In history, the Western powers used warships and opium to colonize China. Now the opposite has happened. We will use our open policy, seize the economic crisis in the West as a historical moment, and use effective measures to turn them into Socialist China’s economic and cultural colonies…. Our colonization of these countries is the historical process of communism’s triumph over rotten capitalism. We Chinese communists must shoulder the great historical mission, and use socialism to defeat capitalism, eventually liberating the entire humanity with Communism.Hu Jintao, 2008 [i]
…as long as we resolve the United States problem at one blow, our domestic problems will all be readily solved. Therefore, our military battle preparation appears to aim at Taiwan but in fact is aimed at the United States, and the preparation is far beyond the scope of attacking aircraft carriers or satellites.General Chi Haotian, secret speech [ii]
And now comes a strange report out of China. Someone has leaked 56 minutes from a May 14 Provincial CCP meeting in Guangdong. Senior officials from local military and government structures gathered to discuss the Central Committee’s “normal to war transition instructions.” They say that a decision for war has been made. They are calling it “the final war.”[iii] They even speak of a battle for the Taiwan Straits and for the unification of the “motherland.”
But that is not all. Provincial officials are tasked with retrofitting sixty-four 10,000-ton ro-ro ships for carrying military vehicles. We also learn of 953 “ships of various types” being massed in the province’s ports, supported by 588 railroad cars tasked to forward military equipment. Yet, a simple paper and pencil calculation suggests that these transport assets can carry more vehicles and men than would be needed to attack Taiwan. And Guangdong is only one province, not even in under the military theater command that would be tasked with invading Taiwan.
And then there is another curiosity. Participants are concerned for the defense of “targets” within Guangdong province. One general refers to sabotage attacks from “lurking spies.” But his concerns are brushed aside by others who fear social chaos and rioting in the cities. There is a slight dust-up in which the provincial governor refuses to commit himself. Yet, one commander – perhaps the district commander – finally talks about nuclear rescue teams. The target list they speak of reads like a list of nuclear targets; that is, the Southern Theater Military Commander Center, the province’s largest cities, the power grid, the province’s four nuclear power plants, etc. Furtively, Political Commissar Wang Shou-Xin suggested they should focus popular rage on the expected U.S. counter-attacks.
One cannot help wondering what kind of American counter-attacks would break down social order in the province. Are these Chinese officials furtively discussing a nuclear war?
There is another curiosity, as well. New recruits for the army are not only being medically examined. They are to be politically examined. Wherever they are being sent, it seems, their political reliability must be assured. Commissar Wang is especially interested in this. No shortcuts, comrades. We must assure the reliability of our soldiers!
Meanwhile, the official responsible for retrofitting the ro-ro ships offers a timid complaint, “The task given by the war zone [Southern Theater Command] is to complete the retrofitting of 365 ro-ro ships, etc., all kinds of ships, within 45 days. In addition, we are responsible for 64 national resource ships in our jurisdiction and 8 other ships.” But then he indicates he does not have access to the province’s “high-quality shipbuilding and retrofitting resources … concentrated in Guangzhou, Yangjiang, Dongguan….” He admits that his resources are “weak.”
There is something beneath the surface here. The participants are not being told everything. The generals and political leaders of the province proclaim their loyalty and agreement with the Central Committee’s “normal to war transition,” and none suggests that victory is unlikely. After all, this is being called “the final war.” But even though Taiwan is named as the target, everyone is afraid that America is going to hit them.
It is imperative, says the leader of the meeting, “to maintain the stability of the rear, pull together the overall strength of the party, government, military, police and civilians as a whole, to help guard 61 important military objectives and 276 civilian targets, maintain social order, cohesion and morale of the people, and continue to push the war forward.”
Push the war forward to where?
China is such a vast country, with 1.4 billion people. We cannot imagine the complexity of transitioning such a country “from normal to war.” We are told that China’s lockdowns are related to COVID. The ongoing port closures and work stoppages, however, may not have anything to do with COVID at all. From the way these Chinese officials are talking, they are not preparing for a small war. There is even reference to China being cut off from certain resources during the war. This raises a rather disturbing question: How could China win decisively if it merely invades Taiwan? Surely, the world will embargo China indefinitely once this has happened. How does China get access to overseas markets if it fails to take full control of the Pacific Ocean?
