ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2019 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, June 28, 2019

An informative interview

The Saker has an important interview with an expert sinologist, which addresses the current stare-down between the US-led globohomo hegemony and the Sino-Russian leadership of the nationalist resistance to it.
A Sino-Russian alliance has long been seen in both the U.S. and in Europe as one of the greatest threats to the West’s global primacy and to Western-led world order. As early as 1951 U.S. negotiators meeting with Chinese delegations to end the Korean War were instructed to focus on the differences in the positions of Moscow and Beijing in an attempt to form a rift between the two. Close Sino-Soviet cooperation seriously stifled Western designs for the Korean Peninsula and the wider region during that period, and it was repeatedly emphasized that the key to a Western victory was to bring about a Sino-Soviet split. Achieving this goal by the early 1960s and bringing the two powers very near to a total conflict significantly increased prospects for a Western victory in the Cold War, with the end of the previously united front seriously undermining nationalist and leftist movements opposing Western designs from Africa and the Middle East to Vietnam and Korea. Both states learned the true consequences of this in the late 1980s and early 1990s when there was a real risk of total collapse under Western pressure. Attempts to bring an end to China’s national revolution through destabilization failed in 1989, although the USSR was less fortunate and the results for the Russian population in the following decade were grave indeed.

Today the Sino-Russian partnership has become truly comprehensive, and while Western experts from Henry Kissinger to the late Zbigniew Brzezinski among others have emphasized the importance of bringing about a new split in this partnership this strategy remains unlikely to work a second time. Both Beijing and Moscow learned from the dark period of the post-Cold War years that the closer they are together the safer they will be, and that any rift between them will only provide their adversaries with the key to bringing about their downfall. It is difficult to comprehend the importance of the Sino-Russian partnership for the security of both states without understanding the enormity of the Western threat – with maximum pressure being exerted on multiple fronts from finance and information to military and cyberspace. Where in the early 1950s it was only the Soviet nuclear deterrent which kept both states safe from very real Western plans for massive nuclear attacks, so too today is the synergy in the respective strengths of China and Russia key to protecting the sovereignty and security of the two nations from a very real and imminent threat. A few examples of the nature of this threat include growing investments in social engineering through social media – the results of have been seen in Hong Kong, Taiwan and Ukraine, a lowering threshold for nuclear weapons use by the United States – which it currently trains Western allies outside the NPT to deploy, and even reports from Russian and Korean sources of investments in biological warfare – reportedly being tested in Georgia, Eastern Europe and South Korea.

The partnership between Russia and China has become truly comprehensive, and is perhaps best exemplified by their military relations. From 2016 joint military exercises have involved the sharing of extremely sensitive information on missile and early warning systems – one of the most well kept defense secrets of any nuclear power which even NATO powers do not share with one another. Russia’s defense sector has played a key role in the modernization of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, while Chinese investment has been essential to allowing Russia to continue research and development on next generation systems needed to retain parity with the United States. There is reportedly cooperation between the two in developing next generation weapons technologies for systems such as hypersonic cruise and anti aircraft missiles and new strategic bombers and fighter jets which both states plan to field by the mid-2020s. With the combined defense spending of both states a small fraction of that of the Western powers, which themselves cooperate closely in next generation defense projects, it is logical that the two should pool their resources and research and development efforts to most efficiently advance their own security.
Remember, the world is not binary. The fact that the globohomo hegemony is pure satanic evil does not mean that either the Chinese or the Russians are good guys. But at least they don't eat people and molest children, and in the case of the Russians, hate Jesus Christ and persecute Christians.

Needless to say, Vladimir Putin's remarks on the failure of liberalism and globalism are quite pertinent here:
 So, the liberal idea has become obsolete. It has come into conflict with the interests of the overwhelming majority of the population. 
The liberal idea failed the West because it proved to be directly contradictory to all three pillars of the West, Christianity, the European nations, and the Greco-Roman legal and philosophic legacies. It was, in the end, intrinsically anti-Western.

Labels: ,

39 Comments:

Blogger David Ray Milton June 28, 2019 11:17 AM  

Classic Liberalism/Libertarianism is an abdication of leadership. It creates a power vacuum which will be filled by the entity that is not afraid to rule. In the west, the parties desiring power are cultural marxists, third-worlders, and the anti-Christians.

Somebody has to rule and be in charge. Somebody has to be the guy that says “We’re not going to allow that, but we will do this instead.” If those rulers are not Christian Europeans, then they will certainly be non-Christian non-Europeans.

Blogger Nate73 June 28, 2019 11:22 AM  

Doesn't look too good for Japan, a western ally until now.

Blogger Bucephalus June 28, 2019 11:35 AM  

Yet the GOP and Democrats Continue on with their, it can only be described as obsession, all things Israel and illegal immigrants, respectively.
Who speaks for, as Putin put it, The overwhelming majority , this though the one that Represents the US population?

