Globalization Blues: Trump, China, and the Women’s March on Washington

In this week's episode, China Watch looks at radically divergent US and PRC positions on globalization in the Trump era, and the Chinese roots of the massive Women’s March on Washington.

 *Follow us here at Newsbud Twitter

**Subscribe here at BFP-Newsbud YouTube Channel

Show Notes

How to salvage US-Russia relations

Become a Newsbud Community Member

Xi Jinping’s Davos Speech Has Shown the World Has Turned Upside Down

Xi Jinping Idealizes a Troubled China at Davo

China’s Xi Jinping at Davos, the World’s Most Powerful Beggar

China Reserves Hover Above $3 Trillion on Government Support

Soros: China Hard Landing is Practically Unavoidable

Bitcoin Plunges as Chinese Authorities Step Up Scrutiny

Chinese Activist Zheng Churan: Hey, Trump, Feminists Are Watching You

Women’s March on Washington: Principles

Why 1995 speech proved formative for Clinton

First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton’s Remarks to the Fourth Women’s Congress in Beijing, China

 

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.

Comments

  1. Peter. Trump a Russian-controlled puppet? Seriously? Please…
    Also, he’s NOT a globalist. (He’s not a neocon.)

  2. Wow. I’m not defending Drumpf, but “treason?” Really?
    And, as for “Russian adventurism,” I don’t even know where to contextualize that oxymoron. Sorry.

  3. I really appreciate this addition to Newsbud’s coverage and I feel that coverage of China, when it’s such a significant geopolitical player, is valuable. Especially given the fact that it seems to be in such short supply here in the States.

    I’m sort of confused about James’ comments as I didn’t just watch this. However, I thought Peter Lee’s comments on Trump’s China rhetoric were surprisingly insightful. As far as I’m concerned, what Trump is actually going to do on any aspect of foreign policy is still up in the air, but I think it’s useful to look at the rhetoric in terms of how Trump employs attacks on a psychological level. I tend to view Trump as more of a narcissist and a clown than a “deal maker” as he presents himself, but examining his rhetoric through this lens of psychological gamesmanship, as Peter’s done, is a much more sober and practical analysis at the moment than much of the other attempts I see at making sense of what Trump says from one day to the next. I think it’s safe to say that Trump takes a certain amount of pleasure in making his opponents squirm. How much of that is conscientiously tactical and how much of that is just the sort of narcissistic bullying I mentioned before remains to be seen.

    Even if I don’t yet know what to make of it in practical terms, Trump’s decision to largely avoid taking the kind of provocative anti-Russia stance as Hillary Clinton had articulated and the Obama administration has largely abided by throughout much of his presidency, was something I found refreshing. After decades of Cold War tension, at times such as the Cuban Missile Crisis, leaving the world terrified about the very real prospect of nuclear annihilation, I still find it sad and pathetic how easily Americans can be rallied around the anti-Russia war drums being amplified from the White House through the mouthpiece corporate and pseudo-alternative media. I can’t imagine how frightened, angered, and ready for war Americans would be if the Russian establishment was even nearly as provocative in it’s rhetoric. Regardless of how I feel about Russia as a geopolitical quantity one way or the other, I’m at least thankful (as I’ve said at numerous points in the past) that the Russians have shown a far more nuanced hand diplomatically. Theoretically, I agree with Trump’s stated goals of seeking to build more cooperative relationships with other countries like Russia would not only be in the interest of world peace, but in America’s practical interests as well. I don’t think the sort of US/NATO adventurism in the Middle East and its covert operations overthrowing governments and backing up tyrants, particularly in Latin America, has served the practical interests of most Americans (nevermind the ethical and moral disgrace involved in the process). I’m not holding my breath on the idea that Trump is going to alter the exploitive (corporate) “America first” relationship that’s existed, but whatever steps he’s willing to take towards a less antagonistic relationship with other countries on the world stage I’ll welcome. Honestly though, just looking at Mexico for example, I don’t see anything really changing, more just reshuffling and readjusting the crosshairs.

Speak Your Mind