In The Face of Chinese Threat, Conservatives Turn Toward Ending The Entitlements State

by Brett Stevens on February 17, 2018

Human historical change is marked more by ignorance than knowledge: each new era spawns from a recognition of what the old denied or was oblivious to. In the Trump era, we see the end of ignorance about the Soviet nature of even suburban Leftism, the failure of diversity, and the recognition of China as a threat.

Unlike Barack Obama, who like the Clinton gang seemed very friendly toward China and willing to overlook their intrusions, Trump and his team have been calling out the great Chinese financial invasion of the West by blocking its various intrusions, slowly boxing in the Chinese and forcing them to admit their strategy.

American regulators are thwarting Chinese access to our technology:

China is trying to gain access to sensitive U.S. technologies and intellectual properties through telecommunications companies, academia and joint business ventures, U.S. senators and spy chiefs warned on Tuesday at a Senate hearing.

…“The focus of my concern today is China, and specifically Chinese telecoms (companies) like Huawei (Technologies Co Ltd [HWT.UL]) and ZTE Corp, that are widely understood to have extraordinary ties to the Chinese government,” Burr said.

Chinese firms have come under greater scrutiny in the United States in recent years over fears they may be conduits for spying, something they have consistently denied.

The West finds itself unprepared for an old-school society like China where all institutions operate in parallel toward a goal, since we are accustomed to having high internal competition and distrust of our state. This means that when China acts, it can be through government, private industry, private citizens, or non-profits.

After that, the warnings stepped up in intensity as the FBI identified China as a threat to America in no uncertain terms:

FBI Director Christopher Wray on Tuesday reiterated a commonly held view among US intelligence officials that China is seeking to become a global superpower through unconventional means — but he framed it as both a governmental and a societal threat to the US.

…”One of the things we’re trying to do is view the China threat as not just a whole-of-government threat, but a whole-of-society threat on their end,” Wray said. “And I think it’s going to take a whole-of-society response by us.”

…He said “collectors” — what the intelligence community calls people who collect intelligence on behalf of agencies or governments — had infiltrated US universities.

…”It’s not just the intelligence community,” he said, “but it’s raising awareness within our academic sector, within our private sector, as part of the defense.”

This would seem extreme, but China has effectively stated its intent to conquer the world through Hegemon, a strategy of subverting and then dominating nearby nations. Only the oblivious and unwary — e.g. democracies — are at risk, since this is not a hidden strategy.

Trump seems to have awakened Washington to this issue and, correspondingly, to the need to get American society in order so that it might resist the cultural warfare coming from abroad. That includes strengthening infrastructure, reducing dependency on Chinese lending and debt-purchasing, and trimming our own expenses.

In the long term, the West is looking to lose the many regulations, unions, lawsuits, diversity, human rights, internal conflicts, identity politics, and other forms of confusion and cost that make us a less able competitor. Democracy and equality are likely on the chopping block in the longer term.

As a first step, the Americans are Europeans are finally considering reining in their vote-buying entitlement states because those are the major source of debt to China, considering that they take up over 60% of the budget:

How can that be? A look at the American budget shows that other than 16% to military, 18% to miscellany, and 6% to debt service, everything else goes to the entitlement state.

In addition to 9% spent directly on aid programs, 24% goes to Social Security, and 26% goes to healthcare subsidies. If we dropped the entitlements state entirely, our budget would be only 40% of what it is now, and could be reduced even further with across-the-board cuts.

If America wants to get out of debt, her path lies through these unpopular but necessary cuts. As we dither, China continues to focus its energies on discipline and aggression, knowing that the bloated, lazy, sloppy, and pampering citizens of late democracy probably lack the will to even recognize the problem.

China Putting RAILGUNS On Ships

Adrian Sol

Daily Stormer
Febuary 4, 2017

America is getting straight-up rail-cucked.

China is one-upping America in terms of cool sci-fi shit, and that should make you very, very angry.

Railguns are the sort of thing you’d expect to see on spaceships – or Gundams. It’s the manifest destiny of the White man to start using railguns to shoot down alien motherships or repress colonial insurrections.

If it weren’t for the Jews squandering all our resources on brown people and women, we’d all have railguns on our cars by now – never mind our battleships.

Big Think:

China has put a railgun on a warship. That sentence alone might trigger the heebie-jeebies in some members of the American military. It’s the first time any nation has ever put such a powerful gun on a warship. But there’s more to the story than that.

That’s… so embarrassing.

America’s been working on railgun tech for years.

And yet, somehow, these shifty slant-eyes managed to beat us to the punch.

The physics behind the railgun are particularly impressive. Since the specially designed “bullets” are 22lbs each and are capable of traveling about 100 miles at Mach 7 speeds (approx. 5,300mph), the bullets have to be fired with an extreme amount of energy: about 32 megajoules. That’s about enough energy to propel a 1 ton object at 566mph, so, to give you a rough idea of how powerful this thing is: it’s like giving something the size of a basketball the speed (and ultimately destructive power) of a 747.

Yes. It’s awesome, and I want one.

Yet the navy, under the pretense of it “using too much power,” dropped the ball big-time.

If it uses too much power, just put a nuclear reactor on the ship, jeez. It’s like these people don’t realize just how cool railguns are.

Trivial things like power consumption mean nothing before the almighty power of the railgun.

While we can’t do much (save for interchanging the lyrics to Aerosmith’s “Janie’s Got a Gun” to “China’s got a gun”), we can rest somewhat assured that the railgun might not actually work. Fancy though it may be, it’s not easy to get a machine this powerful to fire at a target. The American military had up until fairly recently working on railgun technology but since dropped it in favor of more short-range weaponry; it looks like China was watching pretty closely and picked up the ball where America either lost interest or lost focus.


So, should anyone be worried? Maybe. It could be a while until the railgun actually gets used, and if certain Big Thinkers are to be believed this is more-so the kind of show-off weapon that is built mostly as a deterrent and/or status symbol.

Of course it’s a show-off weapon!

Having a railgun is like having a friggin’ death star! You get it so that people know not to mess with you!

Let’s not build a death star. After all, it uses too much power. It’s just a show-off weapon.

Our military seriously needs to get their priorities straight. We need new leadership which understands the pressing need for cool sci-fi weaponry.

Trump Identifies The Actual Opposing Force To America

by Brett Stevens on February 1, 2018

In international politics, you do not have enemies so much as opposition or more gently stated, competition. This occurs because everybody wants to rule the world, mainly because only when one is on top can goals be realized; otherwise, any effort spent on reaching goals is effort taken away from necessary defense.

Diversity fails for the same reason. Every group wants its people in charge, its rules to predominate, society to be shaped after its preferences and aesthetics, and the sense of being in command of its future. It cannot do this when it shares any space with other groups, so conflicts arise. The only solution is for one group to be supreme in each area, and even then, if they are not separated by large bodies of water or mountain ranges, they tend to engage in constant jockeying for who is on top. Anyone who has seen a wolf pack, plate tectonics in action, or even streams of water acting on rock knows this: everything wants to be in the position of effortless power.

When the Soviet Union fell, the United States and Western Europe went into calm oblivion because they had eliminated the last threat that they recognized. At that point, they turned entirely toward internal disputes and ignored the possibility that someone else might be scheming to dethrone them, even though they had fought two wars against this power and suffered historical invasions by its race. They even lulled themselves to sleep on easy wealth based on its labor, and then, easy debt purchased from the people we had just finished enriching with our lust for cheap consumer goods.

Then rumors began to move like shapes in murky air. Hollywood seemed to be being bought up, bit by bit, by a new group. This same group was also investing heavily in real estate in America and Europe, especially the UK, and sending most of its students to our universities. Members of this group seemed to get caught spying and awful lot, especially around military contractors. Their companies began blocking ours overseas, and regulating our products out of existence, while making steady inroads in our market. Still we slept, in part because those in power — the Obama-Clinton gang — seem to have been receiving funds from this group. The Clintons in particular were always known to be friendly with them and even gave them military technology.

The experts tell us that we are entering a multipolar world where instead of having two big superpowers and then only one after the Soviets fizzled, there will be many powers each ruling over the areas around their continents. The Leftist narrative, always one to delight in the failure of anything good so that the failed can feel better about themselves, points out that much of this involves former “developing” nation-states like Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa rising to become new powers. What few will say is that this situation has happened before and always resolves itself the same way: some rise above the rest, and those become the new superpowers.