Blogger Brett baker June 28, 2019 11:38 AM  

Maybe it's time to put more economic pressure on China? Nah, Globohomo doesn't have that much self-discipline.

Blogger chronoblip June 28, 2019 11:38 AM  

Be interesting if they made a deal with each other where China gets Africa and Russia gets North America.

At least locally, there representation is usually Chinese investors/businesses and Russian families, with fewer of the opposite pairing. The appearance that they're already intentionally avoiding stepping on each other's toes in their "American colonies" is getting harder to dismiss.

Blogger Balkan Yankee June 28, 2019 11:42 AM  

Putin gets it. But Matthew Goodwin and Roger Eatwell explain it better in National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy.

Theirs is one of the best explanations of the contest I have read. Geographical focus: United States, U.K., and Western Europe.

Blogger The Observer June 28, 2019 11:46 AM  

Doesn't look too good for Japan, a western ally until now.

Given that they've recently opened up to migrant workers, voted an Indian into political office in Tokyo, and had gay pride parades of their own, I think they have problems of their own.

Blogger Steve Canyon June 28, 2019 11:49 AM  

In other news, Rubble bounced

Blogger Jim the Curmudgeon June 28, 2019 12:05 PM  

Exports between the two countries have also surged. The EU and USA imposed sanctions on Russia and effectively locked Russia out of a lot of European exports. Russia responded by boosting agricultural production and selling a ton of it to China.

I just wish the Chinese would take over Russian road maintenance. Moscow looks good, but a lot of the cities have some dodgy basic infrastructure.

One of Russia's drawbacks is that it is burdened with a certain hostile elite that couldn't care less about the serfs. The Chinese at least have some Han solidarity. If Russia could kick out the rootless cosmopolitan tribalists and boost its birthrate, it would be in prime position to compete as a superpower again. The IQ decline in Russia is half that rate of that in the west. Plus the Africans, Pakis (etc) aren't headed there because they know that there is no welfare and a hostile population that doesn't put up with their crap.

Blogger Dan in Georgia June 28, 2019 12:38 PM  

Russia would be the only acceptable overlord to manage the transition of the USA into regional confederacies with the least amount of bloodshed.

In the mean time, we caught a break with Trump. I think we were headed for WW3 and CW2 at the same time while Hellary throws ashtrays at the Joint Chiefs for not nuking Alabama.

Blogger P Glenrothes June 28, 2019 12:39 PM  

RUBBLE BOUNCED

Blogger Scuzzaman June 28, 2019 12:44 PM  

If you actually wanted a sino-soviet conflict then the quickest way to achieve this would be to leave them both alone.

Constant attacks on both cannot do other than push them together.

Blogger VD June 28, 2019 12:48 PM  

I am digging all the bouncing. Let the fire and brimstone fall!

Blogger Ariadne Umbrella June 28, 2019 1:26 PM  

for whatever reason, my computer will not allow an email address to Vox Day. Would you mind sending one to me, that I might reply in private? small prayer request, except enormous to me.

thank you.

Blogger DonReynolds June 28, 2019 1:49 PM  

The Russian monopoly on high tech magic in China basically ended when Richard Nixon went to China and forced the Soviets to back down from a first nuclear strike on China. Yes, they were very close to coming to blows and opening up China to American high tech and trade released China from complete dependence on the Soviet "advisers" and "engineers" and "scientists".

It is true that the Soviets and the Red Chinese cooperated during the Korean war....Soviet technology (partly provided by the UK) and Chinese manpower on the ground. In Vietnam, it was much the same story, with Soviet weapons freely flowing to North Vietnam but the Chinese were much less involved than in Korea. In fact, the Chinese attempted to invade Vietnam after the war ended (1979) and lost a considerable amount of face and prestige, ultimately being forced to withdraw. It was humiliating.

What China wants is what China gets. They wanted money and the Russians did not have much, so they made deals with the Americans (and the West). They wanted advanced technology in a variety of fields and the best available was in the West, primarily the Americans, and they were able to obtain it by trade. So it is only natural that any partnership between Russian and Chinese today, the Chinese would see themselves as the senior partner, not the junior partner. That means that the European frontiers that have bedeviled the Russians for centuries are not very important, compared to China's ambitions in East Asia, Afrika, and the Pacific. This is indeed a sea change.

What China desperately needs is energy, particularly oil. The Russians have it in abundance, but are less likely to trade it for cheap Chinese manufactures, including weapons. But OPEC countries can slack China's thirst for oil AND will gladly take Chinese-made goods. This arrangement may be durable.

Blogger Chesapean June 28, 2019 1:57 PM  

The liberal idea failed the West because it proved to be directly contradictory to all three pillars of the West, Christianity, the European nations, and the Greco-Roman legal and philosophic legacies. It was, in the end, intrinsically anti-Western.

