Wednesday, January 15, 2020

Rejecting Both Sides


CNN tried again to discredit Bernie Sanders, who now leads the Democratic pack in California polling, by painting him sexist. Caitlin Johnstone has the story:
 Sanders explicitly denied ever saying any such thing. He said there’s Youtube footage people can look up of him saying a woman could become president many decades ago, adding that he only ran for president in 2016 because Warren refused grassroots efforts to persuade her to run (efforts which he’d supported).
 “So Senator Sanders, I do want to be clear here, you’re saying that you never told Senator Warren that a woman could not win the election?” asked Phillip.
 “That is correct,” Sanders replied.
 “Senator Warren,” Phillip then asked without missing a beat. “What did you think when Senator Sanders told you that a woman could not win the election?”...
​ ​The belief that a woman cannot be elected president in 2020 is not a thing. Nobody believes that, and anyone who pretends to believe that anyone believes that is simply telling you that they are an unprincipled liar who would rather take a nonsense stand on a nonsense issue than promote actual policies and changes. The heavy favorite to win the 2016 election was a woman, and were she not literally in the middle of an FBI investigation during that election she would have overcome the narrow margins she lost by.  

Eleni sent 2 articles from the Saker blog about Vietnam's political position in a tough neighborhood, which are informative. I read them both entirely, and nothing is without bias, but these were useful information for me.
The comments following the 2015 "Conical Hat" historical perspective piece served to round it out a little better, but it's still Vietnamese history from a Vietnamese perspective. Vietnam is the only regional country which has fought the Chinese army to a standstill (which both claim as victory), fairly recently, and without air-superiority.

The second article, from 2020, by a Vietnamese writer whose analysis vastly exceeds English language skills, and awareness of diplomatic subtleties, concludes like this:
​ ​This is my own craziest theory: US, and Israel want Vietnam become A WATCHDOG on China and Russia helps Vietnam in order to give a hidden warning to China. From my own knowledge, I will explain with each country:
​ ​US wants to turn Vietnam into their new factory that can make US products to them. Vietnamese today trust US so blindly, and they always think that US will protect Vietnam from China. I am not surprised that Vietnamese want their own country become a vassal state of US due to the myth “US’s vassal state always rich and have happy life than anti-imperialist countries.” US need to weak China first so they can destroy China because China will be weakness in both economic and military after the war with Vietnam even if they win Vietnam. US also does not want to lose their new cheap labors, and a new place that willing import trashed every year for money, of course.
​ ​I think Russia help Vietnam because they want to give a warning sign to China: WE ARE WATCHING YOU AND DON’T TRUST YOU ENTIRELY, CHINA. China is just best ally to China because they have strong border to each other not friendship. I theorize that Putin will never forget China betrayal on Soviet Union when China Invaded Soviet Union in 1969 (they accused Soviet invaded China but I believe that China invaded Soviet), China funded Mujahideen during 1980s. I mean how can Russian military officers can forget China crime against Russia. I believe Russian will not forget China betrayal and they must being skeptical on China. China may possible so some potential in South China Sea so they entrust Vietnam more than China. Helping Vietnam is also message to China from Russia that China should know how to behave and Russia is not fool.
Israel secretly considers Vietnam a useful animal that need to be feed and train to die for their master due to their Talmudist Ideology. Jewish Elites is considering Chinese Elite a thorn in their eyes. China and Israel are playing double faces to each other right now so they need a slave or animal that has experiences to fight China: Vietnam. This is reason why Israel secret help Vietnam like Soviet helped Vietnam, seduced Vietnam in emotional way so Vietnamese will become good Goys that will die for their new Jewish Master.
​ ​I also (try to) believe that Vietnam right now try to maintain their neutral position as much as they can like what they have done before 2013. With the neutral position, Vietnam don’t give US, Russia, and Israel other reasons to hate, but cannot tell the country trust Vietnam entirely, of course. Vietnam can use the relationship with three countries above to pressure China to know how to behave in South China Sea (I hope I’m right this time).
​ ​I hope my analysis help you guys understand about Vietnam relationship with the superpower country and I hope you guys can give me feedback as much as you can.

Here is what is in the China-US trade deal, still insufficiently detailed, and always subject to evolving-reality:

Economics must examine underlying assumptions and change when they change. Energy inputs are critical.
​ ​How do economic analyses account for the roles and impacts of both the cost and quantity of natural resource consumption?
​ ​This question has been debated perhaps as long as there has been the profession of economics.  Before the use of fossil fuels, early “classical” economists knew that most products of interest, such as food and building materials, came from the land as it harnesses the energy from the sun. Thus, land as a natural resource was front-and-center to economic thinking.
​ ​With industrialization and the use of fossil fuels (that provide energy independent of current sunlight) economic analyses became less focused on the role of natural resources as an input into economic production such that in the 1900s most mainstream (i.e., Neoclassical) growth models do not directly account for energy and natural resources.

The Fed Can't Reverse the Decline of Financialization and Globalization, Charles Hugh Smith​
​ ​The global economy and financial system are both running on the last toxic fumes of financialization and globalization.
​ ​For two generations, globalization and financialization have been the two engines of global growth and soaring assets. Globalization can mean many things, but its beating heart is the arbitraging of the labor of the powerless, and commodity, environmental and tax costs by the powerful to increase their profits and wealth.
​ ​In other words, globalization is the result of those at the top of the wealth-power pyramid shifting capital around the world to exploit lower costs of labor, commodities, environmental regulations and taxes.
​ ​This manifests as offshoring of jobs, the stripmining of forests, minerals, etc., the degradation of local ecosystems, the decline of tax revenues derived from capital and the explosive rise in stock market valuations as wages stagnate or decline.
A key element in globalization is the transfer of risk from the owners of capital to the workers and public resources.


No comments:

Post a Comment