Author: VD
Compare the narratives
Austin Bay considers the Seven Chinas grand narrative.
Nations have always used narratives to support their diplomatic operations. Not all of them are “weaponized,” but a powerful, moving story gives a diplomatic initiative additional energy. Often these narratives incorporate nation or ethnic historical and cultural themes. Since they support a diplomatic initiative, they are always political.
In February, the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies published a short paper entitled “Seven Chinas: A Policy Framework.” The paper briefly examined “seven identities” that the Chinese government uses to “shape and justify policy.”
Each identity is a narrative.
China 1: Self-sufficient civilization (We generate our own values)
China 2: Most humiliated nation (Our senior civilization, conquered and despised)
China 3: Leader of the developing world (Late developing China leads developing nations)
China 4: Champion of plurality (We are ending Western/American hegemony)
China 5: Sovereign survivor (We survived the collapse of Communism because we are unique)
China 6: Last man standing (The West is declining while our wealth is increasing)
China 7: Herald of the high frontier (China and shares the global trade and communications commons)
In the South China Sea China’s narrative weapons have augmented its military and economic clout. It’s proved to be a powerful combination.
Compare these to the ever-shifting globalist and SJW narratives that have replaced the traditional Western narrative. It is eminently clear that in any matchup of these particular weaponized narratives, China is not merely winning, China is going to win.
An economic education
Sometimes these jokers openly admit what is readily obvious to even the casual observer: the basis for their professed knowledge is remarkably shallow. In this particular circumstance, one might even say callow.
Jeffrey Gundlach warns we may be repeating the mistakes that led to the Great Depression. The bond investor was asked for his view on the rising trade tensions between the U.S. and China.
“It’s not a positive. I mean it is really interesting when I was in elementary school and high school we talked about the Great Depression … [What] my teachers told me was that the Great Depression was caused by the Federal Reserve raising interest rates prematurely in a not so strong economy and also the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act,” he said Wednesday on CNBC’s “Halftime Report.”
Well, if the opinions of public school elementary teachers from four decades ago aren’t a sound basis for modern economic policy, I don’t know what could be. Sure, my elementary school teacher didn’t know the difference between a triceratops and an allosaur, but I’m confident her knowledge of economic history was considerably more sound.
What he said
An astute comment at Steve Sailer’s about the Kevin Williamson firing:
The NR staff currently wailing on twitter about the injustice of dumping a talented writer for being provocative on an independent website can show it’s not just crocodile tears by apologizing to Derbyshire.
Apologizing? They should offer to rehire him with a raise as well. Consider David French’s wailing about “the cowardly firing” with just a few changes to it.
The AtlanticNational Review has caved to the intolerant mob and firedKevin WilliamsonJohn Derbyshire, and in so doing has contributed to a slanderous fiction — thatKevinJohn is so beyond the pale that he has no place at one of the nation’s premieremainstreamconservative publications. His millions of words, his countless interviews, and his personal character were reduced to nothing — inconsequential in the face ofdeleted tweets and a five-minute podcast dialoguea single column. Look, I know it’s easy for some to dismissKevinJohn’s termination as mere inside-baseball media drama. But it’s more than that. It’s a declaration by one of America’s most powerfulmediaconservative entities that it can’t even coexist with a man likeKevinJohn. If he wants to write, he should run along to hisconservativeAlt-Right home. Hisnewlong-time colleagues simply couldn’t abide his presence.
These cuckservative Never Trumpians simply do not realize that their time is past. They have been exposed for hypocrites and fools. They do not lead opinions, they are led by the Left instead, following it slavishly from one societally destructive policy to the next. Give them a little more time and they’ll be dutifully laying out the conservative cases for cannibalism, child sacrifice, and Satan worship.
Hence the real reason for their wailing. They know they are losing the right-wing audience that is increasingly rejecting their soft leftism, and now they are beginning to realize that the hard Left has no use for them either.
The Littlest Chickenhawk has been crying about that on Twitter, in addition to issuing the conventional dire warnings of consequences never being the same. He thinks he is one of the “virtuous people” to decide who is acceptable and who is not, to decide who is chased down and disemployed and who is not, intstead of the overt Left.
This is, we are told, the “stone cold truth” and “the Left won’t like it”.
The Left continues to radically narrow the Overton Window – the spectrum of acceptable discourse. They separate discourse into two categories: the acceptable and the unacceptable. Then they shrink the acceptable down to the opinions located between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. This necessarily places Kevin Williamson and @bariweiss and @SamHarrisOrg and me and everyone else the Left finds unpalatable into the “excluded” category. But the unacceptable category is already populated by those who are actually unacceptable: alt-right trolls, for example. This means that the population of opinion in the unacceptable category – let’s call them Deplorables, since the Left does – come to be a majority by way of exclusion. Unless, that is, virtuous people who have been excluded by the Left draw distinctions among themselves. Which they should, of course – Kevin and @bariweiss and I and @SamHarrisOrg all get lumped in as Nazis by the Left, but we all fight the actual alt-right Nazis.
But counting on the virtue of people you’ve just deemed unacceptable not to band together against you is both stupid and unrealistic over time. Which means the Left is doing something unethical here, and deeply dishonest – and something that is likely to foster polarization that results in the mainstreaming of truly gross opinions. This is how you get a reactionary movement willing to countenance alt-right evil: you tell people they’re part of the alt-right when they’re not, and treat them as such no matter how much of a lie that is. What just happened to Kevin Williamson leads conservatives to side with anyone the Left casts out, good or bad, merely as a form of protection. That shouldn’t happen. But it does. And the Left causes it with this bulls***.
Demonstrating, once more, that Ben Shapiro is not of the Right at all, but of the soft Left. That’s why they are always trying to a) disassociate from the Right and b) fix the Left.
Glenn Reynolds and Kurt Schlichter have similar takes. From Instapundit:
What really happened is that women at The Atlantic complained that Kevin’s abortion views upset them. And since making women feel bad about their life choices is a mortal sin, he had to go.
The difference between progressives and conservatives is that progressives assert that making women or blacks or gays or Jews feel bad is sufficient reason to lose your job. Conservatives, on the other hand, argue that only making blacks or Jews feel bad is enough to justify disemployment.
Financial nuke or dud?
There are dire warnings about a financial nuclear option in the dawning US-China trade war:
It took China just 11 hours to retaliate against the United States for proposing tariffs on some 1,300 Chinese products, but Chinese officials are holding back on taking aim at their largest American import: government debt.
In a tit-for-tat response to the Trump administration’s plan for 25 percent duties on $50 billion of Chinese imports, China hit back with its own list of similar duties on key American imports including soybeans, planes, cars, beef and chemicals. But officials signaled no interest for now in bringing their vast holdings of U.S. Treasuries to the fight.
China held around $1.17 trillion of Treasuries as of the end of January, making it the largest of America’s foreign creditors and the No. 2 overall owner of U.S. government bonds after the Federal Reserve. Any move by China to chop its Treasury portfolio could inflict significant harm on U.S. finances and global investors, driving bond yields higher and making it more costly to finance the federal government.
But a reader explains why the bond threat is toothless.
It’s hilarious reading Drudge headlines about how the Chinese owning US Treasuries is some kind of “nuclear option” for Beijing.
Presumably, China thinks it will somehow crash the value of its Treasury holdings by dumping it on the open market. This is somehow supposed to destroy the value of these bonds…or something. It’s almost as if no one understands how bonds actually work.
Bonds have an intrinsic value, the face value of the bonds which is the amount of money that is returned to bondholders when the bond matures.
This is the par value. If I sell a bond to you for $1,000, then I am obligated to return $1,000 to you plus interest when the bond matures. If I sell a $1,000 bond to you at an interest rate that is lower than the market rate, then I may only collect, say, $950 for the bond, but, at maturity, I am obligated to pay $1,000 back to you plus interest.
If you decide to sell the bond that I sold to you on the open market, then you may get a premium above the $1,000 or you may get a discount below $1,000, but the face value of the bond, the money owed, does not change. Upon maturity, $1,000 is owed to the bond holder.
The value of the bond may oscillate on the secondary market because of the risk of default or because interest rates have changed, but, absent the risk of default, the value of the bond is purely mathematical. Since US Treasuries have virtually zero risk of default, the value of the bond is simply the interest rate paid by the bond, vs. the interest rate of competing securities of similar risk vs. the duration. These can all be calculated in Excel using amortization tables.
There is nothing China can do to devalue US Treasuries by dumping their holdings. If they decide to sell for an artificially low price, then they are simply creating arbitrage opportunities for the buyers and frenzied trading will quickly bid back up the value of those bonds to their mathematically determined price.
See how important bonds and interest rates are in understanding the economy?
The financial trade media is heavily invested in arguing that there can be no winners in a trade war. But they are ignoring the fact that the trade war has been ongoing for decades and the USA has been continually surrendering.
They are also ignoring the uncomfortable fact that if comparative advantage were legitimate, the correct response to tariffs and other trade restrictions would be to do nothing. According to free trade theory, a country is economically better off if it enacts no trade restrictions regardless of what its trade partners do. The fact that various US trade partners are threatening retaliation for US tariffs is further evidence that, despite their free trade rhetoric, they do not genuinely believe in the concept. Nor should they, because it does not work as advertised.
A negative asset
What goes around comes around. The truth about the dysfunctional, downscale writer Kevin Williamson is that he deserves to die. Economically, he is a negative asset.
Conservative commentator Kevin Williamson was fired from The Atlantic, just weeks after being hired, the magazine told TheWrap.
“Kevin is a gifted writer, and he has been nothing but professional in all of our interactions. But I have come to the conclusion that The Atlantic is not the best fit for his talents, and so we are parting ways,” said editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg in an email to staff on Thursday.
In his memo, obtained by TheWrap, Goldberg explained that Williamson was being terminated over his views on abortion, which have come to wide attention in recent days.
“Late yesterday afternoon, information came to our attention that has caused us to reconsider this relationship. Specifically, the subject of one of Kevin’s most controversial tweets was also a centerpiece of a podcast discussion in which Kevin explained his views on the subject of the death penalty and abortion,” wrote Goldberg.
Williamson even appears to have been fired despite lacking the courage to stand by his previous convictions. There was no “errant tweet”, as the podcast footage subsequently demonstrated. So, who led Jeffrey Goldberg to believe that there was? Did he come up with that on his own, or was that an excuse that was given to him?
While Goldberg himself once trumpeted Williamson’s hire from the National Review, the writer immediately drew outrage — particularly over a tweet in which he argued that women who had had an abortion should face the death penalty. Williamson defenders — and Goldberg himself — had argued that his career should not be judged on an errant tweet.
Some on the Right still don’t get it. The Left is not fixable. The time for worrying about “the heckler’s veto” is long past. There is no public square anymore because there is no common ground. The Left is fighting a cultural war by any means necessary, and even if you’re not willing to do the same, it is reprehensibly foolish to expect them to do otherwise, much less mend their ways for fear of handwringing moderate right-wingers following through on ominously implied threats which they are manifestly unwilling to even articulate.
And we are supposed to imagine what happens to us in light of Williamson’s rapid ejection from The Atlantic? Where have you been for the last ten years? We don’t have to imagine anything. We’ve already experienced it.
Marvel’s vision of the future
So, Wolverine is a woman. The President of the United States is a woman. And a superhero. And a Muslim. It just keeps getting better… check out who is the President in the ALL-NEW WOLVERINE #33. Needless to say, the Comics-SJWs just love it.
As to what we’re doing to take advantage of this nonsense, I’m pleased to be able to say that the first TWO issues of Alt★Hero are now illustrated, the first issue is colored, and we are rapidly approaching the print layout stage. So, here’s the question: do we maximize the potential audience by using the smaller format and selling the single issues for $2.99 or do we go out with the larger format at $3.99?
If you’re an Alt★Hero backer or if you’re intending to buy the single issues, please share your opinion. I go back and forth on this one. Keep in mind that the graphic novels will be in the larger format regardless. And backers will receive the digital editions for free, of course.
We will have another print release on Monday. Possibly two, as a matter of fact.
Another Twitter “suspension”
The Z-man is the latest to be kicked off Twitter:
My twitter account was suspended for violation of their rules. The specific violations were that I was threatening to post personal information about someone and that I was contemplating suicide. Neither of those things are true, but that does not matter in these issues. What I think happened is some anti-Semites, who support the deranged loon Paul Nehlen, took issue with me saying Nehlen is a nut. Soon after, a lunatic started spamming me on Twitter and then my account was permanently suspended by the twitter police.
I’m not all that upset about it. I have been thinking about cutting out social media from my internet life. I was never into Facebook. I never saw the point of it. I’m not that interesting and neither are my friends. If I need to see cat videos, I have a cat at home. I never really liked twitter all that much, but I figured it was a good way to promote the site. It was mostly just a time waster. The increase in traffic from my activity was pretty much zero. My readers know where to find me, so twitter added nothing and just took away.
I’m still up on Gab, but I’m done posting there. Frankly, I’m tired of “white nationalist” types that have made Gab their home. I probably have muted two times the number of people I follow. It’s a free country and I think those people have a right to speak their mind on-line, but I just don’t want to hear it or see it. I’ve reached my limit on that stuff. It’s like being chained to a lunatic. No matter how hard you try to ignore it, you can’t help but notice the lunatic. The solution is to divorce myself from the whole scene. Goodbye lunatics…
Apparently tcjfs was kicked off too. As for the rest of it, the reality is that very few people are cut out for blogging long term. If it doesn’t come to you naturally, then you’re going to burn out sooner or later.
As for the usual “Alt-Right is over” theme, that’s a uniquely American perspective that confuses political philosophy with political movement, ideas with groups, and understanding with branding. When the White House is denouncing and firing globalists, European nationalists are winning elections, and Big Social is enduring everything from Congressional summons to attacks by SJW gunwomen, and self-styled conservative opinion leaders are increasingly irrelevant, the Alt-Right is the exact opposite of over.
Remember, winning is a process, not a conclusion. And as for me, I’m still not tired.
I thought correlation was not causation
SJWs in the media are now trying to claim “globalist” is an anti-semitic term:
The term “globalist” has been used at the White House at least three times this week in reference to an outgoing Jewish Trump administration official, raising some eyebrows because the word is increasingly used in xenophobic and anti-Semitic contexts.
The word came up on Wednesday when a reporter asked White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders whether a similar candidate will take the place of Gary Cohn, the outgoing director of President Donald Trump’s National Economic Council.
“He was a noted free trader, a globalist. Will the president seek another globalist, another free trader?” Fox News reporter John Roberts asked.
This followed Mick Mulvaney, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, using the word “globalist,” in quotation marks, to describe Cohn in a statement that was tweeted by his department on Tuesday….
For the anti-Semitic and neo-Nazi members of the so-called “alt-right” white supremacist movement, “globalist” is a euphemism for “Jew.” It refers to the longstanding conspiracy theory about an international Jewish cabal working to undermine the traditional white family and Western culture by pushing for immigration and diversity.
A glossary of extremist language published by The New York Times places “globalism” among terms like “alt-right,” “antifa” and “cuck.”
First, that is an interesting implication that the mainstream media is now aware that the real battle is between nationalism and globalism, and shows that it fears an increasingly nationalistic public’s reaction to those who openly advocate the latter. Second, it’s an astonishingly foolish way for any philosemite to try to defend globalism, as the following logical syllogism should suffice to demonstrate.
- Major Premise: Globalists advocate evil.
- Minor Premise: Globalist means Jew
- Conclusion: Jews advocate evil.
This leads directly to the following syllogism.
- Major Premise: All good men must oppose evil.
- Minor Premise: Jews advocate evil
- Conclusion: All good men must oppose Jews.
- Restated: Anti-semitism is a moral obligation for all good men.
Now, unless you agree with the conclusions, you will have to identify which categorical proposition is false. Unless you are pro-globalism, the first minor premise has to be the false one.
This is astonishingly inept rhetoric, even for the Huffington Post. It never ceases to amaze me how the Left simply refuses to accept that words actually mean things and good people actually oppose certain forms of evil. While it may have worked for blacks (racism) and gays (homophobia), no one is going to drop their opposition to globalism, or stop identifying globalists as globalists, for fear of being called anti-semitic.
In any event, I look forward to the Post’s future articles on how “pedophile” and “satanist” and “Hitler” are also anti-semitic terms.
Why Trump is still popular
It’s really not hard to figure out. No one believes anything the media says anymore.
It’s not surprising that after little more than a year in office many people who voted for a president still support him. But it’s also surprising that a president who has been the object of more negative reporting than any in our history still enjoys something like the same middling base of support he had before taking office. Unless it’s the negative reporting that is the problem, which I suspect is very largely the case. You can only ask adults to participate in the fiction that a retweet of a wrestling GIF is a credible threat of violence against some nerd reporters at a cable station or delight in what you hope will be the failure of American trade policy before they decide to tune you out. Very largely this had already happened by Inauguration Day, but now the work of MSNBC and The New York Times and PolitiFact is complete. Millions of Americans do not know the difference between what is true and what is false and have decided that they do not much care either.
There was, I like fondly to imagine, a different course that might have been taken here. It is just possible, I suppose, that members of my profession could have exercised their reasoning faculties to decide what in the administration was good, what was bad, what was unremarkable or indistinguishable from what any modern president would do, what was painfully idiotic, what was, perhaps, evil. We chose not to exercise this responsibility. Instead we decided to indulge in our live-action roleplaying fantasies about being brave selfless journos taking on a mean demagogue because we love the Constitution so much.
The morons in the media may have the memory of goldfish, but those of us who still remember how they said Bill Clinton getting it on with an intern in the Oval Office was no big deal aren’t inclined to take their solemn declarations that the God-Emperor banging the occasional Playmate or porn star more than a decade ago is an imminent threat to the Constitution.
The media killed its own credibility. Now they are Fake News and everyone knows it, even those who pretend to believe them. As Glenn Reynolds says, their chief occupation is now deciding what facts they are going to try to hide from the American people.