This is demonstrably true, but a lot depends on definitions. If by "the liberal idea" we mean "equality," then not only the three pillars of the West but mere reason and common sense find "the liberal idea" offensive.

If, however, we mean "liberty," then the inevitable failure is not so obvious.

I define "liberty" as follows: A political arrangement that establishes mechanisms for self-governance while preserving the natural rights of individuals.

Liberty in this sense is a remarkable innovation in human affairs with clear roots in the three pillars of the West.

It is, however, uniquely susceptible to corruption, because its various expressions and ideas are easily confused with others that are it's antithesis. Liberty, for example, should not be confused with the more general notions of freedom or license.

I hope that liberty will inspire many in the generation that is about to go to war to preserve our nations.

Blogger VD June 28, 2019 2:02 PM  

If, however, we mean "liberty," then the inevitable failure is not so obvious.

We don't. We mean the liberal and neoliberal program of the Enlightenment.

I define "liberty" as follows: A political arrangement that establishes mechanisms for self-governance while preserving the natural rights of individuals.

Literally no one cares. Seriously, what on Earth are you trying to accomplish here?

Blogger Ledford Ledford June 28, 2019 2:17 PM  

I wonder if our elites could add India to the China-Russia coalition. If I were in Peking, I'd be working to make sure the Deep State/MSM believe Modi is backing Trump's re-election.

Blogger Avalanche June 28, 2019 2:39 PM  

RUBBLE BOUNCED!

Blogger furor kek tonicus ( according to the 13th Amendment, Slavery is neither Cruel nor Unusual: MSAGA ) June 28, 2019 2:51 PM  

eh? i thought this was where horse carcasses were rendered into jello.

Blogger VFM #7634 June 28, 2019 3:16 PM  

"But at least they don't eat people and molest children"

The Chinese are in fact known for eating aborted babies...
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/31/chinese-cannibalism-infant-flesh-outrages-world/

Blogger Chesapean June 28, 2019 3:39 PM  

@17 Seriously, what on Earth are you trying to accomplish here?

I found the phrase, "the liberal idea" in the original post to be vague. Since "liberty" as a political idea also arose during the Enlightenment, and strikes me as worth preserving, I want to distinguish it from other ideas of the period that deserve to be rejected.

Blogger SciVo June 28, 2019 3:43 PM  

Dan in Georgia wrote:Russia would be the only acceptable overlord to manage the transition of the USA into regional confederacies with the least amount of bloodshed.

That is madness. Do not let a temporary and partial alignment of interests blind you to the duplicity of the Russkie. He is always thinking eight moves ahead, and the eighth move benefits him at your expense.

Blogger Winston Smith June 28, 2019 3:48 PM  

The liberal idea failed the West because it proved to be directly contradictory to all three pillars of the West, Christianity, the European nations, and the Greco-Roman legal and philosophic legacies. It was, in the end, intrinsically anti-Western.

Liberalism is built primarily on two pillars:

1. The state's legitimacy depends upon freedom and equality being the highest political goals and how much it "respects them" and "secures them."

2. No individual should be subject to barriers to the realization of their will, be those barriers nature, biology, authority, etc.

"Liberalism" is completely Satanic. It started with Satan crying "Non serviam!" at God.

It's also why men are subjected to the tyranny frivorce, a favorite subject of the MGTOWs. Men feel little duty to obey authorities except when they agree with them, then wonder why their wives extend that to them. There is no such thing as a tame Liberalism anymore than there is a bourgeois Satanism that doesn't eventually lead to truly serving the devil.

Blogger Winston Smith June 28, 2019 3:59 PM  

@Chesapean

I define "liberty" as follows: A political arrangement that establishes mechanisms for self-governance while preserving the natural rights of individuals.

Every man has his own pet definition of liberty or freedom. The entire program is held together by unprincipled exceptions. For example, every "free speech advocate" who is at least somewhat medically sane supports criminalizing some "speech" (or expression if you prefer). Thus no one believes in the principle of "freedom to speak." They believe in an authoritative classification scheme of "speech which I think is acceptable" and "speech which I think you should be imprisoned for uttering."

You know what freedom is? It's when you agree with the authorities on who should go to prison and what activities land you there.

Blogger SciVo June 28, 2019 4:12 PM  

Winston Smith wrote:You know what freedom is? It's when you agree with the authorities on who should go to prison and what activities land you there.

Yes. That is self-rule, when society is ordered in accord with your values. So, logically, for society as a whole to have self-rule, it must be homogenous.

Anything else is unfreedom.

Blogger IncoherentM June 28, 2019 5:54 PM  

Hoping for a bouncing rubble update soon.

Blogger Cataline Sergius June 28, 2019 5:56 PM  

I'd figured something was up when I watched the film adaptation of Liu Cixin's The Wandering Earth.

(What I found interesting) was choice of White people in this flick. There was a half Chinese/half Australian blond kid that provided the slapstick comic relief. There was also a Russian Cosmonaut who was the Father’s closest friend on the space station. One French woman on the Station as a background extra and no Americans at all. It’s the Russians and the Australians that really matter to the People of the Han for …reasons.


So Russians are the in-crowd at the moment.

Although it should be remembered that China and Russia have had alliances before and they've fallen apart before. Shared borders equal shared tensions.

Blogger rondolf June 28, 2019 8:32 PM  

"I define "liberty" as follows: A political arrangement that establishes mechanisms for self-governance while preserving the natural rights of individuals.

Literally no one cares. Seriously, what on Earth are you trying to accomplish here?"

Who are you to deny him a seat on this years student council.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 28, 2019 10:02 PM  

@Winston Smith
@SciVo
Freedom is the natural state of living within a community of shared expectations and standards.
AKA a homgenous culture.
Grifters, criminals, authorirarians and Conmen are outsiders, almost by definition.

"Shared Values" is always a bait-and-switch. It was a phrase couned by (((people))) trying to camouflage themselves within an alien culture. "We may not be the sam religion, but we share the same values." Except of course when (((they))) don't. Then it is up to you to abandon your values in the name of Freedom, or Comity or Peace, or whatever the excuse is.

Blogger weka June 29, 2019 1:21 AM  

Realpolitik trumps ideology. It is in the interests of thw motherland and the Middle kingdom to have trade and a peaceful border.

Putin and Trump know this. The neoidiots do not.

Blogger tublecane June 29, 2019 3:29 AM  

Let it be remembered that for most of the early liberals the Novus Ordo Seclorum was not supposed to consist of starting society over from scratch. Some of them did, of course. But they were the less responsible ones.

The Founding Fathers (not all liberal, granted) took advanced civilization for granted, and also stressed the importance of virtue amongst those who would run it. Perhaps this was not communicated as well as it should have been.

Lunatics were inspired by the Goddess Reason, and probably the Enlightenment as a whole was a mistake. But some form of liberalism can live within Western Civilization. So long as those people are clubbed over the head once they say anything foolish.

Blogger James Jameson June 29, 2019 3:48 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger James Jameson June 29, 2019 3:49 AM  

The fact that the globohomo hegemony is pure satanic evil does not mean that either the Chinese or the Russians are good guys.

On that note, I am reliably informed by a Russian 4channer that actual Russian nationalism is severely persecuted in Putin's Russia.

There are in fact two words for "Russian" in Russian, one meaning "ethnic Russian" and one meaning "citizen of modern Russian empire". Nationalism for the latter is promoted, whereas nationalism for the former is an imprisonable offense under Russian speech laws.

I even recall Putin comparing Russia favorably against the US on RT by invoking "America's racist history". Given Russian communists invented the concept of "racism", this is hardly shocking. Old habits die hard.

Blogger Unknown June 29, 2019 8:27 AM  

@VD
I thought it was China who was persecuting Christians while Russia was encouraging the rise of its Orthodox branch. Is my information out of date?

Blogger McChuck June 29, 2019 8:34 AM  

Wow, the interviewee (((A.B. Abrams AKA Abraham Ait)) is filled to the brim with BS.

"Perhaps today one the greatest distinctions is Russia’s eschewing of the principle of sovereignty under international law and its adherence to a non-interventionist foreign policy."

That statement is self-contradictory. It is true that Russia doesn't care about other countries' sovereignty (Georgia, Ukraine). It is not true that Russia adheres to a non-interventionist foreign policy (Georgia, Ukraine, Syria, Venezuela).

Blogger Tars Tarkas June 29, 2019 12:18 PM  

This sounds like a whole lot of anti-Americanism and blame America first.

Blogger Neil Patrick Carris June 29, 2019 12:37 PM  

RUBBLE BOUNCED

Blogger Up from the pond June 30, 2019 9:47 PM  

Julian Assad wrote:I even recall Putin comparing Russia favorably against the US on RT by invoking "America's racist history". Given Russian communists invented the concept of "racism", this is hardly shocking. Old habits die hard.

Oh, don't be such Ice-Cold Warrior. Communism isn't Russian, it's Jewish. It oppressed the Russians.

And Russian communists didn't invent the concept of "racism." According to the OED, the first use of "racism" was by an American Brigadier General, Richard Henry Pratt, in 1902. A gentleman of large proboscis, Pratt thundered this seminal quotation: "Association of races and classes is necessary to destroy racism and classism." He is remembered for his project of taking Indians out of reservations and beating the hell out of them to integrate them into white society.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts