Xi Xinping has issued a decree in China that has instantly become law with the full force of policing ready, able, and willing to execute violent consequences should anyone dare defy it. He has issued a decree that your neighbor will not protecy you from when the police knock on your door. He has issued a decree that will gain the instant overwhelming approval of the public faces of the people you see everyday in your daily living.
I juat want to give you a sense of the scope of the control one man holds over a nation that is the 4th largest in terms of land size and number one as far as population in all the world, a major nation-state in the world to be sure, if I can use such lowkey expressions to reflect the true scope of the current geo-economic power the nation-state of China currently possesses on the world stage.
This decreee is about assuring that the children of China, all being sent to mandatory government schools (homeschooling is not a real option, though underground homeschools exist), be taught the new dictates of the demigod-esque leader of China, Xi Xinping, a man we simply refer to as Chairman Xi as it fits the pattern of perhaps his biggest influence as we are seeing this man emerge, Mao Zedong (though his Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is not exactly the same as Chairman Mao’s).
The similarities have more to do with the type of legitimization of power that both men relied upon, which was an apppeal to the ancient Chinese doctrine of the Middle Kingdom, the place where heaven and earth meet, China, and in this exchange of human and nature, the will of heaven is seen in the fruit of the people and the land. This is commonly referred to as the mandate of heaven, and while Chairman Xi is more explicit in this, and more willing to directly refer to the ancient traditions where this ideal was formed and tested, Mao Zedong utilized the terminology of Marx to describe the same type of thing, but instead of the mandate of heaven it was the mandate of the people, only by the people he was only referring to revolutionairies, for everyone else was part of the problem. Mao was no traditionalist.
There are many parallels that can be drawn to the efforts of Chairman Xi to indoctrine the chilldren to think like the party, and the party is Xi, make no mistake about that, and what the DNC is attempting to do by indoctrinating children to think like the party, the DNC. Those similarities have to do with the types of claims Xi and the DNC Apparatchik Class utilize to validate the use of coercion against people for havng opinions or claims of truth that challenge the official party narrative.
The DNC has a particular moral construct it finds useful in undermining the vehicle of power of its opponents, which are very different than the type of opponents the CCP finds itself facing. The DNC has risen to power exploiting the plea of the most needy in the land within contexts that had not been given such hyper focus and concern (not in the polls, however, where economony consistently still rates at the top most all of the time) until the last 10 years, with the last two years seeing an escalation of hyper-consensequential racist and bigoted violations of the new party code.
Now charges of racism and bigotry are as powerful at ending the viablility of a person’s life as being called a witch was back in the early 1600s. The parallels between that reign of moral panic terror and this one are so rich and deep that I have little doubt there will be many books written on those parallels for, perhpas, decades to come, maybe more. It is an extraordinary time in the scope of human history. This is is not a drill, we significantly live in extraordinary times.
The use of failure to meet social orthodoxy is the fundamental method of control that’s being deployed here. This is a tactic hardly ever used effectively to control a large-scale audinece if the faction using this method does not control to 80 percent or more all of the fundamental social and culture affirming, creating, and protecting institutions of the land. These would be the banks, the board rooms, the Federal government, the media, the schools, the news, and emerging tech.
I believe the DNC Empire, if I can call it that, because its coalition of power really does comprise distinct ‘provinces’ that preserve distinct characteristics only bonded by the usefulness of a larger scale structure of support. has such a level of control on the land today here in America, across the board, at 80 percent or more, but that Empire is not the Kingdom that Xi currently rules (though they have begun to venture into their own Empire building, something we have been tracking for a while now).
China is a Kingdom of 99 percent one ‘race,’ the Han race, and Xi and the Middle Kimgdom aims to keep it that way. People there mostly fit within a socially orthodox visual range of acceptable visual characteristics. China is the very type of nation-state the DNC claims to be against, an ethno-state. Yet their alliance still makes perfect sense to me for, like the CCP that Xi derives his legitiamcy of power partially from (it’s ultimately from the mandate of heaven), both parties use the tool of socio-cultural orthodoxy, but one is using it to take power and the other is using it to keep power.
