Asking Baidu questions to see if I can simulate an invigorating discussion

First result, a dead URL. I’m guessing that the best ideas will be cleansed from the results, just a hunch. Next I find an interview with Mearsheimer. You’d be surprised how much he’s brought up, it seems they’re more familiar with him than the US public is, for reasons one might expect. What’s the difference between the cold war between the US and USSR and the US and China? His first thought is that China isn’t as war-weary, that their last major one was the Korean War.

I always see random funny links too

The US has raised about 330 million chickens, so it’s not looking so good. A nation of spoiled nihilists is how I see the US tbh. I’m not even sure a true tragedy could spark its adrenaline, it would probably behold one of those with the same dull, dead eyes. A corpse country with no higher ideals that doesn’t even believe in the ones that it has. I’m trying to find a Sino-supremacist who talks like this about the US. “You don’t even deserve to be nuked.”

Another theme I’ve noticed scrolling around Baidu is the reminder that they should be proud of their country, which I take as a symptom that they’re not, so maybe we’re similar in that way. “Can you just be optimistic?” Calls em as I sees em. If we wanted a restoration here, a civil war might be necessary, and even if the good guys won, they’d probably be so jarred from the bloodshed that China might as well have won it. If we want to live in a country that isn’t a corpse the left needs to be taken out- it actively promotes meaninglessness, and that isn’t even a polemical thing to say.

Mearsheimer is surprisingly pessimistic throughout this interview so far

It also makes me feel sad, this is a tragedy. The problem is that you have to ask yourself, is this the reality of international politics?

Our greatest enemy isn’t China, it’s ZOG, so why would we even have a problem if China decided to war directly with ZOG? That’s what they would do if they were smart. The question is, would they take that risk? If they nuked NYC we’d retaliate by nuking Beijing.

No, the use of nuclear weapons does not mean that the two countries will turn each other into radioactive ruins… it will probably only drop one or two nuclear bombs against targets in the South China Sea.

Do you want to talk about realpolitik or not? Because if you do then Israel is going to be part of the discussion. Mearsheimer thinks this is inevitable. Just entertaining this, what would transpire if the US decided to back off after a couple nukes were dropped in the South China Sea, and China distinguished itself as an equal world power similar to the old USSR? There would be a readjustment among all the countries that aren’t the US or China on how they relate to these two. Ideally there would be a “taking into accounts” of “US” intervention in the past decades, and whether you want someone like that or someone like China intervening in the future. This is how I would think if I were a realistic Australian. And that’s going to be one of the initial case-studies on this global readjustment. So what would you think if you were a realistic Australian?

I’d think about CIA interference with Whitlam, and Goldman Sachs, and the conditions that those likely-connected entities have brought about in terms of living in Australia. Do you like being controlled by lawless secret agencies and banks? Maybe it would be better if China intervened? Now think of all the countries that the CIA and general “US” war-machine has looted and called it “freedom and democracy”. Realistic thinkers in those countries will ideally conduct a “taking into accounts” about all that and contemplate whether China would be a better ally. We’ve seen that China already has demonstrated that it’s not exactly a saint- from the observations in this hyperlink, I’d speculate that they take advice right out of the US/CIA’s playbook. So this is probably the kind of conversation they’re already having in Australia if they’re not stupid. Honestly I fear that they might be on some level, if they are bureaucratic theorists who are beholden to the superstructure I detailed yesterday, which I imagine that they are. If nukes are dropped things might change in this regard. People might start theorizing more realistically. I know people still can’t endure it when I talk this way- the Australians might start wondering “Are ZOG values good values?” Aligning with China would be good economically, at the rate they’re going and the rate the US is going–and perhaps even ideologically, given the bioleninist leveling here and the dogmatic denialism surrounding it which will inevitably lead to Brazil-esque third-worldism. Then you have this problem ricocheting around in their heads of course, being white folks who believe in liberty – “I feared being disappeared” – white folks don’t like that. Like I said though, if nukes are dropped, they might start realistically wondering about the degree to which “our” value-system here is totalitarian and might conclude that it’s kind of a toss-up whose style is worse, because I already have myself without nukes needing to be dropped – western maoism or eastern maoism, take your pick, so it might ultimately be decided by which is more of an economic advantage, and given the facts of geography, Australia’s proximity to China makes that a simple answer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: