Who Is It In America That Is Responsible For Implementing the Trade Agreements With China?


Our podcast today examines the argument made by Mike Slater, on the tv program, The First, that China is an enemy of the United States.

Slater explains that the most recent Wu Virus is only the latest of three epidemics, in 20 years, unleashed on the world by the militaristic, repressive Communist regime in Beijing.

The most charitable interpretation of this behavior by the Communists is that they are wildly incompetent to control the outbreaks of deadly diseases.

The more accurate interpretation of the behavior, explained by Slater, is that they are an enemy of the U. S., intent on destroying the fabric of American society.

Our podcast today adopts the second interpretation in order to examine what political and financial forces in America were responsible for forming the close ties between the two countries.

We agree with the analysis of Curtis Ellis, in his article, China’s Post-Virus Plan to Destroy America’s Economy, where he states that,

“The “respected voices” calling for America to lift the tariffs on China are simply swallowing Beijing’s sophisticated propaganda. China means to use this crisis to destroy us…Moreover, Beijing sees an opportunity in the pandemic to reverse President Trump’s call to move manufacturing out of China. China’s State Administration of Science, Technology, and Industry for National Defense (SASTIND), stated: “China will get more opportunities, including in the reduction of pressure for the international industrial chain to transfer away from China . . . The global epidemic has provided opportunities for improving China’s international position and countering anti-globalization.”

We argue that, in the late 1980s, the 1500 member companies of the Business Roundtable were effective in perpetrating a fraud that China was just like any other country in terms of global trade.

We argue that those same corporate actors continue, today, to coordinate their political strategy with special interest lobbying groups and crony capitalist elected representatives, who obtain personal financial benefits from passing legislation that have continued the re-authorization of the deals with China.

The lobbyists for the Business Roundtable and U.S. Chamber of Commerce, wrote the draft legislation, in 1999, in order for the corporations to obtain huge profits from moving production to China, and then selling those cheap goods back to the American market.

The main political representatives who voted initially to implement the deals, and then voted to re-authorize the deals, are a coalition of Democrats and Republicans, who obtained vast financial benefits from “tribute” paid by the corporations.

The large corporations obtained an 80% cost saving in production of goods in China, and while a small portion of the savings showed up in cheaper goods, the vast majority went to the bottom line profits of the large corporations.

Most of the profits earned from overseas production were never taxed in the U. S., and were never repatriated, in the form of capital investments, back into the U. S. domestic economy

The U. S. corporate profits were reinvested in China, which empowered the successful Chinese economy, and allowed their national champion industries to become wildly profitable.

Elected representatives at the state and Federal level worked together to advocate the public benefits of trade with China.

For example, In North Carolina, Governor Hunt hosted an annual event, called the Emerging Issues Forum, to promote global trade.

Governor Hunt created the Forum in October 1985 to provide a catalyst for the discussion and action needed to move the United States forward in the world economy.

His political mantra was that North Carolina workers must be “competitive” with global workers.

The second conference, in February 1987, drew 1,500 people to the McKimmon Center on the NC State University campus and featured speakers that included Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Paul Krugman, Thomas Friedman, Newt Gingrich, Hillary Clinton, Steve Forbes, Robert Rubin, Jay Rockefeller, Amory Lovins, Al Gore, and Paul Volcker.

While President Trump has correctly ranted incessantly about the unfair trade deals, he never identifies the political or corporate actors, listed above, who are responsible for allowing the trade deals to be enacted.

Citizens need to know who it was in America that engaged in a form of national economic sedition of collaborating with an enemy.

The Wu Virus is helping the citizens understand the extent of the danger caused by trade with China, but the virus has not clarified who is responsible for the economic damage.

Our podcast goes further to explain who these agents are that promoted the trade fraud with China.

We argue that the economic chaos inflicted by the Wu Virus is only the most immediate consequence of trade with China.

Less well known is the negative effect on U. S. labor markets that became overly dependent on service jobs.

In 2000, prior to the trade deals with China,, about  17,000 American workers were employed the production of goods, primarily in manufacturing firms.

In 2000, about 75,000 workers were employed in the service industries.

In 2018, only 12,688 workers were employed in manufacturing and 129,000 workers, or 80% of the U. S. labor force, was employed in services.

