Thirty years ago, a man stood in front of a column of tanks, halting their hulking passage from Tiananmen Square a day after the bloodshed of June 4.
“Tank man” images are ruthlessly excised from Chinese social media, according to monitoring services.
Now the Chinese government is seeking to exert the same sort of control over how China’s history is seen in the rest of the world.
Natasha Khan had a piece in Sunday’s Wall Street Journal concerning the implications of the People’s Republic of China’s 30 years ago Tiananmen Square bloody crackdown on today’s Hong Kong, especially in light of the PRC’s increasing and increasingly direct control over Hong Kong. In the course of that piece, Khan asked about the implications of tightening freedoms on Hong Kong’s position as an international finance center.
To which I answer:
The implications of the PRC’s “tightening” of freedoms in Hong Kong are obvious and universal. The “tightening” is not that, it’s a direct attack on those freedoms with a view to converting them from actual freedoms to freedom to do as the PRC and its ruling Communist Party of China require.
Recall that President Donald Trump has threatened a sequence of rising tariffs on all Mexican goods in an effort to get Mexico to take seriously its broad contribution to the crisis we have on our border with that nation.
Republican lawmakers are gearing up for a vote to potentially override President Trump’s planned tariff on Mexico this month….
These lawmakers are concerned that the tariffs could jeopardize passage of the USMCA, and they’re worried that they will hurt Americans. These folks have lost sight of some important facts.
There is much commentary, generally negative, over President Donald Trump’s statements, among others, that he likes the idea of Boris Johnson succeeding outgoing British Prime Minister Theresa May. It’s unbecoming. It’s unpresidential. Mostly, though, it’s simply not supposed to be done for one foreign dignitary to comment on the doings of another nation’s political debate.
I’ll ignore the foolishness of “unbecoming” and “unpresidential;” those objecting on these grounds routinely shy away from saying what they mean by “unbecoming” or “unpresidential.” We’re simply supposed to accept their august pronouncements without question.
There’re a couple of larger issues in play here, though.
On the matter of the House voting up the US Mexico Canada Agreement, the trade agreement agreed among the US, Canada, and Mexico to replace NAFTA, Congressman Gerry Connolly (D, VA) had this to say:
Given his behavior, I don’t see some great groundswell of support for this on our side of our aisle. I’m a free trader and I’m in no rush to approve this agreement.
That is the Progressive-Democratic Party’s hysterical anti-Trumpism in a nutshell. Party opposes the USMCA over Trump’s behavior; its opposition does not consider the merits or lack of merits in the agreement.
In a Sunday Wall Street Journalpiece about red flag laws as a means of gun control, Zusha Elinson asked whether there are any (other) measures that could unify gun rights and gun control supporters.
I say there are none. Full stop.
Gun rights supporters want the 2nd Amendment honored as it’s written. That’s it, and it’s that simple.
Gun control supporters, though, don’t care about the 2nd Amendment, except to the extent they’re willing to go to the trouble of repealing it rather than simply ignoring it. This is demonstrated by a couple of things central to their position.
[Robert, Chairman and CEO of The Walt Disney Company] Iger told Reuters [last] week that it would be “very difficult” for Disney to continue filming its movie and television content in Georgia if a new state abortion law takes effect.
This is the same Bob Iger whose company enthusiastically operates a theme park and peddles movies in the People’s Republic of China, which government spies on its citizens with, among other things, facial recognition software and which government has locked up millions of PRC citizens—Muslim Uighurs, for the most part, but not exclusively—in “reeducation” camps reminiscent of the worst of Mao’s camps.
That, there, is a true fact. The University of Georgia’s Emeritus Professor (of Agricultural and Applied Economics) Glenn Ames used that as an argument for why the US ought not invade Venezuela in his Letter to the Editor of The Wall Street Journal. After all, he wrote,
Venezuela is a large, complex country politically, not a tiny island in the Caribbean.
Also a true fact. But then he went astray, here and on a couple of other points. For one, our military is not the disjointed, uncoordinated collection of disparate forces that went into Grenada; it’s much better integrated, and it has demonstrated that improvement many times since.
Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden is extremely proud of the economy he and his BFF and mentor ex-President Barack Obama (D) created for us. Here are some graphs generated by the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis that illustrate the magnificence of their creation, via The Gateway Pundit.
The X-axis is hard to read (right-clicking on the image and selecting View Image brings up a bigger image), but the right-most vertical gray band is the Panic of 2008, and the time frame following that includes the bulk of the Obama-Biden administration.
There’s a doctored video on Facebook that purports to show House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D, CA) drunk—or in the aftermath of a mild stroke, or…—, it’s been up for several days, and it’s well-known to have been doctored.
Of course, Progressive-Democrats are in an uproar over it and over Facebook’s refusal to remove the video altogether, even though the company has flagged it and downgraded, based on evidence of the video’s faked nature, its rate of appearance in user news feeds. I disapprove of the video, also, but only because there are plenty of things over which to criticize Pelosi and her fellows without making stuff up, too, and the fakery reduces the overall credibility of those with legitimate criticisms. However, I don’t want it taken down; that would be rank censorship.