Dakota Beacon

Maybe it’s time we stop being chased around by China’s “control” of our medicines and medical supplies and its burgeoning dominance of manufacturing.  Guess what?  China can no longer feed its own people.  China’s swaggering arrogance is grossly misplaced.

That’s right.  China has been singularly focused on monetizing every square inch and every single human being within its domain.  Every human, man, woman, child, is costed out as to his value in coin - how much is his liver worth, how much for his lungs,his kidneys, his pancreas, his heart, his corneas?  This is the value of the human in China.  I suppose in terms of transplantable body parts a human is worth quite a bit.  In terms of slave labor he marks time.  

But for all this monetizing of everything in sight, the Chinese government has overlooked one vital component in the equation - it has sacrificed its croplands to industry.  In truth, probably not enough sunlight could even get through to nourish a plant, what with the unbridled air pollution, and the water pollution has made its rivers unfit even for transport and poisoned its soil.  The government of Red China has basically sullied its country to the extent that it is economically morbid, despite its cornering the market on PPEs.  

In February of this year the US and China reached an agreement which opens the market in China for greater US imports of foods.  That was February 14.  We should have known not to enter into any agreement with China by that time.  At that point China had known for three months about the coronavirus epidemic within its borders and was shipping it to us and the rest of the world.  This agreement ought to be scrapped.  If China is forced to feed itself perhaps less of its time and resources will be spent on its “unrestricted warfare”, which is what the Chinese communist government calls its industrial, psychological, drug and other non-military warfare - openly declared by them against the United States.  In what universe should we engage in trade with these people?  

While China denies everything - like they do with the virus details - and puts out that they are “agriculturally self-sufficient” and even boast about it, this is not really true.  The future of Chinese agriculture is very uncertain.  The government owns the farmland and leases it to those who work it - as those “leases” expire it is unknown what the next policy will be.  One thing experience and history tell us is that communist government planning makes a hash of agriculture, regardless of the geography.

It might be a good time to just quit selling grains and other foodstuffs to China now.  Look at what we’ve been doing.  We have been discouraging industry in our own country, where we have laws and regulations which basically protect our water and our air to a great extent, and where we have laws and regulations which protect to some degree (perhaps not enough) our workforce.  This, one might observe, makes China attractive to industry.  Well, yes, as long as we treat Chinese imports with preferred status.  Those who would further restrict American industry (what’s left of it) by imposing still more environmentally-oriented restrictions to address imagined anthropogenic climate change should understand that when industry abandons the U.S. and goes to India or China our regulations do not reach them - they pollute without any restriction.  They fill the air with plumes of smoke, they dump poisonous chemicals into their streams.  What we should do is not only impose high tariffs on Chinese imports, we should ban them.  If we did this (we did with Cuban cigars at one time) the Chinese could blissfully nationalize our industrial plants over there to their hearts’ content and a few greedy agribusinesses might lose some sleep over it but we could restore a decent relationship.  The Chinese do not hold all the cards here.  If we said no more foods, it is unlikely that anyone else would fill their needs - maybe Canada could.  If Canada wants to cripple their economy and give itself over as hostage to the Chinese after the chilling experience of 2020.  Trudeau might be okay with this but he might not be around forever if he promotes it.    If we are producing this much surplus we could either donate it to someone more deserving or just quit producing so much more than we can consume.  

There is a price to pay for industrializing every square inch of China - and that is agricultural self-sufficiency.  A balance is really far better.  If we quit propping up these gangsters who are running China perhaps at some point the people there will understand that they deserve better and get rid of the real evil - which is communism.  When that day comes they will not be the only winners - the rest of the world will be much, much, much better off than at any time since 1949.  We only then hope for freedom of speech - which if it were possible now might have diverted the horror of a pandemic.  Taiwan, a peaceful, constructive, responsible, self-regulating and free country of free citizens is what China could be.  We should do everything in our power to help the people of China achieve this goal if they so desire.  Nothing would be more stupid than propping up the corrupt and rotten government which practices persecution of dissidents, live organ transplants without consent, steals intellectual property (only natural when a nation stiffles its own thinkers) and behaves as aggressively and irresponsibly as it has in the instant example.  We should follow the good example of India and deny China any right to hold property within the U.S. and thus avoid China “buying us out”.  

We should immediately adopt a policy of stopping trade with China, give some kind of encouragement to American industry, and when the time comes extend the hand of friendship to the freely elected government which we can hope will replace the rotted-out hulk of corruption that the People’s Republic of China has become.  Our participation with the Chinese Communist government has enabled them to abuse their own people, stripping them of all basic human rights, enabled them to harvest the organs of living human beings - nearly all of them Falun Gong practitioners, Christians and Uighers.  And as to their new-found “free enterprise system”?  It isn’t so free after all.  Sure, an ordinary Chinese person could operate a corner noodle shop, but if he expanded into a national-level operation or if, instead of noodles, his expertise was in producing technical instruments, the government would require placement of a government authority on their board and his word would be law.  If a Chinese person invented an advanced communications system or device, that would be commandeered by the government - a practice and system which strongly mitigates against invention, it’s why the Chinese government relies almost entirely on stealing the technology invented by others or, in some cases, just buying it up.  Their system discourages enterprise and invention.  They see it as too much freedom to think and communicate.  So much for China’s experiment in economic “freedom”.  

What we see now is an aggressor which is voraciously acquiring valuable assets in terms of key people and industries, real estate and communications in other nations, while unable to sustain itself.  Without other people’s agriculture, the great nation of China would starve.  They are hardly in any position to dangle their defective face mask and their tainted test kits.

A FINAL NOTE:  

Recently I posted articles regarding the benefits of using a face mask (http://dakotabeacon.com/entry/sally_morris_protect_others_-_wear_a_mask/)).  Today I read an article in Healthline’s website which seconds my motion:  https://www.healthline.com/health/cold-flu/mask#bottom-line.  This was in opposition to Betsey McCaughey’s partially correct statement that homemade masks do not keep virus particles “out”.  This was never the intention - rather it was to protect others from potential exposure by someone who is asymptomatic, which is a huge factor in the spread of this virus.

I also posted an article on March 21, in which I proposed a plan to help preserve the economy (http://dakotabeacon.com/entry/sally_morris_an_urgent_message_to_congress_and_the_administration/).  I posited that the usual plans of government trying to arrange the outcomes it imagined would be “best”, which involves picking winners and losers - a practice which invariably helps their own personal bottom line - were insufficient as well as wholly inappropriate in a nationwide crisis of indeterminate length and scope, one which will potentially destroy lives in every major city and tiny rural hamlet in America.  I said it would bring about deep division as people saw themselves on the “losing” end while others saw windfall profits from their pain and loss.   Well, no one listened to my plea for sanity and a conservative and constructive policy here, so the ill winds are now blowing.   In Bloomberg today there is an article which says as much, as small businesses find that no one hears them.  https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/resentment-grows-on-main-street-over-bailout-winners-and-losers-1.1426347

If you have read this far, please share this with others.  Some people have not been introduced to The Dakota Beacon yet.  Strange but true.  Be their conduit.   And, as always, I look forward to hearing your feedback - whether you agree with me or disagree.  Let’s have a discussion.

Comments:  (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)