The Alt-Right, President Trump, and China

I’ve long held the same view about China:

“SHANGHAI — Perhaps no country has taken more hits from Donald J. Trump than China. During the presidential campaign, Mr. Trump made it sound as if making America “great again” meant defeating China.

But much of the Chinese public supported him. And President Xi Jinping was among the first world leaders to congratulate him. Mr. Xi, in his message to the president-elect, expressed hopes of building on the “common interests” between the world’s two largest economies. …

But in the longer term, Chinese-American relations could become healthier as the Chinese prefer a relationship with a United States that doesn’t try to remake the world. The Chinese know how to compete and can deal with competitors. What the Chinese have always resented and resisted is an America that imposes its values and standards on everybody else.

Mr. Trump’s America is likely to break from this pattern. He has shown no desire to tell other countries how to do things. China is run by competent leaders who are strong-minded and pragmatic. Mr. Trump is a resolute businessman with little ideological underpinning. Without the shackles of ideology, even the most competitive rivals can make deals. This is a new day for the world’s most consequential bilateral relationship. …”

Unlike the American liberals, we have no reason to consider China our enemy. Quite the opposite.

1.) We have no desire to “police the world” as the US Empire has done in the Western Pacific for generations now. We certainly don’t support encircling China with military bases and hostile alliances. We don’t support interfering in China’s internal affairs.

2.) We have no desire to force liberal democracy on China. In fact, we believe liberal democracy has been taken way too far in this country and needs to be curtailed at home. Look at the anarchy in our streets.

3.) We don’t believe in “American exceptionalism” or forcing the American culture on China. We admire and respect China which is one of the world’s ancient civilizations. We think China has been smart to shield itself from the degenerating effects of Western culture.

4.) We have no interest in upbraiding China with sanctimonious “human rights” lectures.

5.) We would like to build a Great Wall on our Southern border which is an idea inspired by China.

6.) We have nothing but admiration for China’s economic progress which refutes neo-liberal economics. Yes, it has come at our expense, but as President Trump has repeatedly said that is because of our own incompetent leadership. It’s not China’s fault our trade policies are made by fools.

7.) We consider the Chinese people to be ranked high among the world’s top races. In fact, we want an ethnostate for our people not unlike China.

8.) Finally, we don’t mind at all if the Chinese decide to colonize and civilize the negroes of Africa.

About Hunter Wallace 9692 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

110 Comments

  1. Recall Putin’s alliance with China to offset global jewry: is it obselete with trump?

    China never did any heavy lifting to help Putin, so is it any great loss?

    Notice how Duterte of the phillipines wants to do business with Trump’s America, right after pivoting to China. Can we all really have it both ways?

    While not a top priority relative to Jews blacks Mexicans and Arabs, the Chinese are a competitor and possibly a threat. Ultimately, they have to go back. I wonder if we want to cede Africa to China, its quite a prize.

    Priorities: we have to take white lands back from those who hate us, then we can deal with other peoples on a basis of strict reciprocity.

  2. The cuckservatives want whites to worry about far away places like China or Russia as distractions to much more important things like the endless amounts of Somalis, Pakistanis, Africans, etc moving to white lands.

    • “Its Chinas fault the jobs are going away, not because of our open borders, free trade policies!
      If anything, we need more globalism to stop the Chinese!”

  3. China has only grown by leeching off of the USA. The Clintons are China’s whores. China is at war with the USA. The PRC is a ponzi scheme, a house of cards, a paper tiger, and a cancer. Economic freedom for the USA hurts the PRC.

    The final solution to Europe and the USA’s invasion crisis, is, as before, for White Europeans to ruthlessly dominate Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Central America. That doesn’t seem likely to happen, though, except when we consider the role of Russia.

  4. I’ve heard reports of whites kids getting hospitalized for wearing Trump gear.

    Crutches, fractured skulls etc.

    Let’s have a story about these Martyrs!

    • Serious subject, but on a not so serious note, I was listening to NPR tonight in my car (I know) and this female academic was trying to explain the Trump phenomena and clearly was struggling and she talked about his wearing those “Trucker’s hats” with Make America Great on them. “Trucker’s hats”? those are baseball caps for crying out loud. I guess in her neighborhood no one wears one, even on the weekends.

  5. You forgot to mention the hordes of Chinese settling in our communities.

    What do we do about Chinese colonization of our territories?

      • If the chinks colonize Africa they are going to be a lot tougher on the spearchuckers than the White European colonial powers ever were.

        • Exactly. Why should we expend all energy and resources on the Black Hole of Afreaka? Whites have attempted, and FAILED, to treat the untermenschen lik Humans. The Chinese won’t waste their time and resources.
          Let the pitiless Chinese deal with all the Bitey Monkey hordes.

      • We need to have Rhodesia and the Union of South Africa returned to the Boers and the Afrikaaners immediately. If the chinks can help us do that then they can have all the oil in Nigeria and the Suez Canal as well!

          • South Africa was destroyed by jews, neo-liberals and race-traitors. The Reagan regime also contributed to its downfall by imposing economic sanctions.

          • So we’ll just ignore facts, shall we?

            Thank God some of us have memories going back more than 5 minutes ago.

            Thank God some of us refuse to cuck for chi-coms or niggers.

            The Role of the People’s Republic of China in South Africa’s Liberation Struggle and MK

            South African History Online 15-Dec-2014

            Officially China had representation in Pretoria where they protested against Apartheid. Unofficially they lent their support to liberation organisations.

            By 1960, after the stage was set for a national liberation movement, the South African Communist Party (who had declared the Apartheid state as ‘colonialism of a special type’) secured the promise of support from both Russia [= The USSR] and Beijing.

            While the communist Peoples Republic of China severed economic ties with South Africa in July 1960, 1976 signalled the development of [SA] ties with Taiwan, based on a common fear of ‘communist aggression.’

            Beijing’s involvement came in the form of support for liberation organisations.

            While Moscow strengthened its ties with the SACP and consequently the African National Congress (ANC), China was left with no other choice but to support the rival Pan Africanist Congress(PAC).

            China supported the Congo Alliance, established between 1963 and 1964, consisting of the People’s Armed Forces for the Liberation of Angola (FNLA), the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), the Revolutionary Committee of Mozambique (COREMO) and Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU).

            China’s competition with Moscow over the support of anti-White liberation movements became apparent at the Afro-Asian People’s Solidarity Organization (AAPSO) Council meeting in Moshi, Tanzania (1963), wherein AAPSO and the World Peace Council (WPC) squabbled for influence over Latin America. While the ANC-backed Soviets proposed the establishment of a new organisation in Cairo which would absorb AAPSO, China and Cuba favoured expanding AAPSO’s influence to Latin-America by means of a liaison organisation. This position was adopted and the Afro-Asian-Latin American People’s Solidarity Organisation (AALAPSO) was established with its base in Havana. This was the first time China had openly called for a political split within third world movements.

            Sino-Soviet tensions thus severely weakened the effect of liberation movements within the third world, however, the movements continued. By the mid-1960s China had effectively adopted an anti-Soviet policy, choosing to switch aid to liberation movements rivalling the Soviet-backed organisations. This resulted in Chinese support of the largely ineffective PAC, rival to the Moscow-supported ANC. A large portion of the first uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK)cadres had been sent for training in China in 1961. Subsequent to the formation of Umkhonto we Sizwe, members of the SACP and ANC were recruited for secret (Tambo had not even been informed) training abroad, and sent to Beijing. Upon arrival, one group was sent for training to the Shen-Yo military academy, while another was stationed in Nanjing. They were met by Chairman Mao Zedong.

            In South Africa, as Sino-Soviet conflict intensified, the PRC’s relationship with the increasingly pro-Moscow ANC and SACP deteriorated. At international conferences the ANC’s criticism of China increased, leading to the collapse of aid relationships between China and the ANC. China’s involvement in the liberation struggle was transferred to the PAC, which received financial aid and military training from Chinese instructors in Tanzania and Zambia.

            Preferring to support active guerrilla armies which would raise its prestige, China focused the majority of its aid on ZANU in Rhodesia.

            The Soweto Uprisings of 1976 provided China with an opportunity to step up its anti-Apartheid rhetoric against Pretoria. This served the dual role of stemming ambitions of the two world superpowers (America and the USSR) as well as allowing China to entrench its influence and prestige in the southern African region.

            The 1980s saw a thawing of Sino-Soviet tensions and as a result, the ANC was willing to resume relations with Beijing. In 1983 China announced a new policy in which all liberation organisations were to be treated equally without discrimination. The PRC shifted the bulk of its support to the ANC; the largest liberation organisation in South Africa.

            In 1983 Oliver Tambo visited the PRC in order to re-establish ties with China. In 1989 China began hosting delegations from liberation organisations, including the PAC and the Democratic Party, and simultaneously began exploring the possibility of renewed economic ties with South Africa. Subsequent to his release from prison, Mandela met with the PRC ambassador to Zambia to thank China for its support of the anti-apartheid struggle. Recognising the ANC’s potential as a primary organisation in any post-Apartheid regime, China supported the ANC’s call for the continuation of sanctions on South Africa.

            1991 saw De Klerk’s announcement of the abolition of remaining racial laws, and was met with Chinese approval.

            In October of that year, for the first time, South Africa’s foreign minister visited China together with a number of delegates representing South African corporations.

            In 1992 Mandela visited China to meet with Premier Li Peng and President Jiang Zemin, again thanking China for its role in the anti-Apartheid struggle.

            References:

            • Ellis, S. 2012. External Mission: The ANC in Exile, 1960-1990. Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball Publishers.

            • Ellis, S. & Sechaba, T. 1992. Comerades Against Apartheid: The ANC and the South African Communist Party in Exile. Indiana: Indiana University Press.

            • Naidoo, N. 2012. The ‘Indian Chap’: Recollections of a South African Underground Trainee in Mao’s China. South African Historical Journal, 64(3): 707-736.

            • Taylor, I. 2000. The Ambiguous Commitment: The People’s Republic of China and the Anti-Apartheid Struggle in South Africa. Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 18(1): 91-106.

            • Thomas, S. The Diplomacy of Liberation: The Foreign Relations of the ANC Since 1960

          • Havana, Peking and Moscow supported Communist guerrillas throughout the Third World for decades. Your point?

          • There is another aspect to the history in the region. Most of the niggers in Mozambique and Rhodesia wielded guns made in China or NKorea.

            When Suez was nationalized by the Arabs, the Chinese threatened to send an army to fight the Brits. It was a real credible threat.

        • Not sure what youre talking about but if Rhodesia and the Union of South Africa was going to be returned it would be returned to Africans, not invading Europeans

  6. Disagree on 6 and 8.
    6: If we were winning at free trade we would love it. People only have a problem with it because we’re losing. But it’s also in the interest of national security to not be dependent on trade at all.

    8: I actually do mind if China takes Africa. We should be the ones taking it instead.

  7. I’m far more concerned about relations with Russia. Trump has indicated a friendly approach rather than the anti-Putin one the ((( usual suspects))) are pushing. IMO, this will be Trump’s most critical foreign policy test: Can he break the strangle hold of the (((warmongers))) regarding any country that Israel doesn’t like.

  8. Reading down the thread, many of the Commenters do not, apparently, understand IRL diplomatic communication methods. Hunter does. Bless you, Hunter!

  9. Funny article. Xi Jinping is in Italy to support the Chi-Coms’ puppet Renzi, to campaign for the ‘yes’ vote in Renzi’s referendum, buy Cagleari; in Rome after overseeing Chinese imperialist operations in Sicily and Sardinia; and meeting with the unelected Commies running Portugal, continuing Chinese negotiations to buy Azorean airbases to facilitate attacks on the US East Coast.

    • Why do you have such a problem with Red China? Let them have their sphere of influence in their part of the world and we shall have ours.

  10. Kike Yellen plants her fat ass in chair:

    Yellen: I’m not stepping down until my term is done

    http://www.cnbc.com

    Forget all that talk about Janet Yellen stepping down if Donald Trump becomes president: The Fed chair told Congress on Thursday she’s not leaving.

    Trump has been critical of the central bank leader and has suggested that he would replace her at some point. He once told CNBC that Yellen should be “ashamed” of her actions, saying her policies were political positions to help President Barack Obama.

    Amid expectations that the president-elect would step up political pressure on the Fed after he takes office in January, there was chatter that Yellen might just step aside.

    “No I cannot,” she said when asked by Rep. Carolyn Maloney if there were circumstances under which she might leave before her term expires. “I was confirmed by the Senate to a four-year term, which ends at the end of January of 2018, and it is fully my intention to serve out that term.”

    If Trump removes her from the chair, she could still stay on as a governor until her 14-year term expires in 2024.

  11. (((just a social construct))) gets noticed:

    The Hill:

    Most diverse [= least White] Congress ever

    HISPANICS

    Hispanics will hit a new record in the next Congress, with 38 members across both chambers.

    Thirty-four Hispanics will serve in the House, while the Senate will have four Hispanic members.

    Seven Hispanic Democrats won election to the House for the first time on Election Day: Nanette Barragán (Calif.), Salud Carbajal (Calif.), Lou Correa (Calif.), Adriano Espaillat (N.Y.), Ruben Kihuen (Nev.), Darren Soto (Fla.) and Vicente Gonzalez (Texas).

    Cortez Masto will be the first Latina to serve in the Senate.

    And in the House, Espaillat, who’s replacing retiring Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), will be the first Dominican-American elected to Congress.

    AFRICAN-AMERICANS

    The new Congress is poised to have a record number of black lawmakers, increasing from 46 to 49.

    That number includes three Republicans: Sen. Tim Scott (S.C.) and Reps. Mia Love (Utah) and Will Hurd (Texas). The two House members, both freshmen, were top Democratic targets this election cycle but handily won reelection.

    Lisa Blunt Rochester will become the first African-American and first woman to represent Delaware in Congress.

    In Florida, former Orlando Police Chief Val Demings will also be the first woman and first African-American to represent her district.

    ASIAN-AMERICANS

    A record number of 15 Asian-Americans will be in the next Congress, up from the current 11 members.

    The total includes 12 House members and three senators.

    Hirono, Harris and Duckworth, an incumbent House member, will make up the ranks of Asian-Americans in the Senate.

    Rep. Ami Bera (D-Calif.) is currently the only Indian American serving in Congress. That’ll change in January when he’s joined by Harris and three new House members: Ro Khanna (Calif.), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.) and Raja Krishnamoorthi (Ill.). (Bera’s reelection race has not been formally called yet, but he is leading his GOP challenger as of Wednesday.)

    Jayapal will be the first Indian-American woman to serve in the House, while Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.) will be the first Vietnamese-American woman elected to Congress.

  12. There is no way relations with China can improve. China has destroyed American manufacturing through currency manipulation and has prevented American companies from giving access to a level playing field in China by imposing non-tariff trade barriers.. Trump cannot bring back manufacturing jobs without beginning a trade war with China.

  13. What people forget about evolution is that it calls for some degree of exclusion in order for it to be successful, at least in the way humans arose. Now, extreme exclusion isn’t good for evolution. A white-skinned cave fish with no eyes is the product of extreme exclusion in its cold dark environment in the cave. Who wants to be a cave fish?

    But extreme inclusion doesn’t allow for the rise of creatures such as apes and dogs and pigs and humans.

    Territorialism did wonders for evolutionary advancement because land animals could exclude themselves from the watery environment of the ocean.

    Ocean is the most inclusive environment. It is the great equalizer. This is why even the smartest marine animals don’t have much advantage over the dumb ones. A seal is much more intelligent than a shark, but sharks routinely feed on sharks. Dolphins are much more intelligent than a great white shark or hammerheads, but dolphins often get eaten. Octopus is smarter than an eel, but an eel will often eat octopus. And a giant squid can sometimes kill a whale.

    Unlike land animals who are safe from ocean animals, all animals in the ocean are part of an ‘inclusive’ environment. Also, because it’s difficult to move around in thick water, marine animals have fins than hands and feet. So, they are not able to use tools. Dolphins may be smart, but they can only do so much with fins. In contrast, a chimp can use tools and even hurl an orange at a leopard in Chimp Lives Matter protests.

    Also, fire is impossible in water, so there is no technology of tool-making that allows smart marine animals to rise above the dumb ones like sharks, barracudas, sea snakes, lobsters, and jellyfish.

    On land, because intelligent mammals don’t have to worry about sharks and barracudas, they are much safer. And with fire, they can build weapons to vanquish the dumber animals. And because it’s easier to move in air than in water, they can build walls and houses, and etc. Try building a pyramid or Great Wall of China under water. Besides, even if a wall was built underwater, the enemies could just swim over it. (This is why air force is such a frightening power of the modern world. No wall defend a nation from air force and missiles.)

    Evolutionary advancement happened on land because evolution meant more effective exclusion of dangerous species. In the ocean, dolphins must co-exist with sharks. Wherever dolphins can go, sharks can go. The exceptions are the deep sea creatures, but they are rare and ugly as hell. And of course, some marine species can only in tropical climes while some live in cold climes. But more than on land, marine animals swim all around and migrate all over the places like birds.

    Land animals have a better chance of seeking out exclusive communities that keep out invasive species through distance, land obstacles, ocean obstacles, or artificial defenses. If baboons fear leopards, they can spend much of their time up the tree. While leopards are good tree climbers, monkeys and baboons are better at it and can climb higher since they are lighter.

    And we see the rise of different races due to exclusion. Imagine if there was no land, and imagine if all humans were marine creatures. Then, the Negrolphins would have swum to the lands of Eurolphins and Asialphins and other human-dolphines. Wild negrolphins would have messed up all the world. (It’s a good thing humans never developed wings like the flying monkeys in WIZARD OF OZ because flying Negroes would have messed up all five continents.)

    But because of land masses, it was difficult for blacks in Africa to venture into other land masses, especially as they weren’t very technological and brainy in creating means of transport. Their technology amounted to chucking spears at hippos and banging on bongo drums and women shaking their booties and men ogling them.

    Also, the other races built much better technology to fend off invaders.

    If all humans as dolphin-like creatures had to live underwater, they would be under threat from the stronger and more aggressive Negrolphins. And they would be defenseless since it is difficult to create weapons and defenses underwater. Also, visibility is poor underwater, and human dolphins would have to communicate through sonar, but that might favor Negroes cuz they got a better sense of beat and rhythm. They be sonaring one another like, ‘there be a pack of white dolphins there, and we’s gonna fishmob them and whup their ass’. It’s like how Negroes use twitter and facebook to organize urban mayhem.

    We know land creatures will perish if the world was covered with water. They would all drown. But even if they didn’t drown, many would perish just the same. Suppose the world is filled with water, BUT every former-land creature is equipped with gills or blowholes(like whales got). So, all bears, tigers, humans, rats, cats, dogs, monkeys, apes, gophers, rabbits, horses, and etc. can live in water. But that wouldn’t be good enough.

    They would lose the exclusionary advantage in the underwater inclusive environment. They would all be attacked by sharks and killer whales, and there would be nothing they could do about it.

    Also, marine apes would have no means to run from marine leopards since the latter could swim to top of trees that are under water. And gated communities would be useless for marine whites because marine negroes will just swim over the fence. And forget about calling the police since technology won’t work under water. (We do have underwater technology but all were created on land.) The sea is the great equalizer. Shark is equal to the dolphin, the moral eel is equal to the sea lion.

    Globalism is like turning the world into one giant ocean of PC, Pop Culture, and massive migration.

    In the past, White Europe had no PC, no toxic Pop culture, and no mass migration into its lands. Whites were proud to be whites and happy to fend off Mongols, Muslims, and other invaders. And they looked upon Negroes as ‘savages’. And there was no Pop Culture telling white boys and girls to abandon their identity and pride in worship of holy homo anus and big Negro dong. And there was no EU ‘human rights’ rules that renders white nations defenseless against foreign invasion. Thanks to those crazy laws, EU must aid and abet the non-West in the invasion. So, if a bunch of Muslims trample into EU, Europeans must provide them with food, shelter, clothing, kisses, and even women. And if Africans come into European waters, EU must tug the boat to EU and let the Negroes run wild and free and hump every white women in sight who are infected with Jungle Fever thanks to Pop Culture that promotes rappers and black athletes. It’s like the entire world is submerged under the power, rules, and ‘values’ of the Glob Ocean. I mean even Japan has a black woman as beauty queen and black runners as Olympic athletes. Thanks to GLOB oceanism, the Negro sharkdom is taking over the world. When we consider the African population is projected to reach 5 billion in just several decades, that is a lot of Negro sharks and Negrolphins swimming and taking over everything. Thanks to cheap air travel and thanks to Negromania in so many parts of the world(and PC that forbids nations from saying NO to the NEGRO), the world can turn into Afrocean or NegrOcean.

    Such will be bad for human evolution as we’ve known it so far. Human evolution along different races was made possible by exclusion that kept some races safe from other races. But the sheer invasiveness of the Glob Ocean reduces those defenses and subjects all races to the Negro sharks and Negroctupus. White evolution happened cuz whites could say NO to the Negro.

    Of course, the elites don’t worry since they have an ark that keep them above water. We can just hope that their titanic hits the ice and sinks.

    ==========================

  14. I can’t remember Trump ever saying the words “human rights”. A quick google search turned up nothing but human rights advocates denouncing Trump.

    • There is no such thing as “human rights”. And the people who claim to be champions of human rights are usually Marxists who can’t wait to imprison, starve and shoot everyone who disagrees with them into submission.

  15. I think Hunter should revisit the September 14, 2016 Horse Race entry and our friend JJgrandisland talking so much smack for Hillary, only to be proven wrong. Funny stuff.

  16. Damn. I had to get away from Breibart for a minute. Those Cucks over there love their Magic Ben Carson. And the media thinks those low-T apologist Cucks are the Alt-Right? It is to laugh.

  17. This was in my inbox today. Will never get another cent from me. Bill Penzey apparently thinks he is morally righteous and expects everyone to embrace his twisted delusion. I believe they’re headquartered in the Milwaukee area. I am betting the white area at that. How much of this crap is going on? I’m betting the family name was originally Pansy:

    “Racism Update:
    At Penzeys we believe it’s not the use of tools that set us on a
    different path from the rest of the animal world; what has set humanity
    in motion is cooking. In our nearly a million years gathered together
    around the fire, cooking shaped our bodies and transformed our minds.
    Cooking unlocked our potential and gave birth to reason, to religion,
    and to politics and government. The kindness of tens of thousands of
    generations of cooks created our humanity, but racism, sexism, and
    homophobia can all very quickly unravel all the goodness cooking puts
    out into the world. As the voice of cooks, we will never sit idly by
    while that happens.

    You may have read Tuesday Night’s email.
    In it I said: “The open embrace of racism by the Republican Party in
    this election is now unleashing a wave of ugliness unseen in this
    country for decades. The American people are taking notice. Let’s commit
    to giving the people a better choice. Our kindness really is our
    strength.”

    Since
    I ask you to read my emails, I feel it’s only right that I read each of
    your replies. In sifting through those replies it was clear that,
    though not intended, a good number of people seemed to sincerely believe
    that in my statement I was calling all Republicans racists. In the
    emails of those Republicans who voted for someone other than the party’s
    nominee, I sensed genuine pain at having the strength of character to
    not go along with what was happening, but nonetheless be grouped in with
    those who were. I apologize for writing something that caused you pain;
    that is not the person I want to be. You are your party’s future, and
    you deserve my admiration and respect, and your country’s as well.

    For
    the rest of you, you just voted for an openly racist candidate for the
    presidency of the United States of America. In your defense, most of you
    did so without thinking of the consequences of your candidate’s racism,
    because for most of you the heartbreaking destruction racism causes has
    never been anything you or your loved ones have had to experience. But
    the thing is elections have their consequences. This is
    no longer sixty years ago. Whether any of us like it or not, for the
    next four years the 80% of this country who did not just vote for an
    openly racist candidate are going to treat you like you are the kind of
    person who would vote for an openly racist candidate.

    You
    can get angry at everyone else for treating you like you just did the
    thing you just did, or you can take responsibility for your actions and
    begin to make amends. If you are lucky and younger family members are
    still coming over for Thanksgiving, before it’s too late, take a moment
    and honestly think about how your actions must look through their eyes.
    Simply saying “I never thought he’d win” might be enough. But if you
    have the means, leaving a receipt from a sizable donation to the ACLU or the SPLC accidentally laying around where you carve the turkey, might go over even better.

    Or, just do what you do best and volunteer. Through our customers’ support, we’ve given away a lot of our Penzeys Pepper, the Pepper with heart.
    More often than not, those we meet cooking and serving food to feed
    those in need are Republicans. You really are a good bunch, but you just
    committed the biggest act of racism in American history since Wallace
    stood in the schoolhouse doorway 53 years ago. Make this right. Take
    ownership for what you have done and begin the pathway forward.

    Thanks for reading,

    Bill

    [email protected]

  18. Understandable but wrong. China is the enemy of everyone. After they’ve taken Australia and New Zealand, they’ll be on your doorstep.

    So, by all means pursue an isolationist policy, but it wont pacify China. You will be next on their list after they’ve conquered Asia.

  19. Back to 90/10 immigration laws. We should only take “the best and brightest” like an exclusive club, and keep them (Chinese) away from military and finance to avoid espionage.

    Trump should expose the Jew Israel Zangwill’s “the melting pot” bs along with Lazerus “give me your wretched refuse” as the subversive Jew bs that it was.

  20. Chi-Com bastards issue further demands to uppity White-boy Trump

    Commentary: Asia-Pacific needs more inclusive trade pact

    Xinhua 2016-11-19
    [Editor: huaxia]
    by Xinhua writer Liu Chang

    BEIJING, Nov. 19 (Xinhua) — Common sense teaches that brisk free trade activities can help incubate economic prosperity and higher living standards with low costs.

    Despite being the world’s most economically buoyant region, the Asia-Pacific is facing the exceptionally arduous task of helping the gloomy global economy return to sustainable growth.

    As leaders of the regional economies are gathering in the Peruvian capital of Lima for the annual Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting during the weekend, they need to tackle anti-trade isolationism and embrace a trade agreement that can truly brighten the region’s economic future.

    At the 2014 APEC meeting in Beijing, the 21 Pacific Rim economies endorsed a road map to promote and eventually establish the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP).

    The FTAAP, an idea first proposed in 2006, stresses inclusiveness, seeks greater regional economic integration and could unleash enormous potential for fast economic growth and balanced wealth distribution.

    These very principles and merits represent perhaps the best kind of trade arrangement that could actually bring a group of the world’s most diversified economies together under the same set of trade and investment rules.

    The all-inclusive trade pact would also reduce the fragmentation caused by many of the region’s separate and non-inclusive free trade agreements, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

    The TPP is in fact not about boosting free trade. It is the economic arm of the Obama administration’s geopolitical strategy to make sure that Washington rules supreme in the region.

    The exclusion of China, the world’s second-largest economy and the top trading nation, from this pact has proved that the United States cares more about its rights to write rules for the world’s most economically dynamic region than the real benefits the agreement could deliver to the other 11 negotiating parties Washington attempts to lure in.

    Recently, outgoing U.S. President Barack Obama has decided, though unwillingly, to let his successor, President-elect Donald Trump, decide the fate of the TPP.

    Trump’s campaign rhetoric has suggested that the future leader in Washington would be no friend to free trade, while his lashing-out at the TPP bodes ill for the trade pact.

    What is more alarming is that the incoming U.S. president may backtrack from other free trade deals in the area and beyond.

    In exactly two months’ time, Trump will be at the helm of the world’s largest economy. Turning his trade-bashing campaign talks into actual policies could bash any hope that the Asia-Pacific will finally have its much-wanted free trade deal. Worse, it could drag his country and the wider world into deeper economic distress.

    The billionaire-turned-politician needs to prove that derailing the global economy has not been one of the reasons why he ran for U.S. president.

    Meanwhile, in the face of rising global anti-trade fervor, the Asia-Pacific members should refrain from further supporting isolationism and protectionism in any way. Embracing openness, not rejecting it, is perhaps the best way for them to navigate the existing economic predicament.

    http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-11/19/c_135842566.htm

  21. More Chi-Com slave-economy economic warfare

    Renzi is the PRC’s puppet.

    The PRC is buiding a nuclear power plant in the UK (while Canada builds them in China…)

    The PRC is negotiating with the unelected Commie government in Portugal to take over Terceira.

    More on the Chi-Com attempt to dominate Europe, using the benefits of mass slave labour:

    “In the first half of 2016 alone Chinese investment funds have bought more than 40 German companies and also made six minority-stake investments. In fact 17 percent of all of China’s investments abroad since 2010 have targeted Germany. Worldwide in the first six months of 2016 China purchased more foreign companies than during the entire course of 2014. China invested €72 billion ($77 billion) within the EU in the same period of time, including €11.3 billion ($12.1 billion) in Germany. This was eight times the level of purchases in 2015.

    Most of the German firms the Chinese acquired are at the cutting edge of the latest engineering and computer technology and their purchases provide China with much needed technical knowhow.”

    (The Diplomat)

  22. Chi-Coms say evil Trump will force them to save the world

    CHINA POWER: With Trump’s Election, Time for China to Save the World

    The world is counting on China to lead on climate change. Our future is in the hands of Beijing.

    By Jinghan Zeng
    November 18, 2016

    China publicly rejected the idea of forming a “G2” with the United States during the 2008 financial crisis.

    Why, Beijing reasoned, should China have to take on increased burdens in solving global problems that were not of its making, instead of focusing its resources on dealing with its own domestic development challenges?

    Under Xi Jinping’s leadership, however, China has been increasingly willing and capable of providing global leadership.

    With the U.S.-China Joint Announcement on Climate Change in 2014, U.S. Secretary of State [Kike] John Kerry expressed his hope that “this unique partnership between China and the United States can help set an example for global leadership and global seriousness.”

    Now it may not be China that is unwilling to fulfill its global responsibility, but the United States under President Trump. The entire Republican Party tends to deny climate change. However, Trump has taken this general stance to an extreme.

    With Trump’s presidency, the United States is likely to retreat its leadership in the fight climate change.

    Will Beijing stand on its own to lead on this global issue? For the sake of our planet, it is perhaps time for us to expect China’s global leadership.

    (Jinghan Zeng is Lecturer at Royal Holloway, University of London. He is the author of The Chinese Communist Party’s Capacity to Rule: Ideology, Legitimacy, and Party Cohesion (2015).)

Comments are closed.