Only one nation benefits from sanctions on Russia – minister

 

Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov © Sputnik / Dmitry Astakhov

Source: RT

The US has capitalized on the restrictions, selling LNG to Europe at lucrative prices, the Russian Finance Minister said

The sanctions the West has slapped on Russia over the Ukraine conflict are taking a heavy toll on the European economy, while the United States is the only actor profiting from the restrictions, Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov said on Saturday.

Speaking to Asharq News daily, the minister claimed that Western sanctions had helped the Americans achieve what they wanted, saying “their supplies of oil and gas to the European market have increased.”

Energy shipments from the US, however, have proved costly for Europeans, resulting in skyrocketing inflation and decreased competitive power for European businesses, Siluanov said.

According to the minister, both Western sanctions and the blasts that ruptured the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines in late September “were orchestrated to provide Europe with more expensive liquefied [natural] gas from America.”

“America benefits, Europe loses,” he explained.

Moscow has called the sabotage a terrorist attack, claiming that the US stood to benefit the most from the explosions. While Washington has denied any involvement, Secretary of State Antony Blinken described the incident as a “tremendous opportunity” for Europe to wean itself off of Russian energy.

Siluanov went on to admit that sanctions have affected the Russian economy. “But they inflicted on the West no less, and perhaps even more pain,” he added, pointing to how sanctions rhetoric has now become routine.

The minister noted that the EU price cap on Russian oil “will certainly lead to price and market distortions,” reiterating Moscow’s position that it would not provide crude under contracts under Western-mandated restrictions.

Russian oil companies are rerouting their oil shipments from the West in other directions, the minister said. “We will be looking for new markets, looking for new logistics. It is possible that this would be more expensive,” he stated.

Earlier this month, the EU, G7 countries and Australia introduced a price limit on Russian seaborne oil, set at $60 per barrel. The measure also prohibits Western companies from providing insurance and other services to shipments of Russian crude, unless the cargo is purchased at or below the indicated price.

Following the move, Kremlin Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov warned that the restrictions would wreak havoc on global oil markets, while Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Moscow was not planning to sell oil to nations supporting the price cap.

Russia explains potential oil output cut

Moscow’s Finance Minister has said it may redirect supplies due to the EU price cap, even as costs rise

Russia will halt oil supplies to nations that impose a price cap on its crude exports, the country’s finance minister, Anton Siluanov, said on Sunday. He also admitted the possibility of cuts to production.

The minister said that Russia would seek new markets and logistics solutions even if they are more expensive.

“We won't sell oil under contracts that will specify price limits offered by Western countries. This is out of the question,” Siluanov said in an interview with Saudi media outlet Asharq News.

“How will this affect the economy, the country's budget, and the volume of production? Yes, we will have to limit production somewhere,” the minister added.

A $60 per barrel ceiling on Russian seaborne crude, imposed by the G7 and EU, came into force on December 5. That measure, along with a ban on EU imports of seaborne Russian flows, is aimed at slashing Moscow’s energy revenues. Russian oil cargoes that are traded above the threshold cannot access key services provided by Western companies, including insurance.

Siluanov characterized the decision to set a price ceiling for Russian seaborne oil as the “dictatorship of a consumer.” He also said that, in theory, the nations backing the step could introduce similar price caps for other producers as well, explaining that Russia could not agree to such policies.

The minister additionally pledged all of Russia's budgetary obligations would be fulfilled despite price restrictions, sanctions and price fluctuations across the world's markets.

His statements echo comments made by Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandr Novak on the price-capping issue earlier this week. Novak said that Moscow wouldn’t sell crude to countries that impose a price cap, and may respond to the measure by reducing oil production by 500,000-700,000 barrels a day in early 2023.

Russia is the world’s third largest oil producer and the curbs would equate to roughly 5-6% of the country’s daily output.

The idea of oil production cuts was first voiced by Russian President Vladimir Putin on December 9. The Russian leader stressed that no decisions on the issue had been made as of then.

The Old World is Over - Vladimir Putin

 

Russian President Vladimir Putin delivers a speech during a plenary session of the 25th St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) in St. Petersburg, Russia. © Sputnik / Pavel Bednyakov

News Source: RT

The old world is over: Key takeaways from Putin's first major speech since Russia's military offensive in Ukraine

Russian leader has buried the old world order and outlined his view on Russia’s and the world’s future, in a key address

New centers of power have emerged, the unipolar world order isn’t coming back, and the “colonial” way of thinking has failed, Russian President Vladimir Putin told the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) on Friday, in what the Kremlin described as an “extremely important” speech.

1. The old world order is gone with the wind

When the US declared victory in the Cold War, Americans designated themselves the “messengers of God on earth,” with interests that should be considered sacred and no obligations, Putin told the audience at SPIEF. New centers of power have since emerged, and have the right to protect their own systems, economic models and sovereignty.

These “truly revolutionary, tectonic changes in geopolitics, the global economy, in the technological sphere, in the entire system of international relations,” are “fundamental, pivotal and inexorable,” Putin said. “And It is a mistake to suggest that one can wait out the times of turbulent change and that things will return to normal; that everything will be as it was. It will not.”

2. Anti-Russian sanctions backfired on the West

When the US and its allies launched the campaign to “cancel” Russia over the conflict in Ukraine, they hoped to crash and undermine the Russian economy and society. The sanctions have instead boomeranged on their creators, aggravating social and economic problems, driving up the cost of food, electricity and fuel, and hurting the quality of life across the West, but especially in Europe.

“The European Union has completely lost its political sovereignty, and its bureaucratic elites are dancing to someone else’s tune, accepting whatever they are told from above, causing harm to their own population and their own economy,” Putin said.

EU citizens will pay the price for “decisions divorced from reality and taken contrary to common sense,” he added, as direct losses from the sanctions alone could exceed $400 billion in a year.

3. Energy prices and inflation are self-inflicted

Blaming the high energy prices and inflation in the West on Russia – “Putin’s price hike,” as the White House put it – is a “stupidity” and “designed for people who can’t read or write,” the Russian president said.

“Don’t blame us, blame yourselves,” Putin said. The EU “blindly believing in renewable sources” and abandoning long-term natural gas contracts with Russia led to the spike in energy prices last year, according to the Russian leader. Meanwhile, both the US and the EU addressed the Covid-19 pandemic by printing trillions of dollars and euros.

4. ‘Elite change’ awaits the West

Policies undertaken by EU and US leaders are exacerbating inequalities and divisions in their societies, not just in terms of welfare but in terms of values and orientations of various groups, Putin said.

“Such a detachment from reality, from the demands of society, will inevitably lead to a surge of populism and the growth of radical movements, to serious social and economic changes, to degradation and, in the near future, to a change of elites,” the Russian leader said.

5. If there’s a famine, it won’t be Russia’s fault

US and EU sanctions against Russia – in particular fertilizer and grain exports – are one of the reasons for growing global food insecurity, Putin pointed out. If there is famine in the world’s poorest countries, “this will be entirely on the conscience of the US administration and the European bureaucracy."

Troubles with food supply have arisen over the past several years – not months – due to the “short-sighted actions of those who are accustomed to solving their problems at someone else's expense,” distorting the trade flows by printing money in a sort of “predatory colonial policy,” Putin said.

Russia is ready to send food to Africa and the Middle East, where the threat of famine is most acute, but faces “logistical, financial, transport” obstacles imposed by the West, he said.

6. Reasons for the Ukraine conflict

Russia sent troops into Ukraine in February because the West refused to abide by its obligations, and it was “simply impossible to reach any new agreements with them,” Putin said. The decision was “forced, but necessary,” as Russia had every right as a sovereign country to defend its security and protect its citizens and residents of Donbass from “genocide by the Kiev regime and neo-Nazis who received the full protection of the West."

The West spent years turning Ukraine into an “anti-Russia” state and pumping it with weapons and military advisers, Putin said, pointing out they “did not give a damn” about Ukraine’s economy or the lives of its people, but “spared no expense to create a NATO foothold in the east, directed against Russia, to cultivate aggression, hatred and Russophobia."

“All the objectives of the special military operation will be unconditionally achieved,” Putin said.

7. Economic development is an expression of sovereignty

In the 21st century, sovereignty can’t be partial, Putin argued. All of its elements are equally important and complement each other, and the economy is one of them. There are five key principles Russia will follow in economic development: Openness, freedom, social justice, infrastructure, and technological sovereignty.

Russia will “never follow the path of self-isolation and autarky,” but will expand interactions with anyone who wishes to trade, Putin said, adding there are “many such countries.” Moscow will also support private enterprise, build and repair its transportation infrastructure, seek to reduce social inequality, and ensure its key technologies are not dependent on foreign imports.

“Truly sovereign states are always committed to equal partnerships,” while “those who are weak and dependent, as a rule, are busy looking for enemies, planting xenophobia, or finally losing their originality, independence, blindly following the overlord,” he said.

LINKS:

[01] June 17th, 2022 – Official Release of Vladimir Putin’s Speech at SPIEF

[02] Vladimir Putin - Today’s World Faces Similar Challenges and Threats as the 1930’s

The Sustainable Growth End Game

 

By: Stewart Brennan

Is Sustainable Growth, the Economic Cartels New Deal?

Prince Charles, one of the senior members of the Windsor Royal family, addressed the UN Climate Change Conference (COP 26) [01] in Scotland on Oct 31st, 2021, where he brought to attention the similarities of just how devastating the (Fake) pandemic had been to the economy, while equating climate change and bio-diversity being no different, and that it posed an even greater existential threat due to the growing global population and its demand for finite resources.

Charles then went on to say that, “we must go on a war like footing, must act with all dispatch, and decisively because time has quite literally run out…” he also claims to have addressed his climate alarmism with most of the World Leaders in attendance over the past 18 months which of course coincides with the pandemic timeline. Is now a good time to say, “Never let a good manufactured crisis go to waste?” 😉

In citing the UN’s IPCC Report “Code Red for Human Driven Global Heating” [02], Prince Charles then talked about carbon capture and carbon taxes, which of course, we’ve all heard before, as those who will be taxed, will be the commoner and small business owners that are blamed for, what they call “Human Driven Global Heating” while the big corporations owned by the cartel will be blessed with carbon credits which will be tradable on their rigged stock market while they continue to drive the biosphere into global ecological destruction.

The pretentious solution Prince Charles leads up to, is of course, sustainable growth.

However, the sustainable economic growth system Prince Charles is pushing is not a solution to ending the global environmental destruction that they are strangely calling climate change, because the continuation of a devastating consumer growth market will continue to be the real problem as it always has been in reference to the destruction of our environment. The proposed solution pushed by Prince Charles will just continue the same program of growth economics, that destroys the land, water and forests, while deflecting the blame away from their mega international corporations, and placing the blame onto the global population.

Sustainable Growth for whom?

First of all, there is no such thing as a “sustainable growth economy” especially when it does not address the central defining issue that is causing all the problems, which or course is the interest-bearing debt-based banking system that drives the inflation and the need for economic growth. By any measure, its a reckless monster with no off switch.

Within this system, all business requires growth; it’s a mathematical necessity given the nature of the economic system which, by coincidence, is controlled by those looking for an economic reset.

Growth can be explained through a simple math equation [03] to see how long it would take for a company to double in size.

The equation is derived through electronics and based on the discharge of a capacitor on a resistor where the fractional decrease in the charge of the capacitor is relative to time and so instead of showing a decay in fixed fraction unit time, we show something increasing over a fixed fraction unit time by changing the negative sign into a positive sign. I.e.: Growth rather than decay

[T2 = 70 / Percent Growth] in which T2 represents the doubling time; so, for an 8% annual growth, the time it takes to “DOUBLE” the size of your company or economy would be;

T2=70/ 8% = 8.75 years. The higher the growth percentage targeted, the shorter the amount of time it takes for a corporation to double in size.

It is in this way that ALL corporations are destructive to the environment because they are extremely wasteful, regardless of what prattle is believed.

For example: One of the places I worked recently was in a printing company that made sports trading cards, restaurant brochures, cigarette packages, store flyers, cardboard boxes for disposable masks, thousands of blank police tickets, food canning labels etc.; all of which are disposable products (with the exception of the sports trading cards). However, the process showed how truly wasteful the production process is where paper of different grades, textures and treatment were received on wooden pallets every day. By the end of the week, hundreds of wood pallets were discarded, tons of paper wasted, hundreds of gallons of soap, chemicals and ink tins were also discarded while the products were all packaged in plastic wrap and with plastic straps, shipped in and shipped out by diesel trucks to and from our company, 357 days a year…one to two containers of waste paper and wood was produced every week…and that does not count the waste produced in the initial process of cutting the trees down, transporting them to mills, processing them into wood slats or paper rolls and then the transportation of those products to be further processed into their final shapes and sizes, which are then repackaged and shipped to a printing company…is that an environmentally ethical or sustainable business?

There are no real environmental laws imposed on corporations…well I suppose they will pass around a few carbon credits in the future…that should help the environment, right?

How many trees need to be cut down every year to make the pallets and paper? Since all of it ends up in the trash, final products and all, how deep of a hole do we need to bury all that trash in a continuous cycle? For what purpose? Profit?

The example used is just one small business in the printing industry. Imagine the amount of waste and environmental destruction we are talking about when every single corporation small, medium and large are taken into account…THAT is who, what, where and how the environment is being destroyed!

Is that a sustainable economic model? Define sustainable growth to me Prince Charles…

There are tens of millions of companies around the world encompassing every aspect of every economic stream that requires economic growth. Most every product is now single use or short life and so they all become disposable products, products that are extremely wasteful and destructive to the environment.

A larger example of the printing company I mentioned is of course an international monster corporation like Quebecor [04] where they have over 200 printing facilities in 15 countries. One of many mega printing corporations that has expanded into many other forms of media, industries and of course politics via their economic footprint. I’ll bet the Royal Families of Europe have a few preferred shares in a host of corporations like these.

Government Approved Essential Business

During the so-called pandemic, all the companies and corporations that contribute to the massive global economic machine were deemed “essential business” and remained open; the status and treatment of which was confirmed by Klaus Schwab, [05] of the World Economic Forum when he was pressed by a question from Edward Felsenthal of Time Magazine about the failure of small and medium sized businesses during the pandemic, Klaus said,

“No, its my big concern because small and medium sized companies have been much more hit by za crisis compared to most large companies. So, I’m very pleased and I think it’s a task of society to take care because they are an essential part of our economic tissue so we have to make sure that its not their fault, that they can survive the crisis because we need, at the end of the crisis, we need still a prospering middle class in the um…as far as companies are concerned.”

So, the rich dividend stock paying businesses owned by the cartel are integral to the future plans of a sustainable economic system that comes with the economic reset; while governments are encouraged to allow the small and medium support businesses to keep running (i.e.: giving them the status of being essential businesses) Of course, all of these actions conflict with the idea of a green future that they are talking about, not to mention being open in times of a supposed pandemic, which is more like a pandemic of lies and coercion. [06]

Sustainable growth is not possible, unless you look into the more sinister possibilities of how they might achieve their goals. The most glaring one is of course, forced population reduction. In fact, it is the only way in which their current push for a green sustainable solution can be achieved while maintaining their economic growth model of economics and if we are to believe their net zero carbon emissions goal.

The Final Solution?

World leaders are following plans outlined at the United Nations under “Agenda 21” [07], and “Agenda 2030” [08] that outlines a net zero emissions goal, a sustainable growth and population reduction. While at the same time, world leaders are determined to force their populations into obeying their dystopian dictates on a falsely declared pandemic by the World Health Organization by pushing a politically, corporate driven, inoculation program. All of which are being used as an economic reset for a sustainable future where the mandatory inoculation program brings about a fascist health pass security state with severe restrictions and punishments for those that do not comply.

Yes, inoculations, where heart attacks are on the rise, which includes many young healthy athletes. [09] Inoculations where stillbirths are on the rise, [10] vaccine injuries are on the rise, severe mental health issues are on the rise, poverty is on the rise and untimely inoculation deaths are on the rise.

Questions are not being answered by governments, governments that are becoming more totalitarian with each passing week. Is that what Prince Charles meant when he said “we must go on a war like footing, must act with all dispatch, and decisively…”?

I worry about what is not being talked about, because if they can lock the world down using lies about a flu that is 99.98% survivable, using a PCR test which cannot detect if you are sick and then lie to you about inoculations that THEY say are safe but censor science-based information on the dangers of their so-called vaccines, then they can lie to you about the contents of what they are really delivering to your body by inoculations that are now becoming a never-ending nightmare. The possibility of a mass sterilization of the young, during their age group appointments for inoculation should be a major concern considering the development of new sterilization procedures through inoculation [11] that fit in with the mRNA technology they are now using on the global population.

So, when a senior citizen of the global elite calls for military action to force a final solution, what exactly is he talking about? Will they close down all businesses that are destructive to the environment, or just those that don’t belong to them? They certainly are not clear about that nor are they clear about anything for that matter because they talk in circles with empty platitudes for their economic and environmental religions. So, as more governments are talking about forcing inoculations on the public [12], are you not just a little worried about what’s in that shot and what they really want?

Last Word

Of course, when looking at any type of growth economics, you need oil to power it especially on a global scale with a large population and so that must also be considered when looking for a reason to explain why these so-called world leaders are so determined to follow instruction from parasitic entities that are destroying our communities. The one thing that has been consistent in explaining the economic cartels absolute insanity and direction over the past 105 years; and why their paranoia has come to a head is Oil, peak oil, and being past peak oil all of which effects their growth economic model. [13]

The cartels economic empire is on the edge of a cliff with a massive global population surrounding them that have been impoverished by the cartel’s greed and lust for power. Tell me I’m wrong, explain it to me please, because if the world is to move forward and evolve, it can only do so with truth, education and inclusivity with a combined effort to solve problems but we are seeing none of that. The banking real estate racket, which the economic cartel controls, could end tomorrow if they wanted it to…but unfortunately, sustained growth is what they have chosen which maintains their total control…Sustainable growth is impossible to achieve today, unless of course you have a robust supply of oil and resources with a lot of people eliminated from the economic grid…
---------------------------------------------

About Stewart Brennan:

Stewart Brennan is a Geo-political and economic analyst, activist, blogger and author. He’s worked in the Aviation, Packaging, Transportation and Logistics Industries and is the author of “The Activist Poet”, two books of political activism and poetry. (See Here and Here) He's also the author of several blogs including World United News and World United Music and a contributor on Global Research.

LINKS:

[01] COP26: Prince Charles says 'time has quite literally run out' - Video
[02] IPCC report: ‘Code red’ for human driven global heating, warns UN chief
[03] Sustainability 101: Exponential Growth - Arithmetic, Population and Energy
[04] Quebecor
[05] Developing the Evolution of Stakeholder Capitalism
[06] Agenda 21
[07] Agenda 2030
[08] A Pandemic of Lies and Coercion
[09] Compilation of News reports of Athletes Having Heart Attacks
[10] Canada - Stillbirths Exploding Across Canada in Fully Vaccinated Mothers
[11] A method for non-surgical sterilization of mammals

[12] The Western Collapse into Fascism
[13] The Looming Collapse and Population Reset

Additional Links:

[A] Rising Up Against Covid Inoculations and the Health Pass
[B] FDA says it wants 55 YEARS to process FOIA requests about COVID-19 vaccines 
[C] Global Medical Tyranny Spearheaded by the W.H.O.
[D] Collapse – Michael C. Ruppert

Stakeholder Capitalism?

 

Commentary By: Stewart Brennan

TIME’s Editor-in-Chief, Edward Felsenthal, launched a session and discussion of “Stakeholder Capitalism [01]” on Jan 25th, 2021, based on the new book (10,000 years in the making) by Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman, of the World Economic Forum.

Talking points for 2021, being a pivotal year for the future enslavement of mankind, went from tackling a problem released into the world called COVID-19 to a mysterious catch all phrase called climate change that somehow involves “attaboy” stock shares in the stock market, with “awe sh*t” penalties should the initiative fail and thus have to start all over again.

“Time”, would like to know (Interesting concept that time would like to know), time magazine would like to know what role can “Stakeholder Capitalism”, better known around the world as the “Purveyors of Theft”, what role can the purveyors of theft play in the stealth robbery of the global economy?

The answer to that is simple, there’s nothing left…except maybe small business in our communities.

What is Stakeholder Capitalism?

In today’s reality, Capitalism is a system owned and run by over-bloated banks and corporations owned by a wealthy few that deem themselves too big to fail. What do you call a system that has a rule book which is subject to change on a moments’ notice, while policed by specially employed referees who side with the criminal employers? I don’t know either, but because they are locking everyone down and telling us it’s the new normal, I’d have to say totalitarianism.

So here are a few questions posed to Klaus Schwab by Time’s Edward Felsenthal regarding their COVID coup on freedom and how they’ll address the failures of small and medium businesses.

Edward Felsenthal - “Big Business did well in the crisis and small business did not; how has this affected companies across the spectrum to execute Stakeholder Capitalism?” (note the word Execute)

Klaus Schwab initially doesn’t know what to say. His answer, “No, what we are seeing now is the companies engage to our 100 issues such as climate issues, creating jobs and so on. What we are seeing is the national big companies engage much more compared to a year ago. I think they have listened to the people who have great expectations, (he means they listened to the share holders – emphasis mine) which means they have to exercise stakeholder responsibility.”

He was pressed again about the failure of small and medium sized businesses and he continued his rhetoric and side stepping saying, “No its my big concern because small and medium sized companies have been much more hit by the crisis compared to most large companies. So, I’m very pleased and I think it’s a task of society to take care because they are an essential part of our economic tissue so we have to make sure that its not their fault, that they can survive the crisis because we need, at the end of the crisis, we need still a prospering middle class in the um…as far as companies are concerned.”

Ok so, that means it’s about companies, not people and so his remarks are taken at face value…he’s telling us directly that “Stakeholder Capitalism” in the Great Reset is corporate ownership behind the scenes (Share holders) and that the smaller companies that interact with their mega corporations and who cannot sustain themselves by economic means should be bailed out by government to ensure the big corporations continue uninterrupted.

Of course, the government bailout money is borrowed from those “Stakeholders” private banks which is tacked onto an already massive national debt that the country has to pay back with compounding interest.

Eventually, the debt leads to the loss of government controlled social programs as I mentioned in my post yesterday titled, “The Corporate Takeover of Healthcare” [02]. In fact, Klaus Schwab alludes to that very thing in answer to a question on Stakeholder Capitalism posed near the beginning of the video (3:30) by the presenter where he understands that Klaus Schwab had an AC, BC moment meaning that “The After COVID world” and “The Before COVID world” would be nothing alike.

A major change happened in Feb 2020 when the US branch of the economic cartel made an official announcement that they would Embrace the Stakeholder Concept.

Klaus Schwab - “What the CORONA crisis has shown them (USA) is that people expect more from government and business, not just material satisfaction but security for example in terms of health services ah, but, what we also have learned is, all those services related to cleaning up the environment and providing the necessary diversity inside companies and society, this cannot only be undertaken by governments or by business alone or citizens safely alone, we really need public / private cooperation. So, the crisis has shown us we need a mind set change, and we need also to move from a society where business and governments have very separate tasks, to a society where the two together with civil society work hand in hand.”

So, in other words, everything on a national level will be a government / corporate initiative…that’s not capitalism, that’s fascism.

It would seem that US President Joe Biden’s globalist government has that well in hand as Capital Hill is fenced in with razer wire and tens of thousands of troops to protect them when the bow breaks and the economic cradle falls during the Economic Reset in the Spring of 2021.

In the USA, health services are a major burden on the population which are managed through corporations. In contrast, many nations in the west such as France, the UK, Canada etc., have government-controlled healthcare. In those countries, healthcare will be given up to for profit only corporations, these measures are already underway and are mandatory in their coming Economic Reset.

So, in other words, health services cannot be held by government alone, according to Klaus, there needs to be corporate inclusion to fulfill their growth which is a result and fallout of this BS COVID Crisis they created…

Corporate Economic Growth or Human Societal Evolution

In reality, many corporations can no longer grow by normal means, they had to invent a new way to continue corporate growth for the stake holders. That means we the people and our communities are the direct target for their growth as I mentioned in my August 2020 post “The COVID 2nd Wave Will Tear Our Communities Apart” [03].

When people like Klaus Schwab talk about climate change and economic growth in the same sentence, they are trying to pull a fast one over you to make you believe that they are motivated to save the world by their climate change initiatives…however, in reality corporate growth is exponential and the real problem causing environmental degradation. Their efforts are solely based on the control of economics while they pretend to embrace an environmental topic. There is of course a much better solution than the “Reset” they are offering, but they wont dare suggest it because it would mean losing control of their massively failed economic system. So, I’ll say what needs to be said.

“Remove economics from the picture, build to last, zero waste target, foster real education, empower people within communities, embrace equality for everyone, change the real estate concepts so that housing is a guarantee, manage food, water and health as a necessity, foster education on birth control, work on real partnerships…etc.

These topics should be the real discussion we strive for as “The Greater Reset” to include everyone from every country around the world while changing course from the disastrous path of environment degradation, war, famine and greed that these Klaus Davos Dinosaurs have led us down since mankind emerged from the great catastrophe 12,500 years ago.”

What role can “stakeholder capitalism” play in the pursuit of a more sustainable, resilient and inclusive global economy? I’ll tell you, let it all go, make everyone a shareholder then work with people around the world to make the world a better place.

Thank you for reading.
-----------------------------
LINKS:

[01] Stakeholder Capitalism
[02] The Corporate Takeover of Healthcare
[03] The COVID 2nd Wave Will Tear Our Communities Apart


RELATED:

[A] China’s President Xi Jinping Reads the Multilateral Riot Act on the Virtual Davos Agenda

China’s Rise - (Part 1) Internal Struggle

 

By: Stewart Brennan

“It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles. If you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one. If you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.” ~ Sun Tzu [01]

Understanding a Difficult Period in China’s History 

Behind the wall of western hubris and propaganda on China, there remains 5,000 years of experience in war, politics and economics. These disciplines, embedded within Chinese culture, have never disappeared from thought in those that have led China for thousands of years, regardless of politic that led the country in the past or present; be it a Republican Democracy, Communist State, National Socialist State or Royal Imperial State.

It is my view that the many years of Chinese political and cultural history did not suddenly disappear overnight when China’s governing structure changed to communism. The last Royal Chinese Imperial Dynasty [02] (Qing) had only just ended (1912) with the Xinhai Revolution [03] and so thousands of years of Chinese evolution doesn’t just suddenly disappear in a generation.

In reality, routines become a way of life after long periods of time and then become culture that the people of the society identify with as a normal way of doing things. Over time, everything becomes refined, pleasantries, planning, transactions, understanding, economics, politics, war; and so, Mao Zedong’s [04] China must be viewed and perceived with the retention of a large part of their culture intact with set ways of doing things where a supreme ruler would wield his political power much the same way as a past Chinese emperor, while the political courts and people surrounding him would also be conditioned in the disciplines and ways of doing things from the past.

What many people in the west are not aware of during China’s communist rule is that there were actually many factions within the Chinese governing structure with differing thoughts and plans for China’s economic future who were fighting with each other for power. The two main rivals that survived were the hardline Soviet style communists and a Nationalist Socialist group that leaned towards a more capitalist approach in their political economic vision of the country.

It’s difficult to understand what took place during that time in China (1949 to 1979) if we do not read history and only view it from a minimalist western perspective. It can be better understood if we equate the two surviving Chinese factions within the Communist party to the two super powers that emerged at the end of World War II in complete opposition to one another. (Capitalist USA and Soviet Russia) However, it is more realistic to understand this period of history if we compare it hypothetically, to a more traditional Chinese period by likening Chairman Mao to an emperor of their past who had competing heirs to the throne that engaged in a fierce political battle with one another to prove their ideas, worth and devotion to the father; a father who must ultimately choose which son’s plan would make his Imperial rule a favorable and lasting one for the country.

The Fall of Imperial China: What Went Before 1894 to 1949 

Before Chinese communist rule took hold as the governing entity in 1949, China went from a 5,000-year old Imperial Monarchy, which had its own periods of domestic wars and internal violence, to a country that was broken by wars of foreign intervention beginning with the First Sino Japanese war in 1894-1895 [05], which led to the Boxer Rebellion 1899-1901 [06] and ultimately to the Xinhai Revolution in 1911. The result of those two foreign wars shattered the country and turned it into a Western style Republican Democracy [07] by 1912.

The fall of China began with their loss to Japan in the first Sino-Japanese war from July 25th, 1894 to April 17th, 1895. The Chinese ruling Qing dynasty under Empress Dowager Cixi [08] was ill prepared against the more advanced Imperial Japanese military. The loss showed weakness and signaled the end of the Qing empires domination of Asia, while the humiliation of losing Korea as a tributary state to Japan as a consequence, sparked an unprecedented public outcry that became a catalyst for a series of political upheavals led by Sun Yat-sen [09] and Kang Youwei, [10] culminating in the 1911 Xinhai Revolution.

The growth of foreign spheres of influence in China after the Sino-Japanese War of 1895 led directly to the "Boxer Rebellion" (1899 to 1901) between the Qing Empire of China and an Eight-Nation Alliance that included Austria-Hungary, France, Germany, United Kingdom, Italy, Japan, Russia, and the United States which also included Belgium, Spain, and the Netherlands. China's defeat was another humiliating blow [11] to the Qing Dynasty and to the people of China.

In China’s past, if weakness was shown by the ruling family, it created internal division and a challenge by wealthy groups against those who ruled the Chinese empire; and so, those two major losses broke China and caused division in the decision on how to strengthen the country and move forward. During this period of time, China was ruled by the iron fist of Empress dowager Cixi from 1861 until her death in 1908.

Empress Dowager Cixi (1903) 

Empress Dowager Cixi (1835 – 1908)

Selected as a concubine of the Xianfeng Emperor in her adolescence, she gave birth to a son, Zaichun, in 1856. After the Xianfeng Emperor's death in 1861, the five-year old boy who was the only surviving son of the Emperor, became the Tongzhi Emperor, while his mother became the Empress Dowager. Cixi immediately ousted a group of regents appointed by the late emperor and assumed the regency, which she shared with Empress Dowager Ci'an who was the consort wife of the late Emperor.

However, with the sudden death of her heirless 19 year old son from small pox in 1875, Cixi consolidated control over the dynasty by installing her three year old nephew as the Guangxu Emperor, contrary to the Qing dynasty rules that had been in place since 1644. In essence, Cixi ruled China and did what ever she needed to retain power which had been declining due to foreign economic interference.

Cixi supervised a series of moderate reforms that helped the regime survive until 1911. Although Cixi refused to adopt Western models of government, she supported technological and military reforms with a Self-Strengthening Movement as a means of limiting Westernization to preserve her own power and the dynasty.

China made substantial progress toward modernizing its heavy industry and military through the 1880’s and 1890’s but the majority of the ruling elite still subscribed to a conservative Confucian worldview, and the "self-strengtheners" were by and large uninterested in social reform beyond the scope of economic and military modernization. The Self-Strengthening Movement (1861 to 1895) under Cixi succeeded in securing the revival of the dynasty from the brink of eradication, sustaining it for a half-century, however the considerable successes of the movement came to an abrupt end with China's defeat in the First Sino-Japanese War in 1895.

The purge of China’s cultural history began by the loss of “Korea” as a tributary state in the First Sino Japanese war and the outrageous indemnities China had to pay the eight victorious foreign nations from the “Boxer Rebellion” war. China’s history and independence began falling faster to foreign economic influence.

The “Xinhai revolution” which followed, consisted of many revolts and uprisings, however, the turning point was the Wuchang Uprising [12] on 10 October 1911, when people rose up in opposition against the Qing governments decree to nationalize local railway development and transfer control to foreign banks. The movement, expressed mass discontent with Qing rule and galvanized the revolution against them. The revolution ended with the abdication of the last Chinese emperor, the six-year-old Puyi [13], on February 12th, 1912, and marked the end of 5,000 years of imperial rule and the beginning of China's early republican era.

Republic of China (1912 - 1949) 

The Republic of China was declared on January 1st, 1912. Shortly after, the country descended into a melee of power grabs and coup attempts.

Sun Yat-sen, the founder and president of the new Republic served briefly before handing over his position to Yuan Shikai,[14] the leader of the Beiyang Army [15]. Sun Tar-sen's party, the Kuomintang [16] (KMT), then led by Song Jiaoren, won the parliamentary election held in December 1912. However, Yuan Shikai, the Beiyang Army leader seized control of the government, and assassinated Song Jiaoren. In 1915, Yuan Shikai proclaimed himself Emperor of China but abdicated shortly afterwards due to popular unrest.

After Yuan's death in 1916, the authority of the Beiyang government was further weakened by a brief restoration of the Qing dynasty. Cliques in the Beiyang Army claimed individual autonomy and clashed with each other during the ensuing Warlord Era [17] (1916 to 1928).

By 1921, the KMT established the national government in Guangzhou, supported by the fledgling Communist Party of China (CPC). The economy of Northern China, which was overtaxed to support warlord adventurism, collapsed between 1927 and 1928. General Chiang Kai-shek [18], who became the Chairman of the Kuomintang after Sun Yat-sen's death in 1925, started a Northern Expedition in 1926 to overthrow the Beiyang government, which was accomplished two years later in 1928. However, in April 1927, Chiang Kai-shek established a nationalist government in Nanjing and massacred Communists in Shanghai. The latter event forced the Communist Party of China into armed rebellion, marking the beginning of the Chinese Civil War [19].

The Chinese Civil War 

1945 Jan 01 - Chiang Kai-shek of the KMT allied with Communist Mao Zedong of the CPC 

The Chinese Civil War was fought between the Kuomintang (KMT)-led government of the Republic of China (ROC) and the Communist Party of China [20] (CPC) lasting intermittently between 1927 and 1949. The war is generally divided into two phases with an interlude: from August 1927 to 1937, the KMT-CPC Alliance collapsed during the Northern Expedition, while the Nationalists controlled most of China. However, from 1937 to 1945, hostilities were put on hold, and the Second United Front between the two groups joined forces and fought the Japanese invasion of China with eventual help from the Allied forces of World War II. The civil war resumed after the Japanese defeat, where the CPC gained the upper hand in the final phase of the war from 1945 to 1949, generally referred to as the Chinese Communist Revolution.

Civil War 1947 

The Communists gained control of mainland China and established the People's Republic of China [21] (PRC) in 1949, forcing the leadership of the Republic of China to retreat to the island of Taiwan. A lasting political and military standoff between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait ensued, with the ROC in Taiwan and the PRC in mainland China both officially claiming to be the legitimate government of all China. No armistice or peace treaty has ever been signed, which has raised the question of whether this war itself has legally ended, or temporarily halted.

During this very turbulent time, (1894 to 1949) the people of China found themselves caught in the middle of an economic war between the upper classes of China, Japan, Europe and the United States.

For years the common people of China were brutalized by European and Japanese occupation but also by groups within China some of whom collaborated with the foreigners. Anger, resistance and determination against the occupation forces culminated into a popular revolution to cast off the shackles of foreign Imperialism and push forward to regain their national, cultural and economic independence.

China had emerged at the end of the second world war in 1945 economically weak and on the verge of all-out civil war. Large swathes of the prime farming areas had been ravaged and there was starvation. Many towns and cities were destroyed, while millions were rendered homeless by floods. The problems of rebuilding China after a long-protracted war were staggering, which left the Nationalists severely weakened.

Meanwhile, the war strengthened the Communists both in popularity and as a viable fighting force. In the communist controlled areas, Mao Zedong the leader of the communist forces was able to adapt Marxism–Leninism to Chinese conditions.

Mao also began to execute his plan to establish a new China by rapidly moving his forces from across the country to Manchuria. The Soviet occupation of Manchuria, although short, was long enough to allow the Communist forces to move in and take all the military hardware surrendered by the Imperial Japanese Army, which allowed them to quickly establish control in the countryside and move into position to encircle the Nationalist government armies in the major cities of northeast China. Following that, the Chinese Civil War broke out between the Nationalists and Communists, which concluded with the Communist victory in mainland China and the retreat of the Nationalists to Taiwan in 1949.

1949 - Mao Zedong PRC Founding

The years leading up to China’s re-established independence through a communist victory in 1949 put an end to foreign domination and domestic infighting that had torn the country apart for 55 years.

Puyi the last official Emperor of China 

Emperor PuYi - (1930's -1940's) 

With the fall of Japan in 1945, and thus Manchukuo where the Japanese installed Puyi as their puppet Emperor of China, Puyi fled the capital and was eventually captured by the USSR. The War Crimes Trials of the Far East in 1946 [22] saw Puyi imprisoned for ten years as a war criminal. He was extradited to the People's Republic of China in 1949 after Communist Rule had been established. However, in China, he was not executed, as Mao Zedong reasoned that Puyi was more valuable as a reformed commoner than a murdered emperor. After his reform, Puyi became a member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference [23] and the National People's Congress [24] a political body which advised the hierarchy of the Communist government. Puyi died in 1967 during the Cultural Revolution, and was ultimately buried near the Western Qing tombs in a commercial cemetery.

Infighting and Emerging Power 1958 to 1979 

1956 – 8th National Party Congress 

As mentioned at the beginning of this post, to understand China, one must understand it’s historical past. There has always been differing political and economic opinions on how to move the country forward. These opinions are expressed from a power base, and that power base has a dedicated and loyal following even if all rivals are focused within one party as in China’s past Imperial empires or the newly emerged Communist Party.

So, looking at this period of history (1958 to 1979) we must compare it with the Imperial China of the past where fierce political battles were waged between would be heirs to the throne for the right to lead the nation unopposed, where the Imperial court is dragged into a vicious political battle by all sides.

The battle of China’s rival sons within the Communist party came to a head during the, “Cultural Revolution” [25] (1966 to 1976), where the ideas of Mao and the first son (hardline communism) were put into action, which was to reimpose order from the chaos and aftermath of the Mao Nationalist Socialist project called the “Great Leap Forward” [26] (1958 to 1962).

The Cultural Revolution marked China’s return to a more rigid position of power after a five-year period of economic failure from the “The Great Leap Forward”. The official reasons of the program’s failure were attributed to 30% natural disasters and 70% manmade errors.

It is important to point out during the five-year Great Leap Forward plan, that there was also a three-year political purge across China from 1959 to 1961 by hardline communist elements through their “Anti-Rightist Campaign” [27] that saw the end of all political / economic opposition while turning the country into a hardline one-party system. The disruptive nature of the “Anti-Rightist Campaign” greatly impeded the economic flow within China and was one of the major factors in contributing to the failure of “The Great Leap Forward” and one of the worst famines in recorded human history [28] where between 30 to 55 million people died of starvation. Exact numbers are not known.

1956 to 1963 - Liu Shaoqi, Zhou Enlai, Deng Xiaoping, Mao Zedong

Also, interesting to note, is that after the 1959 “Lushan Conference” [29], Chairman Mao stepped down as the State Chairman of the PRC (Peoples Republic of China) due to the ongoing failures of “The Great Leap Forward” but remained Chairman of the CCP and appointed “Liu Shaoqi” [30] (the new PRC Chairman) and reformist Deng Xiaoping [31] (CCP General Secretary) both National Socialists in charge to change policy and bring economic recovery. Also, of note is the purge of Defence Minister, Marshal “Peng Dehuai” [32], whose criticism of some aspects of the Great Leap Forward was seen as an attack on the political line of Chairman Mao. He was replaced by military hardliner, "Lin Biao" [33] who led the three-year political purge across China.

The Cultural Revolution 

 1966 Lin Biao & Mao Zedong

After the disaster of the Great Leap Forward, Mao felt China needed solutions to counter the turmoil, chaos and division raging across a country that could potentially rise up against the government and Mao himself. China was moving in a very dangerous direction, and so Chairman Mao made the decision to try a more hardline approach and returned to lead the country through, “The Cultural Revolution” in 1966.

In essence, Mao called on the nation's youth to clean up the "impure" elements of Chinese society and revive the revolutionary spirit that had led to victory in China’s civil war two decades earlier that led to the formation of the People's Republic of China. The hardliners embraced it and called it” Mao Zedong Thought” or “Maoism”,[34] and pushed it as the dominant ideology in the “Communist Party of China” (CPC).

Historical Inflection

What is missing in history books here is the consultation Mao had with the different groups within the party including his fourth wife Jiang Qing, so I’ll use the historical parallel of China’s previous dynasties as an example to clarify the decision process.

The decisions of an emperor are always made with great planning and thought when finally presented to the people. It comes to the public as an emperor’s decision, but in reality, the plan is usually partly owned by the emperor and the rest by those who are close to him or influence him towards his decision.

Before coming to a conclusion, there is harsh political dialog behind the scenes by competing rivals (heirs to the throne) which often included the influence of the different mothers of those heirs. (“Mothers” meaning, the different wives of the emperor.) In these fierce, sometimes violent drawn-out contests, there were plots and sabotages made on each other to undermine the rival’s political appearance to the emperor, while promoting the points of their political positions, ideologies and economic interests and why their plan was good for the country. The side that does not prove its point to the emperor, must humble themselves in complete submission and face its demise or humiliation. Sometimes, if allowed to live, they slowly find their way back from obscurity and calculate a different angle to make their plan work.

If a group fails in its tasks of carrying out their Emperors plan, which was made public as the Emperors plan, they are severely reprimanded, imprisoned or executed, while their subordinates in general are either purged or demoted; most of whom would quietly continue to pledge their honor and loyalty to those they served. The victorious group is given permission by the Emperor to carry out a new detailed plan in the emperor’s name including a public announcement.

Since the failure of the “Great leap Forward” (1958-1962) was a disaster under the national socialist tenure, Mao severely disciplined the group and made them responsible for his failure, including President Liu Shaoqi and General Secretary Deng Xiaoping.

So, Mao moved forward with the hardline communists for the chance to restore his honor by endorsing the “Proletarian Cultural Revolution” to go ahead under his leadership which included Lin Biao, and Mao’s fourth wife, Jiang Qing [35] both of whom had great influence in putting it together. (In hind sight, one could draw parallels of Jiang Qing to the dowager empress Cixi of the Qing Dynasty, but perhaps a little more sinister.)

1966 - Lin Biao & Jiang Qing

Mao launched “The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution” in August 1966, at a Central Committee Plenary Meeting. He closed public schools, calling for the mobilization of young people to take party leadership and to face the bondage of bourgeois values and those with a lack of revolutionary zeal.

In the following months, the movement increased rapidly as students formed a paramilitary group called the Red Guards [36a] and attacked and harassed Chinese intellectual groups.

The Cultural Revolution, was overtly pro-Maoist, and gave Mao and the hardliners the power and influence to purge the Party of his political enemies at the highest levels of government. Along with closing China's schools and universities, it encouraged Chinese youth to destroy old buildings, temples, and art, while attacking their "revisionist" teachers, school administrators, party leaders, and parents. (See Here [36b])

Chairman Mao & the Gang of Four, the Cultural Revolution

Many of the most senior members of the CCP who had shared Zhou's hesitation in following Mao's direction, including President Liu Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping, were removed from their posts almost immediately. They, along with their families, were subjected to mass criticism and humiliation.

Deng Xioping and his family were targeted by Red Guards, who imprisoned Deng's eldest son, Deng Pufang who was tortured and was thrown out of a four-story building window in 1968, becoming a paraplegic. In October 1969 Deng Xiaoping was sent to the Xinjian County Tractor Factory in rural Jiangxi province to work as a regular worker. He was purged nationally, but to a lesser scale than President Liu Shaoqi.

Liu Shaoqi disappeared from public life in 1968 and was labelled by the hardliners as the "commander of China's bourgeoisie headquarters", China's foremost "capitalist-roader", and a traitor to the revolution. He died under harsh treatment while in prison in 1969.

Although Zhou escaped being directly persecuted, he was not able to save many of those closest to him from having their lives destroyed by the Cultural Revolution. Sun Weishi, Zhou's adopted daughter, died in 1968 after seven months of torture, imprisonment and rape by Maoist Red Guards. In 1968, Jiang Qing also had Zhou‘s adopted son (Sun Yang) tortured and murdered by Red Guards.

With different factions of the Red Guard movement fighting against perceived threats, many cities in China reached the brink of unrest in September 1967, when Lin Biao sent the army to restore order. Amid the turmoil, the Chinese economy plummeted, with a loss of industrial production in 1968 by 12 percent below the 1966 level. The army immediately forced many members of the urban Red Guard into rural areas to learn farming, where the movement then declined.

In 1969, Lin Biao managed to take power officially as Mao's successor. He immediately used an excuse of clashes with Soviet troops at the border to form a state of martial law. Disturbed by the destructive force of Lin Biao, Mao turned to his trusted friend Zhou Enlai [37], the Premier of the Peoples Republic of China, for solutions.

China not only needed to pull itself out of economic disaster and internal conflict, Mao now had to find a way to dismantle the challenge to his position by the hardliners who had continued to divide the country through their fist of violence, imprisonment, torture and executions. Everything the revolution had achieved was in jeopardy, so Mao turned to his closest friends with Nationalist Socialist leanings and put them into action. Internal economic success would require an outside ally, and so a reply to US inquiries to seek a meeting with the Chinese government were answered by Zhou Enlai in December 1970 and relayed back through foreign diplomatic channels in Pakistan to the USA that China was indeed interested in the US request for diplomatic communication. The Chinese communication stated that “the US initiative had the support of Chairman Mao and Vice Chairman Lin Biao”.

On July 08th, 1971, after several secretive diplomatic communications, Henri Kissinger visits China in Secret. (see here[38a] and here [38b])

1971 Henri Kissinger & Zhou Enlai

In his meeting with Zhou Enlai at the “Great Hall of the People” on July 10th, many topics were discussed including commitments on Taiwan by Henri Kissinger [39] including the withdrawal of two-third of the US forces present on the Island, a huge point of contention for Chairman Mao which would serve as a positive reason while eliminating suspicion from the hardliners for the sudden meeting with the leader of the Capitalist world.

Important to note is that Zhou Enlai let Kissinger know, in answer to questions previously submitted by the US for discussion, that China was looking to indeed develop their economy, although it would take a while, but they would try to go all out, aim high, and develop their “socialist construction” in a better, faster, and in a more economical way. Zhou continued, saying the second part of their answer was that once their economy was developed, they would still not consider themselves a superpower and would not join the ranks of the superpowers.

The meeting between Vice Chairman Zhou Enlai and Henri Kissinger came at a very critical time in China’s internal struggle which then set off a series of events that would strengthen the Socialists position within China. It was a stroke of political mastery by Chairman Mao and Zhou Enlai over the hardliners who had sowed chaos throughout the country and the subsequent loss of support by the people.

Strange and significant events in the USA and China seemed almost coordinated at times, yet cautious in a Yin Yang trust building partnership leading up to the historic meeting of US President Richard Nixon and Chairman Mao Zedong of China in February 1972.

Important Events in the US & China after Kissinger’s meeting with Zhou Enlai

On August 15th, 1971, after meeting with “Federal Reserve Chairman” Paul Volker, in a major economic shift from world war II, Nixon cancelled Bretton Woods by announcing actions to suspend, with certain exceptions, the convertibility of the US dollar into gold or other reserve assets, and ordered the gold window to be closed such that foreign governments could no longer exchange their dollars for gold.

On Sept 13th, 1971, Lin Biao leader of the hardline communist faction in China, died in a mysterious plane crash in Mongolia, apparently while trying to flee to the Soviet Union. But before the crash, Mao Zedong had taken measures to distance himself from Lin Biao in August 1971 after personally inspecting troops in central and southern China while stating publicly his differences with Lin Biao.

After the plane crash, members of Lin Biao’s military high command were then cleansed. The four military cadres in the Politburo, Huang Yongsheng, Wu Faxian, Li Zuopeng, and Qiu Huizuo were arrested and not released until the late 1980’s.

Zhou Enlai then took control of the government.

Around the time of the death of Lin Biao in 1971, the Cultural Revolution began to lose momentum. The new commanders of the People's Liberation Army demanded that order be restored in light of the dangerous situation along the border with the Soviet Union.

On Oct 25th, 1971, China became one of the five Permanent members of the UN Security Council [40] with full veto powers, replacing Taiwan.

Oct 25th, 1971, China became one of the five Permanent members of the UN Security Council

1972 Feb 17 – Nixon Goes to China [41]

Nixon Goes to China - Feb 17, 1972

As Mao's health began to decline in 1971 and 1972 and following the death of disgraced Lin Biao, Zhou Enlai was elected to the vacant position of First Vice Chairman of the Communist Party by the 10th Central Committee in August, 1973 and thereby designated as Mao's successor (the third person to be so designated after Liu Shaoqi and Lin Biao) Premier Zhou Enlai, who had accepted the Cultural Revolution, but never fully supported it, regained his authority, and used it to bring National Socialist Deng Xiaoping [42] back into the Party leadership at the 10th Party Congress. Deng Xiaoping, who had been purged early on in the Cultural Revolution, took effective control of the government as Zhou became more ill.

Deng Xiaoping and Zhou Enlai

Deng focused on reconstructing the country's economy and stressed unity as the first step by raising production. He remained careful, however, to avoid contradicting hardline ideology on paper, but his internal struggle with the hardliners, led by “The Gang of Four” [43], continued over the leadership of China.

“The Gang of Four” were Jiang Qing (Mao Zedong's last wife), Zhang Chunqiao, Yao Wenyuan, and Wang Hongwen.

Important to note that at the end of 1973, Mao Zedong began to rely on Deng Xiaoping to handle US-China relations, he also turned to Deng Xiaoping to help him strengthen his control of the army.

1973 (July) was also the year that the Trilateral Commission [44] was Created by the Western Economic cartel (Bankers from the USA, the Western Europe nations and Japan). The Trilateral Commission was formed to bring about substantive political and economic partnerships across the world while focusing on the developing nations with a greater improvement of East-West relations. ie: China. Many of these same nations had participated in the destruction of Imperial China with sights on its economics 70 years earlier. Later that year in October 1973, Henri Kissinger met Chinese officials in Beijing [45].

Deng Xiaoping (who had been political commissar of the 2nd Field Army during the civil war) became the most influential of the remaining army leaders. When Premier Zhou Enlai fell ill with cancer, Deng became Zhou's choice as successor, meaning that he could have, in theory, also have succeeded Mao.

During the next several years, a protracted factional struggle took place between the hardline Gang of Four and the National Socialists led by Zhou and Deng.

Zhou Enlai’s last major public appearance was at the first meeting of the 4th National People's Congress on 13 January 1975, where he presented the government work report.

The hardline Communist Gang of Four saw Nationalist Socialist Deng Xiaoping as their greatest challenge to power. In order to keep internal peace, Chairman Mao asked Deng to draw up a series of self-criticisms. Although Deng admitted to having taken an "inappropriate ideological perspective" while dealing with state and party affairs, he was reluctant to admit that his policies were wrong in essence. His antagonism with the Gang of Four became increasingly clear, and Mao seemed to sway in the Gang's favour. Mao refused to accept Deng's self-criticisms and asked the party's Central Committee to "discuss Deng's mistakes thoroughly".

Zhou Enlai had fallen out of the public eye after the National Peoples Congress meeting in January 1975 for medical treatment and died of bladder cancer a year later in January 1976.

Zhou Enlai - March 5th, 1898 - January 8th 1976

Zhou was a very important figure in Deng Xiaoping's political life, and so his death left Deng alone within the Party's Central Committee. After Deng delivered Zhou Enlai's official eulogy at the state funeral, the Gang of Four, with Mao's permission, began to criticize Deng.

The massive public outpouring of grief which Zhou Enlai’s death provoked in Beijing turned to anger at the Gang of Four, leading to the 1976 Tiananmen Incident.[46]

Tiananmen Incident 1976

The Tiananmen Incident was a mass gathering and protest on 5 April 1976 Tiananmen Square in Beijing held on the traditional holiday and day of mourning called the Qingming Festival. [47] The Gang of Four branded the event as counter-revolutionary and threatening to their power and blamed Deng Xiaoping as the mastermind behind the incident.

During the Tiananmen Incident, thousands of people protested the militia's removal of wreaths honoring Zhou Enlai in front of the Monument to the People's Heroes. Vehicles were burned, offices ransacked and there were reports of many injuries.

Mao himself wrote that "the nature of things has changed". This prompted Mao to remove Deng from all leadership positions, although he retained his party membership, which indicates that Deng was still under Mao’s protection.

In the aftermath on April 06th, 1976 Premier Hua Guofeng [48] was appointed to Deng's position as Vice Chairman and the vacant position of “First Vice Chairman”, which Zhou Enlai had once held. The appointment of First Vice Chair made “Hua Guofeng”, Chairman Mao's fourth official successor.

The Gang of Four's attempts to suppress public displays of grief resulted in demonstrations against the Gang of Four and Mao himself. However, five months later, chairman Mao, China's leader for 27 years, died on September 09th, 1976. The entire country entered an extended period of mourning.

