Chinese_flagArticle by Mark I Rasskazov, Editor in Chief.

Bottom line: China is a huge threat to America’s sovereignty at the moment, however, over the long term, they are not — all we have to do is keep our government intact and legitimate (insofar as possible), and wait them out.

Here’s the thing: they own a lot of our debt.  Tom Murse of reports that China owns 1.2 trillion dollars of US debt — more than any other individual stakeholder — and they use this debt, as well as its connections to corporate America, which, of course, feeds back into the American political machine, to influence our politics.  The Chinese government is openly coordinating with US Businesses.  This is a major problem, because it allows them to have a say in American politics; case in point, gun control.  Why would China be calling for gun control in the US?!  This is something that must be addressed on the federal level, on the state level, on the local level, and on the individual level.  Right now, it seems Americans, fortunately, are standing their ground by purchasing guns and ammo at record rates, which is encouraging.  But it is unsettling that China has so much obvious influence over American politics.


This influence is exacerbated by the fact that so much American industry has moved to China.  However, the tides are already shifting on this front, as Vivek Wadha of Forbes reports.  This brings me to my next point, which is: why China is not a threat over the long-term.  Part of the reason for this is its currency manipulation coming home to roost, however, the root of China’s inevitable decline in influence and economic power is its one child policy.


China’s economy is on decline, and the reason for this is that what once drove their economy — cheap labor — is going away as their population declines.  Their one child policy will halve their population, and they have not yet relinquished it, which means it will halve twice.  Furthermore, because of Chinese cultural preferences for male children, their population will halve again even after they’ve gotten rid of the onerous policy.  The Chinese already have ghost cities created through economic over-extension, and their troubles are going to get worse, not better.  Soon, they will have one quarter of the population supporting the other three quarters.  At that point, their economy will completely collapse, and they will not be in a position too mount any kind of existential threat to anyone.

In the short term, we must closely watch Chinese influence.  In the long-term, however, China is not something we need to worry about.


Money and power are inherently related.  This is common knowledge.  What is not common knowledge is the reason why this is the case.  And the reason this is the case is quite simple.

Power is the ability to exert influence over how others choose to expend their time, effort, and resources.

Money is an accepted, demarcated representation of time, effort, and resources.

Ergo, money and power relate to one another on a directly proportional basis.  An amount of money is a strong indicator of power, as well as being a source for the same.

An indicator: because, under normal circumstances, money is acquired by being able to constructively guide (or influence) human action.

A source: because it amounts to a direct means of accomplishing the same.

An insidious implication: when money stolen (or redistributed, which amounts to the same thing; subject of a future post), what is actually occuring is not merely theft, but also enslavement; because you are taking by force that which legitimately represents the time, effort, and resources of other people.

Contrast this to trade, which amounts to an agreement of equivalency; i.e., an agreement that a certain amount of time and effort on the part of one party, is equivalent in value to a different amount of time and effort on the part of another.

Tangential conclusion: people say that Capitalism is injust, and distributes income inequitably.

The former is not true; because the system in its strict sense, allows only for such economic relationships which each party (legitimately) in question is willing to voluntarilly agree to.

The latter is a partial truth: not everyone is «equal» in a capitalist system.  This is, for the most part, a function of the fact that not all people are equal.  Some are smarter.  Some are harder working.  Some have unique talents.  Some people seem to think this is unfair.  Such an attitude is not merely petty and resentful, but also counterconstructive.  These people should be thankful that these people are so much smarter, hard-working, talented, and wealthy than them, because this enables them to create a world that is much more pleasant to live in for everyone; they are able to do this because they understand how to allocate themselves and their resources.  If the socialists had their way, these people would be severely handicapped and we’d all suffer for it.

Caveat to the tangential conclusion: we do not live in a Capitalist society.  We live in a Fascist society.  If you do not understand the distinction (and many do not), then don’t worry; I will clarify it in a future post.