Xi appeals to the moderately well-off Chinese. He is a conservative, and in a profoound sense as well, for he is seeking to revitalize the teachings of Confucius, he is appealing to the ancient history of China and its traditions as the base of his power, and the base of power for China in becoming the new leader of the world.
The DNC is still largely in the insurrectionist role, at least socio-culturally, for, while they have achieved great gains in conditioning society to be much more reflective of DNC values (some of which will still ultimatly be part of their undoing and many on the ‘right’ now opposed to some of those changes will ultimately be happy they happened), they still have yet to undo within the bulk of Americans the sense of one might call rights entiitelment that comes from growing up in a land in which you perceive (in part rightly, in part falsely) that appealing to the rights iterrated in the Bill of Rights is enough to shut down whole police departments, is enough to give families of victims of those whose rights have been violated, millions for the harm.
So they appeal to the moral violations that affect their ‘constituency,’ the people who perceive (to some degree rightly, to some degree falsely) that the way things are is a fundamental threat to their potential to live lives of their own choosing (thoughn they rarely think of it in those terms, more often equating their preferential way of living to THE morally correct way of living that everyone must comply with or face coercive consequences). They set to flame whatever moral vulnerabilities the current socio-religio-cultural institutions are vulernable to. In this tactic, the DNC is far more like Mao than Xi, which, by my theoretical pondering, is more a reflection of Mao being at the beginning of seeking to recreate a socialist China like the D,C would ultimately create if it were to fully rid the American lands of any signficiant number of people that uphold the values of the Bill of Rights, and recognize their power in protecting the weak from the strong, will be a refection of the usefulnes of the structure to meet the current power need of the DNC when it reaches consolidation.
For now, it is enough for the DNC to focus on closing the deal, on fully cementing its hold on power by ridding the land of the Bill of Rights constructs. So long as it is successful in continuing to reinforce the notion that all of the land views threats to other races by dangerous whites as necessitating the rights espoused in those 10 amendments to our American Constitution, more and more is chipped away at the core of the resistance to the DNC world the DNC seeks to create, a world that might be described by them at some point as Socialism with Chinse Characteristics, though the Socialism part in America, as well as what exists in China, will be in name only, as it wlll simply be a police state that controls as much as it can without cutting off productive output from the highest to the lowest levels, what China essentially is today.
Both China and the DNC still rely on the same method, fundamentally, of control, the use of failure to meet social orthodoxy, a penalty that could be worthy of death itself in some circumstances, certainly one that, more often than not, requires market, social, and cultural removal, to be depersoned for the crime of having bad thoughts that you dared express publicly.
We live in extraordinary times. We are soon to find out if the DNC has consolidated power in America, and if Chairman Xi can keep his Kingdom together while the mandate of heaven appears to frown on him and he prepares to insert Chinese troops and personnel into nations around the world.
ASK MEMBERS of China’s elite—from senior officials to academics at leading universities, well-known commentators or bosses at big companies—to explain the beliefs of the country’s leader, Xi Jinping, and their replies are surprisingly unhelpful. Even simple questions elicit waffly answers. Take an ongoing campaign to clip the wings of some of China’s largest firms, notably technology giants. The authorities have variously accused such businesses of seeking excessive profits, harming national security with a cavalier approach to data, abusing workers, bullying smaller firms or exploiting young consumers with addictive video games and online fan clubs. Is Mr Xi revealing himself as an ideologue, bent on re-imposing Communist Party control over the economy at the expense of growth? Or is he more pragmatic than that: a nationalist strongman who is helping to make China stable at home and mighty abroad? There is chatter among the country’s grandees, but no consensus.
Given such confusion among grown-ups, this is a bold moment to issue a new series of textbooks to all students in Chinese schools, colleges and universities, with the aim of explaining Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for the New Era, as Mr Xi’s political philosophy is formally known.
As the academic year began on September 1st, teachers and lecturers began distributing these books, tailored for each age-group, down to children as young as six. The use of stand-alone schoolbooks devoted to a serving leader marks a break with decades of caution. The last time that hundreds of millions of youngsters clutched books devoted to the wisdom of one man was under Mao Zedong, the object (and instigator) of a disastrous personality cult.
Books for the young are especially revealing, for they have to keep their messages simple. Primary schools have long taught the general rudiments of ideology. Via courses with names like “ethics and law”, children have studied…