It seems rather obvious that China is mobilizing for a war against the United States. Several Chinese sources have, during the past two years, told me that China is preparing for a war against America. The evidence is now more than sufficient to conclude that war is coming in the short term. I am told it will start before November 1, 2022.
CHINA’S COLONIZATION OF THE WORLD
Reflecting on Party General Secretary Hu Jintao’s comments (quoted above), we need to admit that China has been working to colonize Africa, North America, South America, and Australia. So far, nobody has effectively blocked China’s moves. It is well known that China operates ports around the world, including the ports of entry on either side of the Panama Canal.[iv] We ought to ask why communist China has been so successful at solidifying its hold on so many ports and countries. One answer has to do with American businessmen wanting to exploit cheap Chinese labor. This has led to the industrialization of China. It has also led to extensive trade with China. Many “experts” thought this would serve the cause of peace. “Surely,” they said, “the Chinese communists want to make money. In that case, if we make them rich, they will not start a war with America or their neighbors.”
Such ideas may sound correct, but now it appears that this way of thinking is wrong. First, we misunderstood the nature of the Chinese communist regime; second, we have sinned against our own values by going into business with people who forcibly harvest organs from political prisoners; third, our own business class – our ruling class – is subject to financial blackmail by their Chinese partners. Furthermore, since business is connected to politics, and politics controls defense policy, we have seriously compromised our own national defense, and our economic independence.
How did we get in this position?
The history of America’s misguided China policy is a long one. Back in the 1940s, after World War II, the Chinese communist leader Mao Zedong fooled U.S. Army General George C. Marshall at the outset of the Chinese Civil War. Mao lied to Marshall about everything under the sun, and Marshall believed him. Through General Marshall’s mission to China, the United States effectively empowered the communists while tying the hands of General Chiang Kai-shek. Through Marshall we made it possible for the communists to take over China while General Chiang retreated to Taiwan. Because of Marshall, President Truman trusted Mao. He also trusted Stalin in the agreement that followed. In the end, Stalin and Mao violated all their solemn promises. It was said, at the time, that President Truman and General Marshall lost China.
Did we learn from these blunders? No. What followed, in time, was the blundering of Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger who opened relations with the mass murderers in Beijing. When Nixon shook hands with Chairman Mao, he was shaking hands with someone who killed more innocent people than Adolf Hitler. Imagine, then, if Nixon had made an “opening” with Nazi Germany after the Holocaust. Nobody would have congratulated Nixon in that event. At the time, however, nearly everyone was ecstatic about Nixon’s “China policy.”
As egregious as Nixon’s misstep was, America’s blundering had only just begun. Seven successive presidents facilitated massive Western investments that made China into an industrial and military superpower. There is nothing in history to compare with this enabling of a mortal enemy. How did all these geniuses of foreign policy talk themselves into it? First, they believed that China would join us against the Soviet Union. They called this, “Playing the China card.” Even worse, they flattered themselves that this strategy actually worked after the Soviet Union “collapsed.” Compounding one error with another, they mistakenly believed they had won the Cold War and that China would become a capitalist country. Deceived by the leaders of Russia and China, America’s business community formed a partnership with the Chinese Communist Party. And now these Chinese communists are preparing a “final war” against America.
How can we explain this American blundering? I believe we will need a whole new political philosophy to understand it; for a failure on this scale signifies the collapse of our political premises. Because we have valued the wrong things, and because we have no real interest in the truth, we have sacrificed our future to make money off cheap Chinese labor. For this to have happened, it also seems that we have no real leaders. In fact, our political system attracts and promotes the wrong kind of people. Therefore, our strategic incapacity is foreordained. None of our leaders possess the qualities of a Duke of Wellington or a George Washington. We have, instead, the inarticulate Joe Biden, the bumptious Boris Johnson, and the superficial Justin Trudeau. These are the Anglosphere leaders of today (with a tip of the hat to French Canada).
Is the East, then, destined to win the wars that are now being planned? Does Moscow or Beijing have formidable leaders? Undoubtedly these leaders have succeeded in swindling their Western counterparts. But how does that translate into something positive for the Russians or Chinese? A formidable liar makes for a defective regime. For example, Russia suffers under the furtive Bolshevism of Vladimir Putin and his fellow gangsters. They have poisoned many defectors, dissidents and journalists. At the same time, they are so busy stealing from the Russian people they have shortchanged their own soldiers. Meanwhile, China labors under the sanguinary discipline of the Communist Party. Here is a regime of forced organ donations, labor re-education camps, summary executions for “political crimes,” and social credit scores. Under the Communist Party the Chinese are not a people. They are chattel. They are treated as chattel. And they will fight as chattel.
Aside from their moral nihilism, the thing that ultimately damns all communists is their aversion to the free market. It is ironic that self-declared materialists should be so opposed to a true reckoning of material values. When they say “property is theft,” they are confessing. When they finally bomb and invade their suppliers, investors and customers, they are killing the Golden Goose. Thieving and killing is a dead end. Once the process begins, their unraveling will only be a matter of time. Furthermore, totalitarian socialists have this lust for destruction that normal people just cannot relate to. One might call it “destruction for the sake of destruction.” All their compromises with the market have been for the sake of organizing an even greater orgy of destruction at some future date. Therefore, their final war of mass destruction will be self-attenuating. In the sense that it really is final, they will not be able to walk it back for another go-round.
It is very difficult to generalize what this means for mankind. The cultural historian Jacob Burckhardt wrote that war establishes new conditions of life “which may be very durable.”[v] Wars not only establish nations, noted Burckhardt. Wars teach us to admire real heroes.[vi] Burckhardt added, “A people actually feels its full strength as a people only in war….”[vii] He suggested that nations only exist, as such, during wars. In recent years we have heard the lament that America is no longer a country. Watch, then, what would happen if the country came under attack. Remember what happened in the wake of 9/11. Heraclitus said, “War is the father of all things.” Please note: America’s founding occurred through the war of 1775-1783 (The American Revolutionary War). America’s re-founding occurred during the war of 1861-1865 (The American Civil War). “Not without cause do the Indians worship Shiva, the god of destruction” noted Burckhardt. “The warrior … is filled with the joy of destruction, wars clear the air like a thunderstorm, they steel the nerves and restore the heroic virtues, upon which states were originally founded, in place of indolence, double-dealing and cowardice.”[viii] Clarifying his position further, Burckhardt wrote:
Lasting peace not only leads to enervation; it permits the rise of a mass of precarious, fear-ridden, distressful lives which would not have survived without it and which nevertheless clamor for their ‘rights,’ cling somehow to existence, bar the way to genuine ability, thicken the air and as a whole degrade the nation’s blood. War restores real ability to honor. As for these wretched lives, war may at least reduce them to silence. [ix]
Burckhardt added a qualifier. To impart these benefits, a war must be “a just and honorable war – perhaps a war of defense such as the Persian War, which developed the powers of the Hellenes gloriously in all ways….”[x] But modern war, noted Burckhardt, has been degenerating into something purely destructive. He wrote that “the wars of today are certainly aspects of a great general crisis….”[xi] Civilian life, he said, was in a rut. Our political formulas and ideologies were inwardly deadening. Violence undertaken for a “higher world plan” was “cold comfort” and wars waged under such slogans were “a scandal.” To use violence in the name of false ideals, or false creeds was nihilistic. “And so,” he wrote, “peoples may be destroyed, and not even survive as component elements of other races.”[xii]
In one of his last mad books Friedrich Nietzsche predicted the approach of “a crisis without equal on earth, the most profound collision of conscience, a decision that was conjured up against everything that had been believed.”[xiii] Nietzsche further predicted that this “crisis” would cause “upheavals, a convulsion of earthquakes, a moving of mountains and valleys, the like of which has never been dreamed of.” He said, “The concept of politics will have merged entirely with a war of spirits; all power structures of the old society will have been exploded – all of them are based on lies: there will be wars the like of which have never yet been seen on earth.”[xiv] Elsewhere he warned,
Socialism – as the logical conclusion of the tyranny of the least and the dumbest, i.e., those who are superficial, envious, and three-quarters actors – is indeed entailed by ‘modern ideas’ and their latent anarchism; but in the tepid air of democratic well-being the capacity to reach conclusions … weakens. One follows – but one no longer sees what follows. [xv]
In other words, the whole world has gradually been succumbing to socialism. And why not? Modern ideas do indeed entail socialism. Our intellectuals have been turning more and more to socialism for the last hundred years. What does this portend? The revolutionary Paris commune of 1871, wrote Nietzsche, “was perhaps no more than a minor indigestion compared to what is coming. But there will always be too many … who are of one mind on one article of faith: ‘One must possess something to be something.’”[xvi] Life is appropriation, after all. But consider, in the year 2022, who the ultimate appropriators will be. Harking back to Party General Secretary Hu Jintao’s statement about China’s campaign of world socialist colonization (quoted above), we are talking about a world owned and dominated by China.
Ask yourself what a chinafied world would look like? The Merriam-Webster dictionary gives the following definition to the word chinafy: “to reduce (a country) to a state of passivity and helplessness.”[xvii] This not only fits China, but also socialism. Here is what China’s “final war” against America signifies. “In the doctrine of socialism,” wrote Nietzsche, “there is hidden … a ‘will to negate life’; the human beings or races that think up such a doctrine must be bungled. Indeed, I should wish that a few great experiments might prove that in a socialist society life negates itself, cuts off its own roots.”[xviii]
Socialism, noted Nietzsche, might end up serving as a demonstratio ad adsurdum. Even as “a restless mole under the soil of a society that wallows in stupidity, socialism will … be something useful and therapeutic: it delays ‘peace on earth’ … it forces the Europeans to retain spirit, namely cunning and cautious care, not to abjure manly and warlike virtues altogether….” This, Nietzsche speculates, might preserve Europe from the advent of a withering feminism.[xix]
It is too late, of course, to forestall the effects of “withering feminism” on Europe. We have become, as Julius Evola predicted, “beings who, in the deepest recesses of their souls, are neither men nor women, or who are masculine women and feminine men, and who claim to have reached full sexual emancipation while truly having regressed….”[xx] The disgusting liberal paradise celebrated by Francis Fukuyama in his book, The End of History and the Last Man, was meant to be a rebuttal of Nietzsche. In the end, it was merely an affirmation of decadence. The liberal democratic paradise of Fukuyama, like the socialist paradise, was always an illusion. About this, Juan Donoso Cortés wrote,
Those who made people believe that the earth can be a paradise, have made them more easily believe it can be a paradise without blood. The evil is not in the illusion; it is in the fact that, precisely on the moment and hour the illusion would be believed by all, blood would flow even from the hard rocks, and earth would be transformed into hell. In this obscure and lowly valley man cannot aspire to an impossible happiness without incurring the misfortune of losing the little he has. [xxi]
The West still believes it won the Cold War and achieved “the end of history.” This is why Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has been such a shock. History was supposed to be over. War was supposed to be a thing of the past. The result is exactly as Juan Donoso Cortés has stated. They believed the liberal paradise had arrived. But now blood flows “even from the hard rocks,” and the earth will be transformed into hell.
The Chinese, of course, have yet to make their move. Imagining Russia has been defeated in Ukraine, the West has assumed its preponderance by virtue of cash power. But now we see that cash itself is at the end of its tether. The West, deluded by false values and false sense of history as progress, has smugly said to itself that nobody would be crazy enough to start a nuclear world war. There is no money in such a war.
Can you hear the communists laughing? If China wins “the final war,” the criminals in Beijing are going to own the world. It does not matter if a few million square miles are turned to desert or irradiated. It does not matter if a billion people disappear. China and Russia will own the world and everything can be made right in that world by cracking a whip over the surviving slaves.
nOTES AND lINKS
[i] Jia, Howard. “China’s Secret Plan to Take Taiwan,” Chinascope, January-February 2010, p. 13.
[v] Jacob Burckhardt, Reflections on History (Indianapolis: LibertyClassics, 1979), p. 301.
[vi] Ibid, p. 302.
[vii] Ibid, pp. 216-17.
[viii] Ibid, p. 217.
[ix] Ibid, p. 217-18.
[x] Ibid, p. 218.
[xi] Ibid, p. 219.
[xiii] Friedrich Nietzsche translation by Walter Kaufmann, Ecce Homo, “Why I am a Destiny,” 1.
[xv] Friedrich Nietzsche, translation by Kaufmann and Hollingdale, The Will to Power (New York: Vintage Books, 1968), p. 77.
[xviii] Nietzsche, p. 77.
[xx] Julius Evola translation by Guido Stucco, Revolt Against the Modern World (Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions, 1995), p. 165.
[xxi] Juan Donoso Cortés, Essays on Catholicism, Liberalism, and Socialism (Dublin: M.H. Gill and Son, 1879), p. 304.
Quarterly Subscription (to support the site)