The services economy is commonly called the “gig” economy, that features low paying, unstable jobs, that offer no health benefits.

In Governor Hunt’s propaganda of the benefits of trade with China, required North Carolina workers to be “competitive” with China meant transferring North Carolina jobs from manufacturing to the gig economy.

North Carolina’s formerly diversified economy employed about 800,000 workers in manufacturing, before the trade deals.

After the trade deals with China, out of a total state workforce of 5 million, about 400,000 workers were employed in manufacturing, and over 1 million were employed in the service sectors.

The service industry is made up of restaurant workers and retail shops, and is the most vulnerable to mass layoffs from the Chinese disruption to the U.S. economy.

After the trade deals were implemented, the U. S. labor market and economy lacked diversification, and its occupational job structure looked just like the third world economies in Latin America and Africa.

The relocation of medical supply chains by large global corporations also exposed another hidden consequence of trade with China.

When the entire inter-industry manufacturing supply chains moved to China, local towns that relied on manufacturing jobs were devastated. Those local economies became overly dependent on service jobs, and on increased government welfare payments.

More importantly, by moving the supply chains off shore, America’s single most important competitive initial factor endowment of technological innovation was lost.

Technological innovation, prior to the trade deals, used to occur in the metro regional manufacturing supply chains in 350 metro regions, as a result of tacit knowledge creation and diffusion among the small manufacturing firms.

After the trade deals, the citizens discovered that innovation and product commercialization does not occur in the gig economy. Innovation occurs in the industrial supply chains, now located in China.

We argue that the members of the Business Roundtable, and the establishment Republican Party knew, in advance, the economic damage that would be caused by moving the supply chains to China, but calculated that the benefits of their increased profits outweighed the social costs imposed upon American citizens.

Part of their propaganda, at the time, was that there would be high paying, stable jobs in services that replaced the high paid manufacturing jobs. This was a lie, and the elites knew it was a lie, at the time that they used it to change the laws on trade with China.

The dysfunctional American political system is accurately described by Angelo Codevilla, as the Ruling Class, who make decisions that are not connected to the will of the citizens.

Secret decisions by the Ruling Class are the primary cause for the trade agreements with China. The American citizens were never informed about the globalist intent of the elites, or the permanent economic damage caused by the deals, until it was too late.

We conclude that the problem of a dysfunctional crony capitalist system and the centralized Ruling Class elite tyranny in Washington cannot be fixed, under the existing Constitution.

The ideology of globalism, in both the socialist Democrat and crony corporate Republican Party is too entrenched, and the unelected power of the deep state agents are too deeply embedded in the government apparatus to be dislodged by common citizens, through periodic elections.

We conclude that nothing binds the globalist factions together in a common national mission with Trump’s national sovereignty ideology.

The global Democrat socialists will never voluntarily obey the unwritten American rule of law because they will never share the cultural belief that all persons, institutions, and entities are subject to the equal application of the law.

The crony global corporate elites will never, willingly, give up their trans-national global trading privileges to share power with common citizens, in the current framework of the representative republic.

The establishment Republicans, like Senator Burr, of North Carolina, derive too many financial benefits from collaborating with the Democrats and global corporations, to change the status quo of power, or the distribution of tribute.

The solution for citizens is to follow the advice of Jefferson, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive to the ends for which it was created, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government.

The best, non-violent, idea for dealing with the irreconcilable ideological differences is a civil dissolution of the nation and the implementation of a new government, based upon the framework of state sovereignty, under the provisions of Article I, Section 10, Clause 3, the state compact clause.

I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for March 27, 2020.

Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category Vichy Republican Collaborators and is titled, Who Is It In America That Is Responsible For the Trade Agreements With China?

The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.

The American Roots of Globalism.

In his article, Exposing the Roots of Globalism, in American Greatness, Theodore Roosevelt Malloch, explains that globalism is the advocacy of one world government, based upon the idea of world citizenship.

The Wu virus is simply a subterfuge to advocate a new world order.

For example, Former UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown is using the Wu virust to call for a one world government. “Now is the time for global leaders to create one world government to tackle the twin medical and economic crises caused by the Chinese coronavirus pandemic,” he urged on March 26, 2020.

Globalism is a competitor ideology advocated by the American Ruling Class to the ideology of national sovereignty, promoted by President Trump.

Malloch explains that globalism is,

“The Democrats’ core belief today. Open borders, diminished sovereignty, multilateralism, multiculturalism, and everything defined as “worldwide” or global in scope. World government is the ultimate, long-term end.”

Malloch would have been more accurate if he explained that globalism is also the core belief of establishment Republicans, globalist Democrats, and large global corporations who are members of the Business Roundtable.

The global utopian socialism of the Democrats is matched by the global ideology of international trade of the Business Roundtable members, and the establishment Republican Party, whose members derive personal financial benefits from advocating the globalist corporate ideology.

The roots of globalism formed in the mid-1980s, with a coalition of Democrats, like Governor Hunt, and progressive think tanks, who wrote the documents to justify globalism.

In the late 1980’s, George H. Bush won the presidency by promoting a new world order, one-world government, and he used the neocon military apparatus to force global trade on third world countries.

By 1991, the coalition for global trade had solidified in the form of the first major trade deals, and by 1999, the coalition was successful in implementing the entrance of China into the World Trade Organization.

In his article, The Hidden Price of American Chinese Advocacy, Robert S. Spalding, cites the continuation of the collaboration between corporations and both political parties, and adds a new component of global corporate cronyism, where the Ruling Class elites of globalism make most of the decisions.

Spalding cites the network of lobbyists and think tanks who recently signed an open letter denying responsibility of the Chinese communists for Wu virus.

In describing their response to the Wu virus, Spalding notes,

“The primary co-signers of the open letter include M. Taylor Fravel, Michael D. Swaine, J. Stapleton Roy, Ezra Vogel, and Susan A. Thornton. Swaine coordinates the U.S.-China Crisis Management Program co-sponsored by the Carnegie Endowment and the China Foundation for International and Strategic Studies (CFISS). He also co-authored Managing Sino-American Crises: Case Studies and Analysis with Zhang Tuosheng, chairman of the CFISS, funded by the People’s Liberation Army of China, and mostly staffed by PLA colonels and generals academic committee.

The network of globalists obtains funding from the Chinese communists to promote their propaganda. Spalding cites the background of the Chinese $30 million grant to Yale, as an example,

“Susan A. Thornton, former State Department diplomat and (former) acting assistant secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, is similarly subject to the influence of Chinese soft power. Now she is a senior fellow and research scholar at Yale University’s Paul Tsai China Center—named for the late Dr. Paul Tsai, after his son Joe Tsai, co-founder and vice-chairman of Alibaba, donated $30 million to the university.”

Victor Davis Hansen explains that the term “globalism” contains two components, an economic international trade component and a political, totalitarian ideological component.

Hansen notes,

“It is the attempt (of the Ruling Class), from the outset to overlay the latter (political) onto the former as though the necessitating objectives of the economic dynamic somehow supersede the normalizing and solid structures of the Nation Sate and national interests.”

Hansen cites the Ruling Class as the agents in the totalitarian one-world government, as the power that would make global economic decisions.

He notes,

“the geniuses of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the European Union — applaud the globalization of the world.”

The American roots of globalism are hidden in this secret network, and it is this secret network of globalists who promoted the lockdown of the American economy, under the fake auspices of Wu flu, in order to damage President Trump and the American economy.

The Link Between Globalism and American Crony Capitalism.

The propaganda of the globalist Ruling Class is that the elites know better than common citizens what promotes global social welfare, and must, therefore, have the unchecked political power to exploit the production value of the non-elites in order to obtain the tax revenue to achieve better social welfare outcomes in fairness and income equality.

As Codevilla notes,

“The elite’s attitude (of moral superiority) is key to understanding our bipartisan ruling class. Its first tenet is that “we” are the best and brightest while the rest of Americans are retrograde, racist, and dysfunctional unless properly constrained…Our ruling class’s agenda is power for itself.”

The most powerful political force in implementing and maintaining the status quo of the China unfair trade deals are the 200 member companies of the US-China Business Council.

The USCBC is a private, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization of approximately 200 American companies that do business with China. Their membership overlaps the members of the Business Roundtable, which provides added political muscle to implement their covert political activities.

As they modestly state on their website, the mission of the USCBC is to “Help Shape the World’s Most Important Relationship.”

One way the U. S. member companies helped shape the relationship, in 2001, was to designate China as a nonmarket economy, when China entered the World Trade Organization.

The nonmarket status is equivalent to being an underdeveloped nation, and that status allowed the CCP to obtain favorable terms and conditions in negotiating the trade deals with the U. S.

Long after China became the second most powerful economy in the world, the USCBC continues to promote the fraud that China is an underdeveloped country.

Long after China adopted its global “belt-and-road” strategy of world domination, elected U. S. representatives continue to vote to re-authorize the U. S. trade status quo with China.

The trade deals were promoted, by the USCBC, to U. S. citizens, and implemented in the  U. S. political system, as a way of bringing China more towards international standards of open trade and civil rights.

The logic of the USCBC argument was, “No, really, the Chinese are just like you and me, and they will respond favorably to increased trade with America.”

The trade with China permanently damages technological innovation in America, which is one result of how the American Crony Capitalist Corporate Economy permanently damages the entire macro economic structure of the American economy

The main macro economic cost of cronyism is that the national rate of GDP growth is permanently lower because cronyism diverts scarce resources into non-productive enterprises, which are based upon political relationships, and are not based upon market prices.

The three main industrial components of the American global crony national economic structure are:

  1. The global firms in the military-industrial complex, who promote continual war across the world.
  2. The global manufacturing industrial firms with a financial interest in obtaining foreign trade benefits, especially with China.
  3. The global banking and investment firms who coordinate global financial transactions in conjunction with global central banks.

The common characteristic of global cronyism, in all three of the national economic structures, is a preference for globalism, as opposed to promotion of a sovereign national economic interest.

Codevilla explains,

“No one in a position of power in either party or with a national voice would take their objections seriously, that decisions about their money were being made in bipartisan backroom deals with interested parties, and that the laws on these matters were being voted by people who had not read them, the term “political class” came into use…our ruling class grew and set itself apart from the rest of us by its connection with ever bigger government, and above all by a certain attitude.”

On the corporate side of the swamp are the three primary industrial sectors of the military industrial complex, the large global manufacturing firms that benefit from global trade, and the global financial banks.

On the government agency side of the swamp are the agents in the deep state military spy apparatus and Department of State that collaborate with elected government officials to promote the elite perspective on the U. S. role in the global economy.

On the legal institutional side are the law firms and judicial activist lobbying firms who do the lobbying and write the draft legislation to enact trade laws and tax policies that tend to establish monopolies and monopsonies by legal fiat.

The entire American crony political and economic system has become oriented to obtaining privileges rather than maximizing profits.

Macro economic cronyism feeds on itself and becomes a self-fulfilling process where corporate elites who benefit from the system, reward their political cronies in Congress.

Civil Dissolution or Civil War?

Our podcast argues that the current U. S. Constitution is incapable of fixing the American corporate crony political system.

Madison’s Constitution contains an internal logical flaw, which caused the first American Civil War. The flaw continues to exist, and may cause the second Civil War.

In his article, A Contradiction at the Heart of the American System, John Farmer Jr. explains that Kurt Gödel, a mathematical scientist, described the internal logical contradiction in the Constitution.

Farmer writes that the flaw in logic is in the structure of how policy debates occur in Congress,

“Gödel’s revolutionary idea was that no system of thought can be both internally consistent and externally complete. The price of consistency, in even the purest logical systems, is that it excludes externalities that cannot be reconciled.”

For example, the conflict over slavery, beginning in 1820, could not be reconciled through debate. Eventually, the series of compromises on bringing a free state into the Union, with a slave state, could not be reconciled with the principles of freedom in the Declaration.

Over time, the logical contradictions reveal ideological differences that are irreconcilable and incompatible with the original mission of the Nation.

Farmer continues,

“As a system aspires to completeness, it begins to include elements that are fundamentally incompatible with each other, resulting in recursive propositions such as “this sentence is false.” In systems that aspire to completeness, chaos and collapse are a perpetual possibility.”

This is the stage in America today with irreconcilable differences between globalists and nationalists.

Chaos and collapse of the political system today, mirrors the collapse of the system in 1860, and are not solvable, under Madison’s framework, because Madison failed to provide a Preamble that connected the Constitution to the Declaration of Independence.

The recursive proposition in the logical flaw is that a “more perfect union” can mean anything, at any time, depending on what the majority of the Supreme Court decides that more “perfect union” means at that time.

Kenneth Arrow, a mathematical economist, went further than Godel in explaining why Madison’s contradiction is impossible to resolve in a democratic representative republic.

Arrow explained that in the absence of a clear constitutional mission statement in the Preamble, voters have no method of choosing nationalism over globalism. They will continue to recursively fluctuate in a system that leads to chaos.

Arrow wrote in his 1951 book, Social Choice and Individual Values, that the social welfare goal of “fairness” cannot be obtained.

In the absence of a clear, commonly-held, social goal of the nation, the only solution to Arrows’ impossiblity theorem is a dictatorship, who imposes his vision of society on the citizens.

A dictator similar in concept to Xi Jinping, in China.

Irreconcilable Differences

Jinping is an enemy of the nationalist ideology of President Trump, and is an ally to the ideology of globalism, promoted by American corporations who do business in China.

Those agents are responsible for implementing the trade agreements with China.

John Adams explained to the citizens of North Carolina, in 1776, that the framework of a representative republic had to be laid upon the foundation of shared cultural values and a common mission, such as liberty.

The implication for American citizens today, is that there are no common values between globalism and national sovereignty. The ideological differences are irreconcilable and irresolvable.

John Farmer, cited above, uses the example of the Civil War to describe America today,

“With the nation employing two entirely separate and opposed vocabularies and embracing separate and opposed sets of facts, the use of force to preserve the Union was, in retrospect, inevitable. A Confederate victory would have pledged that new government to the narrow consistency of white supremacy; the Union victory reaffirmed our nation’s commitment to completeness…The issue of slavery exemplifies what Gödel meant when he said he saw how our form of government could fail. The slavery example should remind us that our system’s success is not self-executing; indeed, our checks and balances are set up to fail in the absence of a spirit of common enterprise and compromise.”

Peter Leyden and Ruy Teixeira, in their four-part series called “California Is the Future,” explain that there is “no bipartisan path forward for America.”

They argue that there are two competing economic systems, classes, and cultures, and that one has to win while the other has to lose.

They incorrectly argue that the fight will be over socialism versus free enterprise, and that the socialists will win, and vanquish the free market conservatives.

There is ideological overlap between socialist Democrats and the other two groups who comprise the globalist coalition, but the unifying value is globalism, not socialism.

A more accurate analysis of America’s future is a fight between globalism and national sovereignty. It will not be like the Civil War, where one side wins, and the other is vanquished.

And, it will not be like the Civil War, where states seceded from the Union.

The future of America will be like the scenario presented by Kevin Baker, a socialist writer at New Republic, in his article, “BlueExit.”

Baker offers a modest proposal for separating blue states from red, but in reality separating globalists from nationalists.

He states,

“This is the bleakest new reality of all: That common ground is gone. You Trump Staters don’t read or listen to the same news sources we do. You don’t even care what a legitimate news source is, as the rise of all those fake news sites has demonstrated.”

Baker’s modest proposal for a national divorce is to create interstate compacts where globalists could have their own common laws, and nationalists could create their own set of laws.

Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution provides that “No State shall, without the Consent of Congress… enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State.”

If the globalists in New York, California, Illinois, and other blue states want to form a compact of globalist states and become citizens of the world, they have a God-given, and Constitutional right to BlueExit.

Natural rights conservatives, who are aware of who it was in America that was responsible for implementing the trade deals with China, can move forward to eliminate the plague of crony capitalism, with the creation of a new Constitution for The Democratic Republic of America, built upon the solid state sovereignty framework of the Articles of Confederation.

I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network.

You can subscribe to all of the audio and text of our podcasts, for $30 per year, at our website.

You can join the political movement to create a natural rights republic and contribute our mission at CLPnewsnetwork.com

You can learn more about the federalist, state sovereignty framework of the new constitution of the Democratic Republic of America at GABBYpress.com

Thank you for joining me today and please visit our entire archive of podcasts at clpnewsnetwork.com