGHT AND YET, EASTMAN FAILED TO DRAW THIS SIMPLE ANALYSIS AND THE COMPARISON WITH THE ARAB DEAL IN 1976.
WHEN TRUMP WON THE ELECTION, CHINA WAS CAUGHT IN A SURPRISE, AS PRESIDENT XI JINPING THOUGHT THAT THE DEAL WITH THE USA WOULD NOT BE CHANGED AND OR UNDERMINED. THAT EXPLAINS HIS PREMATURE REACTION AND CHINA’S KNEE JERK RESPONSE TO TRUMP’S VARIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT CONCERNING GLOBAL TRADE, SPECIFICALLY TRADE WITH CHINA. HOW STUPID CAN CHINA BE!
I WROTE A SIMILAR STATEMENT AS ABOVE AND HAD IT TRANSMITTED TO CHINA VIA MY CONNECTIONS AND THOUGH I WOULD NOT CLAIM AS THE PRINCIPAL FACTOR, THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE STANCE OF CHINA, AS CAN BE SEEN IN THE RECENT STATEMENT FROM CHINA THAT “CHINA WILL COOPERATE WITH THE USA AND TRUMP, SAVE ONE ISSUE, TAIWAN”. THIS WAS, ALL ALONG USA AND TRUMP’S OPENING GAMBIT WITH CHINA. TRUMP IS A GENIUS.
NO ONE SAW THIS COMING. HOW STUPID CAN THE CHINESE AND THE US ESTABLISHMENT BE? THEY ARE NOW IN DEEP FEAR AS THE RULES OF THE GAME HAS CHANGED AND WILL BE CHANGED TREMENDOUSLY UNLESS TRUMP IS MURDERED AND OR A COUP IS MOUNTED AGAINST HIM DURING HIS TENURE AND REPLACED, AS WAS IN THE CASE OF NIXON WITH THE FALSE FLAG COUP VIA WATERGATE.
THERE IS NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE 21ST CENTURY MORE FAR REACHING THAN THIS EPIC (MIND BOGGLING TO MANY CHINA “EXPERTS” AND PSEUDO COMMUNISTS” WHEN CHINA IS A CAPITALIST COUNTRY, WITH A ONE PARTY RULE) AND DYNAMIC PARADIGM SHIFT EFFECTED BY TRUMP.
IF TRUMP SUCCEEDS HE WILL BE CONSIDERED THE GREATEST PRESIDENT OF THE USA WHETHER ONE AGREES WITH HIM OR NOT.
IN GEOPOLITICS, IT MATTERS NOT WHETHER ONE AGREES WITH TRUMP. IT IS WHETHER WE TAKE COGNISANCE OF THE PARADIGM SHIFT AND ADJUST AND ADAPT OR BE WIPED OUT BY THE CURRENTS OF HISTORIC DYNAMIC CHANGE.
REGARDS,
MATTHIAS
Dick Eastman’s Article Below
Trump’s Neo-Harding “America First” Protective Tariff Policy over Neo-Liberal Free-Trade is fine with me. Here’s why.
When Henry Kissinger and David Rockerfeller met with Zhou Enlai in China in 1973 just one week after Richard Nixon had visited China reopening official relations an understanding was reached whereby the US would supply industrial capital and knowhow to China in exchange for a monopoly relationship letting only Kissinger-Associates-Allowed corporations to gain the advantage of low cost labor production which could outcompete all US domestic industry.
Now the compatative adavantage to a corporation of being able to hire Chinese ready for hard work at low exceedingly lowcost — no drugs, no alcohol, a strong work ethic, no unions, no benefits to pay, weak environmental standards and a great labor pool so that one can burn workers out and just keep on replacing them with fresh — gave the Rockefeller/Kissinger corporations, great competitive advantage over their domestic US competitors having to pay high wages, high regulation, minimum wages, union strikes and collective bargaining etc. gave them tremendous advantage.