What the West might tell these people is that being a superpower is a kind of a trap, a slaves-and-masters paradox. When you are a superpower, you can pursue your visions of power without restriction, but at the same time, this converts you from being a country focused on its own health to a country being used as a means-to-the-end of power itself. By being masters, you become servants of power, and this leads you to treat your people, customs, values, history, and even existence as secondary to financial, political, and ideological objectives. America for example was happier before it became the guardian of the world, and Europe was glad to relinquish colonialism because of the high cost of maintaining overseas bases and the destructive social effects that it had. In the end, the lesson of power is that it is a lot like alcohol: too little is frustrating, but too much can be lethal, all ensconced within the same warm feeling of fuzzy anesthesia that makes the danger invisible until the next morning, when everything is destroyed and you have to peer through a hangover to realize the growing dread.

China finds itself in the grip of both thymos, or a desire to be recognized for excellence in a natural hierarchy, and hubris, or the compulsion to rise above its station despite the negative externalities that are generated. It has many internal instabilities that will need to be rectified before it can become a stable power, and lacks the time to fix those, so instead it will become increasingly repressive, which will backfire the same way it did for the Soviets. Speaking the Russians, they are — as they were during the Cold War — allies of the Chinese and yet always scheming against them, much as the Chinese are doing in return. The American Left is fanatical about blaming the Russians in order to take the heat off the Chinese, and Russia aims to both sabotage America/Europe and destabilize China by goading them into radicalism much as the USA used military programs like SDI to goad the Soviet Union into over-extending its unstable and incapable system.

If the Chinese stay true to form, their approach will be to do as much damage indirectly as possible, then humiliate the West in some conflict like the Vietnam war, which despite being a win — Chinese expansion stopped — was quite a PR hit for the otherwise previously undefeated West, not least of all because of the social instability it created through anti-war protests and the quivering neurotic paranoia it unleashed in our political system. If they can buy up enough of the West to influence it, spread destructive habits throughout the society, and then lure it into over-extending itself and getting clobbered in another Asian land war, then the Chinese will consider themselves to have risen above the West as a superpower, even though their own internal disorder will prevent them from being anything like the stable society needed to be powerful without consuming itself. Part of this advance manipulation has come through buying the allegiance of the Left and certain key industries so that the 1960s scenario can be replayed with every newspaper shouting the same message of pacifism, disarmament, and focus on nonsensical social issues in order to weaken the West.

Unlike the stumblingly incompetent Obama administration, Team Trump has tackled the Chinese problem head on with hard negotiation on trade while strengthening both infrastructure and industry. At the same time, Trump is now signaling that the Chinese Cold War (via /.) is entering its final stages before it potentially becomes “hot”:

“Trump national security officials are considering an unprecedented federal takeover of a portion of the nation’s mobile network to guard against China, according to sensitive documents obtained by Axios.” This is based on a PowerPoint presentation Axios has in their possession. Two options are described — a national 5G network funded and built by the Federal government, or a mix of 5G networks built by existing wireless providers. A source suggests the first option is preferred and essential to protect against competition from China and “bad actors”. The presentation suggests that a government-built network would then be leased out to carriers like AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile.

The PowerPoint presentation was produced by a senior National Security Council official, and argues that the move is necessary because “China has achieved a dominant position in the manufacture and operation of network infrastructure,” and “China is the dominant malicious actor in the Information Domain.”

It also suggests America could export its secure 5G technology to protect its allies, and “Eventually this effort could help inoculate developing countries against Chinese neo-colonial behavior.”

If you read between the lines, the point here is clear: China is a national security threat, they are using industry as their vanguard, and they are attempting to subvert former colonial nations so that they can spread their system and mobilize allies against us. Basically, the old Communist plan is the new Communist plan, mainly because Communist like dysentery is eternally unchanging.

And look, it gets even more explicit as Team Trump acts against Chinese embedded spyware (via /.):

Huawei devices still work on both companies’ networks, but direct sales would’ve allowed them to reach more consumers than they can through third parties. The government’s renewed concern about Chinese spying is creating a potential roadblock in the race between Verizon and AT&T to offer 5G, the next generation of super-fast mobile service. Huawei is pushing to be among the first to offer 5G-capable phone, but the device may be considered off-limits to U.S. carriers who are beginning to offer the next-generation service this year in a few cities. U.S. security agencies and some lawmakers fear that 5G phones made by companies that may have close ties to the Chinese government could pose a security risk.

This is point two of the message above, reiterated. China is not just the government, but its industry. The two are one and the same as in Communism or fascism, and they are working against us much as the “deep state” Establishment spanning government, media, academia, and industry is working against us here. The point is to cut them off and also savage their economic lead, forcing them to fund their ambitions through state funds instead of American product dollars.

Right now, Trump and the Democrats are playing a long dance. They demand something; he offers a compromise; they reject it and blame him. This benefits both sides. Trump gets to keep peeling back layers of the last seventy years of Leftist insanity. The Left gets to escape being blamed for not doing what they promised their coalition.

Why are both sides okay with this? Once the Obama fog lifted, it became clear that China was moving aggressively against the West. Then China formalized that with a slow reveal of its plans for world domination that scared the heck out of the West. This meant that the West has to get out from under China’s thumb, which remains reducing our debt because China is our biggest creditor and if they stop buying our debt, they can crush us. That means they can manipulate us by regulating their buying, and sabotage our markets by simply announcing that they plan to stop buying.

Trump and the Left are seeing eye-to-eye on this, behind the scenes. America and Europe have to get free from their creditors. The only way to do this is to remove the 60% of our budget that goes to entitlement payments and get competitive again. That means making our own car parts, computers, televisions, phones, and basic life gadgets. We will have to starve the Chinese of our consumer dollars and radically cut our spending, or they will own us.

And the Russians? They continue to sabotage us with psyops that emphasize our internal division not on the basis of race, but politics:

There is a third possibility, namely that the dossier was part of a Russian espionage disinformation plot targeting both parties and America’s political process. This is what seems most likely to me, having spent much of my 30-year government career, including with the CIA, observing Soviet and then Russian intelligence operations. If there is one thing I have learned, it’s that Vladimir Putin continues in the Soviet tradition of using disinformation and espionage as foreign-policy tools.

…The pattern of such Russian operations is to sprinkle false information, designed to degrade the enemy’s social and political infrastructure, among true statements that enhance the veracity of the overall report. In 2009 the FSB wanted to soil the reputation of a U.S. diplomat responsible for reporting on human rights. So it fabricated a video, in part using real surveillance footage of the diplomat, that purported to show him with a prostitute in Moscow.

…The FSB probably believed that Mrs. Clinton would win the election, and that once the dossier became public Mr. Trump would vociferously argue that she had played dirty. Thus the dossier would have had dual benefits: The salacious portions would undermine the Republican candidate, and then his attacks would delegitimize the eventual Democratic administration. The 2017 ODNI report says that pro-Russia bloggers even prepared an election-night Twitter campaign, #DemocracyRIP, designed to question the election’s validity after a Clinton victory.

For Russia, the winning move is for both China and the US/EU to fall, which will enable Russia to occupy Europe and subjugate China. To that end, it would be best if the American society became unstable and paranoid at the same time China was emboldened by Russian support, guaranteeing war between America and China in which Europe would join. Afterwards, Russia would attack and conquer the victor, who would be almost certainly massively weakened by that great contest. That is Machiavellian realism.

In the meantime, China faces an uncertain future. Its hybrid economic system requires intense state control by a state that is notoriously slow to respond to change. Its people are mostly peasants, and its economic growth is based on a boom in consumer electronics that may not last. Even more, its quality seems to have issues as many of its products are low-quality, leading to a question of how well its own infrastructure and technology will work. The tiger may be partially a paper tiger, and that may make them as unstable as the Mongols, who were able to conquer vast swathes of territory but not administrate it.

China probably needs — in parallel to Hitler’s Germany — several generations to begin recovering from the chaos of the past three thousand years. But, like Russia, China sees the solution to internal instability in external conquest. Russia wants to own Western Europe for its wealth, forgetting that under Russian management, that will likely be paltry much as it is in Russia now despite massive reserves of natural resources. These countries need solutions that are part structural, and part eugenics, in that they are bottom-heavy with peasant laborers and short on actual visionaries.

For reasons unknown, America and Europe have decided to follow that lead by making their already slightly bottom-heavy societies really bottom-heavy through the importation of large numbers of third world laborers who will take more from the welfare benefits state than they will put into it, guaranteeing a systemic crash on economic and political levels.

Despite that, the Trump/Brexit years show us the West re-awakening to a need for a general direction other than further into the ghetto of Leftism. Instead of bowing to China, Trump has challenged China. Instead of indulging in pity politics as the Left does, he encourages growth through competition and excellence. And now, by identifying China as the force that is historically and in the present day most likely to attempt to overthrow us, he has changed the dialogue on the Western future entirely.

China Will Eat The West


The Current Year in the West is unbalanced and self-destructive. Native Westerners’ demography is in free-fall, families are rare or fragile, the mainstream culture is treacherous and toxic, the power and money have been taken away and given to violent organized anti-male, anti-white groups. Most women and effete blue pills try to ignore or trivialize the situation when they’re not straightly SJWish.

I recently witnessed a leftist soyboy talking for hours to a female “friend” he never fucked and will likely never fuck to pressure her into remaining inside the leftist creed. “Doesn’t matter to be a friendzoned beta wimp, I will pretend I’m someone by acting as a leftist watchdog!” Many whites behave like that. They direct their need for identity and belonging to some version of the blue pill, thus only gaining some semblance of being by contributing to the ignominious fall of their own civilization.

Some women admire us. At another time I saw a self-claimed female “love coach” whose eyes sparkled when I told her I was writing at Return of Kings. “God, at least someone who’s neither left-wing nor an egregious MGTOW!” These kindred feelings, though, tend to remain discrete. Women are natural born conformists and fear getting singled out if they express beyond the “normal” degeneracy cesspool.

Drawing up an exhaustive list of the problems in Current Year West looks like pouring water into the Danaides’ sieve. Parasites who pose as regular people or poor unprivileged abound. White guilt, female narcissism, male conformism—the Current Year is a clusterfuck of problems fostering endless divisions and confusions.

Sometimes you just want to turn the media off

And then there’s China.

In 1816, Napoléon Bonaparte is supposed to have said “let China sleep, for when it will wake up, the world will tremble.” A century later, Lothrop Stoddard wrote in the Rising Tide of Color about China’s cheap labour combined with enormous reserves of iron and coal, then the basis of industry. Later again the French politician Alain Peyrefitte wrote a two-volumes book on China’s potential, followed by a sequel, China has woken up. These men were right.

In Peyrefitte’s words, China has been an “immobile empire” for centuries. It was forced into mobility by English cannons, debilitated by the opium trade, taken over by Communists who killed between 30 and 50 million people in the name of progress, and even then, the Middle Kingdom did come back. In a very short time, this purportedly undeveloped nation managed to become an industrial powerhouse and flood the world with its products.

Sure, many Chinese are working their asses off 14 hours a day in sweatshops. But deep down, they can do so because they are motivated to do so. They aren’t isolated atoms—they still follow traditions that keep female hypergamy in check, and they are part of a mighty empire, like cells who can fully identify to a magnificent higher organism. They do not suffer from the disease that became normal across the West. The Chinese tend to be realistic about leftism, powerful communities, to care about their family and traditions, and they are extremely optimistic about the future of their country.

When we, red-pilled Westerners, tend to struggle individually to get our lives in order and, in the better case, start a family, the numerous Chinese tend to form a homogeneous block who has been expanding in all directions. Since whitey has been leaving Africa, China has steadily taken his place. On the other side of the pond, as Brazil keeps paddling into a typical Latin-American corruption scandal, the Confucian dragon invested more than $30 billion there so that the vast Brazilian fields will keep growing food for the Han instead of feeding their own industry.

China is also heavily involved into the research race. In September, a Beijing lab has held the world’s first quantum intercontinental video call on what is said to be a breakthrough in secure communications. Before that, China had already build a complete quantum communications network between Beijing and Shanghai. Disgruntled CIA and NSA spies will have to shift to another target—for example, their own young commenting the news on Facebook.

China has also embarked on a space race and may take the lead there, in spite of decades of American accumulated advances.

Also, last but not least, China was never hostile to eugenics. Just like their Singaporean cousins, the Chinese constantly tried to improve their stock since they have become aware of it:

A Eugenic Law of 1994 made it compulsory for pregnant women to undergo prenatal diagnosis for the presence of genetic and congenital disorders in the fetus and to have abortions where these disorders have been diagnosed. Chinese physicians and geneticists are much more sympathetic to eugenics than are those in Western democracies. For instance, in a survey of attitudes to eugenic practices carried out from 1994 to 1996, 82 percent of Chinese physicians and geneticists supported the mandatory sterilization of, for example, a single blind woman on public welfare who has already had three blind children by three different men (all absent from the household), as compared with around 5 percent of physicians and geneticists in the Western democracies. (Richard Lynn, Eugenics: a Reassessment, p.41)

The Chinese prove that a high IQ, ethnocultural homogeneity and a strong work ethic can achieve much. Intelligence can be used to succeed in almost any field. No leftism at all is needed to build a flourishing civilization. Leftism looks more like a cancer, feasting on an old man’s barely alive body. China has no real leftism inside, and China wants its place under the sun. Who’s going to prevent it from taking the first place?

Even if we could, I’m not sure we would do so. No one’s motivated to defend the Western world when the West is not Western anymore. Instead, one could drift towards favoring a meritorious people over the degenerate white normies. In Richard Lynn’s words: “I am profoundly thankful for the existence of the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans. The torch of civilization will pass to them.”

Will the West witness the rise of tradition again, with patriarchal nationalism, identity and a vivid spiritual breath blending into a rejuvenating fountain of youth? Could China’s system crumble due to its own failures? Or will we become “a bemused footnote in the Chinese Encyclopedia of World History”, as Jared Taylor once wrote?

On the other hand, no one is forcing us to buy cheap crap all the time or to die with countries we cannot identify with anymore. The Chinese haven’t been investing in Bitcoin as they were too busy making our clothes. And definitely, we can live on our own, travel, tinker, and build the tribes we need.


Delaying Chinese Dominance

The 19th Congress of the Chinese Communist Party is over.  It was a seminal event.  It…

  • …firmly consolidated political power in the hands of a single man, Xi (no successor was named).
  • …clearly informed the world that China was now a global superpower (and the US was its only rival).
  • …would promote a world based on ‘capitalism with Chinese characteristics’ (a capitalism in a Leninist cage) in opposition to Western Democracy.

In short, China publicly announced that it is now in a ‘cold economic war’ with the US for the future of the world.  In fact, China was so confident of its eventual victory, it clearly articulated the centerpiece of their effort to accomplish it:  one belt one road

  • It’s an investment of $8 trillion (to start!) to build a global road, rail and maritime system that connects Asia, Africa, and South America (60 countries in total) to China.
  • Transportation is a natural monopoly.  Xi is trying to build a transportation and logistics monopoly on a global scale.  It is an undertaking that isn’t only backed by Xi personally, it is now enshrined in the Communist party constitution (!).  In other words, it’s going to be built.
  • By the time the first round of investment is completed, a majority of the global economy will be connected via a Chinese owned, built and/or financed logistical system.  As the buildout continued, the US would quickly find itself disconnected from the rest of the world and on its way to becoming a second tier economy.

Unfortunately, due to a self-inflicted wound (Trump is merely a symptom), the US couldn’t be in a worse position to counter this effort.  Decades of blind adherence to economic and social neoliberalism has shattered US cohesion along all three vectors: moral, mental, and physical.   The result has been intractable economic stagnation, social turmoil, and political chaos.  Even worse is on the horizon: the US is careening towards identity authoritarianism.  In time, the US may be able to regain stability.  However, it’s unlikely the US will find a way through its internal crisis fast enough to mount a successful conventional counter to China’s grand ambition.  So what can be done, given the assumption the US will eventually recover, but not soon enough for conventional efforts?

One belt one road

Delaying China

One solution is to mount a rearguard action — a method of delaying an advancing enemy when your forces are in retreat.  An action that buys time for the US to regroup and regain cohesion.  The US faced a similar situation re; the Soviet Union in ’79 after the invasion of Afghanistan.  In that case, support for Afghan insurgents kept the Soviets occupied while the US recovered (Carter, inflation, Iran, etc.).  In this case, the rearguard action would be the disruption of China’s plans for one belt one road.  This could be done inexpensively and with very little manpower or visibility.  How?

  • Create groups that operate like global guerrillas.  Small groups that operate independently w/o oversight.  More letters of marque than special operations.
  • In the short term, disrupt the Chinese construction effort.  Double and treble construction costs by delaying timeliness and forcing increased security efforts.   Drive up the costs of financing.  Drive away subcontractors.
  • Next, force the Chinese to physically and logically protect the entire system, from roads to ports to trains, from disruption.   As my analysis of Lawrence of Arabia shows, it’s more damaging to partially disrupt a system than to completely break it.  Keep up the pressure — with the ability of systems disruption to generate a million to one return on investment, this is sustainable.


John Robb

Writing on a crisp fall day in New England

PS:  Doesn’t the US risk more from disruption than China?  No. The US doesn’t have a choice.  If it doesn’t act while this logistical monopoly is being built (when it is the most vulnerable to disruption), the US will cede global dominance to China so completely and the consequences to the US will be so negative, it may require a war to reverse.

PPS:  It also may be useful to see this as a measured response to China’s relentless attacks on mainland US computer systems over the last decade.