Mao Zedong - December 26th, 1893 - September 09th, 1976

Mao was revered by the people of China much the same way a great Chinese Emperor’s had been in the past. For all the major problems that China experienced under Mao’s tenure, he was still revered and held blameless. The hardships that the people faced were blamed instead on those that advised him. Mao was 82 when he died.

Mao Zedong - Funeral Service Sept 18th, 1976

Communist Rule Ends in China 

Hua Guofeng who now held the three most powerful positions in the Chinese government, arrested the Gang of Four and denounced them as “counter-revolutionary”. Of special note, Hua Guofeng also served on Zhou Enlai’s committee to investigate, Lin Biao in 1971.

The Gang of Four, together with general Lin Biao who had died in 1971, were labeled the two major "counter-revolutionary forces" of the “Cultural Revolution” and officially blamed by the Chinese government for the worst excesses of the societal chaos that ensued during the ten years of turmoil it brought. Their downfall on October 6, 1976, a mere month after Mao's death, brought about major celebrations on the streets of Beijing and marked the end of a turbulent political era in China. The hardline Communists had been defeated.

Although Hua Guofeng was the First Vice Chairman and designated successor to chairman Mao, it must be noted that Hua Guofeng was one of the survivors of the "Long March" [49] along with Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai, Lin Shaoqi, and Deng Xioping. All of whom became very close with unending loyalty and support for each other due to their shared experience in battle with life and death, they may not have agreed on everything, but their vision for China’s future was clear.

Disgraced “Lin Biao” was also a survivor of the long March and was for a long time, part of this unending loyalty bond between brothers, however, when Mao Zedong appointed Lin Biao as Defence Minister in 1959, Lin’s sights on power grew and later became evident to Mao during the Cultural Revolution that Lin Biao was very ambitious and a danger to his rule. Lin broke his loyalty to Mao and thus broke a sacred bond to a brother in arms and the revolution.

“Keep a Low Profile and Never Take the Lead.” ~ Deng Xiaoping

Deng Xiaoping 1978

On 22 July 1977, Deng was restored to the posts of Vice-Chairman of the Central Committee, Vice-Chairman of the Military Commission and Chief of the General Staff of the People's Liberation Army.

Deng discredited and condemned the Cultural Revolution, and in 1977 launched the "Beijing Spring", which allowed open criticism of the violent excesses and suffering that had occurred during that period. Meanwhile, he was the force behind the abolition of the class background system. Under new direction, the CPC removed employment barriers to those deemed to be associated with the former landlord class. Its removal allowed a faction favoring the restoration of the private market to enter the Communist Party.

By carefully mobilizing his supporters within the party, Deng outmaneuvered Hua Guofeng, who had pardoned him, then ousted Hua from his top leadership positions by 1980. In contrast to previous leadership changes, Deng allowed Hua to retain membership in the Central Committee and quietly retire, helping to set the precedent that losing a high-level leadership struggle would not result in physical harm.

Deng led China through a series of far-reaching “market-economy reforms”, which earned him the reputation as the "Architect of Modern China".

The term, “Market-Economy Reforms”, known in the West as the Opening of China, refers to the program of economic reforms called "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" and "Socialist Market Economy"[50] in the People's Republic of China (PRC). The reforms were started by Deng Xiaoping and reformists within the Communist Party of China on December 18, 1978.

In early 1979, Deng made an official visit to the United States [51], meeting President Jimmy Carter in Washington as well as Zbigniew Brzezinski [52]. The next day, after his meeting with Brzezinski, Deng went on a tour of corporate facilities including the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Coca-Cola and Boeing in Atlanta and Seattle, respectively. The corporate visits made it clear that the new Chinese priorities were moving towards economic and technological development.

Sino-Japanese relations also improved significantly. Deng used Japan as an example of a rapidly progressing power that set a good example for China economically.

Deng quoted an old proverb, "it doesn't matter whether a cat is black or white, if it catches mice it is a good cat." His point was in reference to east / west politics and economics and well understood by those in the west that were about to go into business with China in the near future.

Deng’s economic reforms accelerated the market model in 1979, while the leaders maintained old Communist-style rhetoric. The commune system was gradually dismantled and the peasants began to have more freedom to manage the land they cultivated while selling their excess products on the market. At the same time, China's economy opened up to foreign trade, mostly by high level political connections through Zbigniew Brzezinski and the Trilateral commission. Business between China and the West, was once again, back on line.

Conclusion: (Part 1)

In the years since (1912 to 1979) the fall of the Qing Dynasty and Confucian China [53], infighting by Chinese wealthy families, warlords and political idealists demonstrated a fierce determination to win at any cost while forcing their plans on the Chinese nation. In the case of Communism, Mao was very much like an Emperor of the old world and wielded power much the same way. The National Socialists that prevailed after Mao’s death, can also boast of benefitting from singular rule as demonstrated by Deng Xiaoping and his National Socialist construct. Even though Deng is considered a reformer, his constructs of power are based in a totalitarian mindset.

China moved from totalitarian rule by an Emperor, to the totalitarian rule by a communist leader, to the totalitarian governance by the leader of a national socialist state. “National Socialism” is what emerged in China after Mao’s death. Communism perished with Mao and the Cultural Revolution.

The difference between China post-communist state and those two disgraced regimes of the 20th century that embraced National Socialism is that China, has not invaded anyone…yet.

China’s partnership with western economic interests goes deeper than one might think, but China also has a long memory as the most gifted of their leaders are masters of strategic planning and have great patience when waiting for the right moment to launch their final thrust in achieving their goals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Be sure to subscribe or follow Alternative Views for the continuation of China’s Rise (Part 2) where I will show how China rose from economic disaster to the most stable economic nation on Earth as well as its partnership with the western economic cartel and what the future holds for the world.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINKS:

[01] The Art of War – Sun Tzu
[02] Royal Chinese Imperial Dynasties
[03] Xinhai Revolution
[04] Mao Zedong
[05] The First Sino Japanese War
[06] The Boxer Rebellion
[07] The Republic of China (1912 to 1949)
[08] Empress Dowager Cixi
[09] Sun Yat-sen
[10] Kang Youwei
[11] Boxer Protocol
[12] Wuchang Uprising
[13] Last Chinese Emperor - Puyi
[14] Yuan Shikai
[15] Beiyang Army
[16] Kuomintang
[17] Warlord Era
[18] Chiang Kai-shek
[19] Chinese Civil War
[20] Communist Party of China
[21] People's Republic of China
[22] Tokyo Trials
[23] Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference
[24] National People's Congress
[25] The Cultural Revolution
[26] The Great Leap Forward
[27] Anti-Rightist Campaign
[28] The Great Chinese Famine
[29] Lushan Conference
[30] Liu Shaoqi
[31] Deng Xiaoping
[32] Peng Dehuai
[33] Lin Biao
[34] Maoism
[35] Jiang Qing
[36a] Red Guards
[36b] Chairman Mao & the Gang of Four, the Cultural Revolution
[37] Zhou Enlai
[38a] Henri Kissinger visits China in secret
[38b] Henri Kissinger visits China (Video) 
[39] Henri Kissinger
[40] China becomes a permanent member of the UN Security Council
[41] Nixon Goes to China
[42] Deng Xiaoping
[43] The Gang of Four
[44] Trilateral Commission
[45] 1973 Oct - Kissinger Meets Chinese Officials in Beijing
[46] 1976 Tiananmen Incident
[47] Qingming Festival
[48] Hua Guofeng
[49] The Long March
[50] Socialist Market Economy
[51] Deng Xiaoping Visits America 1979
[52] 2016 Zbignieu Brzezinski in Reflection to Deng Xiaoping
[53] Confucianism

RELATED LINKS:

[A] The Opium Wars
[B] 1971 - June 30, Conversation Between President Nixon and the Ambassador to the Republic of China (McConaughy) (UN Security Council Seat) Washington,
[C] Sino-Soviet split