Of course the American consumer did not see greatly lowered prices commensurate with the greatly lowered labor costs. The $19.99 plastic action figure toy tied in with a Hollywood movie, still cost $19.99 even though it cost $12 to $15 to produce in the US but less than $2.00 per copy to produce in China and trnasport to Oakland’s containerized port for distribution throughout the US. The consumer paid the old prices for good while the corporations split with the Princelings of China the monopoly profit, since it did not take much lowering of prices — not as much as they were able to lower them in competition — to drive high-wage high-benefit paying, labor-contract, and environmental-cost and safety-cost domestic corporations out of business. Wal Mart was introduced to ensure monopsony buying to reinforce the monopoly selling of off-shore manufactures.
The Domestic producers were not simply being bested on one or another area of goods production, they were being bested across the entire spectrum of manufactured goods American buy. These firms would fail — and they were helped in failing by the banks maintaining a deflationary domestic real economy in the US throughout the post Rockefeller-Kissinger-Zhou buildup of China and degrading of American domestic manufacturing. The entire money supply of the US is borrowed — that is, co-created with a debt of an even bigger amount (principal plus compound interest) that must subquently be returned to the lender — but money in the domestic economy was going to multinational corporations and to China, and to taxes to pay on the national debt that resulted. Good manufacturing jobs disappeared and with them the strength of the income tax base — requiring more and more borrowing by goverment — at compound interest.
Make no mistake — Rockefeller and Kissinger were at war with middle-class America, with the intelligent, selfsupporting, self-respecting, ambitious, industrious citizens who always pose the greatest threat — in the form of populist politics — to the bankers and their Bank-of-England/East-India-Company/Rothschild system, the system that Rockefeller and Kissinger were representing when they visited Zhou Enlai.
So here we are in 2016 and the newly elected president intends to place a tariff on goods imported from China, while the media decries the violation of “long-standing liberal free-trade policies.”
One more thing — in defense of a great president and a warning for a new one. Richard Nixon opened China believing in peaceful co-existence and the fact that if given time for a fair comparison of how free-enterprise and representative goverment functions in contrast to the communist planned command economy where each receives what the state deems he needs and where works is ordered by the state as much as the state determines the worker is able to and must provide — that the former system would win out. But of course Kissinger and Rockefeller were moving the Watergate coup against Nixon — a frame-up (with John Dean and Kissinger as the real Deep Throats by my deductions from public information — so that the Rockefeller/Kissinger plans for China’s industrialization and America’s middle-class deindustrialization could proceed unopposed, as it certainly did after Nixon’s resignation to avoid a constitutional crisis that would hinder the proper working of goverment — he should have fought them because they were take a de-industrialization and dfinancial axe to this country as soon as Nixon was gone. When Nixon was gone they first robbed the middle-class of their savings with Paul Volkers “QE” bond purchases at the New York Fed, and then, when that was accomplished and the savings-and-loans were in crisis (because they had been taking in money short-term at 3% and lending long-term at 6%) forcing dereglation of banking to Rockefeller advantage — after which Volker moved to become Fed Chairman in control of the discount rate — from where he inaugurated the tight-money (deflation) policy that has presisted to this day — making it very hard for firms to invest in automatization to combat the cost advantage of Chinese subsistence labor. Japan was hit with deflation too — they were going to provide us with the robots. THE WHOLE THING WAS ON GREAT PLAN AGAINST US — COORDINATED AT EVERY LEVEL, WITH EVERY INSTITUTION — FROM THE NEWS TALKING ABOUT THE LEVERAGED BUY-OUTS OCCURING IN THE DEFLATION — AS MAKING US “LEAN AND MEAN” — WHEN IN FACT THEY WERE TEARING OUT THE GUTS OF AMERICAN PRODUCTION. The news media and the economics and business administration courses in colleges sung praises of international free trade and the efficiency of markets ad nausium.
I watched it all from a pretty good seat on the sidelines — but of course I was marginalized — just another excess white person who needed to stand aside so that blacks and women could have their fair chance. And who could argue with that? So I took to the internet to have what effect I could simply speaking as a citizen — where I met with endless abuse — endless ridicule — which certainly makes it unpleasant to try and be Paul Revere awakening the good citizens.
I wish Donald Trump the best — but let us make sure that none of the Neo-cons he is taking into his administration are “Kissingers” really beholden to Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman-Sachs. Beware of new Watergates.
