BBC On This Day: 1951: Communist forces to re-take Seoul
We in the West seem to have entirely forgotten the Korean War. President Xi Jinping of the People’s Republic of China is keeping the memory alive, in his own fashion.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
On this day in 1951, Seoul fell for the second timeJanuary 4th, 2021 |
 7 comments to On this day in 1951, Seoul fell for the second time |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
“We in the West seem to have entirely forgotten the Korean War.”
Journalists and cultural establishment in West have been making every effort to.
Meanwhile, relating to Chinese matters, e-commerce founder and billionaire Jack Ma, who has criticised Beijing for its financial policies, has disappeared and has not been seen for more than two months. https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-china-ant-group-jack-ma/jack-mas-disappearing-act-fuels-speculation-about-billionaires-whereabouts-idUSKBN2991DA
Ask yourselves, dear readers, how long a country that routinely “disappears” anyone who is successful and not totally down with the State can continue to be so prosperous? Yes, China may continue forging ahead for a while – the average user of Alibaba products and services probably doesn’t give a fig who Mr Ma is – but at some point, if you keep purging and confining the movers and shakers, rather less gets done.
The thugocracy in Beijing may seem all-powerful now. Yes, it either intentionally or carelessly unleashed a global pandemic and caused the West to lose its collective head; it has clashed with India, crushed Hong Kong, threatened Australia and is encroaching on the waters of the Philippines. But at some point, dictatorships over-reach. The issue is exactly when that point comes.
Taiwan, maybe?
Seoul fell, the second time, because General McArthur had not been allowed to destroy the bridges and supply roads leading from Korea back into China. The Washington bureaucracy has been dominated by “Progressives” (i.e. TRAITORS) for a very long time – after all it was the cut off American support to Chang and the KMT that allowed the Marxists to take China in the first place (just as it was the embargo on Batista in the late 1950s that led to the victory of Castro, and the sanctions on Somoza and the Shah that led to the victory of the Marxists in Nicaragua and the Islamists in Iran in 1979).
President Xi is a Marxist dictator – but he is also the ruler of a country with a capitalist manufacturing economy. He sees no contradiction in this – as the capitalists will only be kept as long as they are useful (in the destruction of the West). The international elite (the people who control Puppet Biden and so on) would prefer that President Xi move from Marxism to a form of Saint-Simonism – under this Big Business (especially the Credit Bubble bankers) would actually be in charge of the Collectivist system – all in the name of “science”.
It must remembered that when an establishment person (a collectivist totalitarian) says “listen the science” they have no interest in science-as-such they are using the word “science” to mean POWER – the political and economic collectivism known as “Technocracy”.
As for Jack Ma – Jeff Bezos (the richest man in the world) would tell him that it is fine to think that Collectivism is nonsense – as long as you SUPPORT Colectivism. Remember Mr Bezos is supposed to be a pro liberty type in private – but he funds the Collectivist Washington Post, and Amazon helps fund Marxist Black Lives Matter to murder and burn.
As Mr Bezos would say “it is just business” to back the forces of Collectivist Totalitarianism, it does not mean you actually believe they are morally right.
Paul:
How interesting that Jack Ma may be a more morally admirable person than Jeff Bezos.
I agree with the point that a ruling party which gets into the habit of disappearing its more intelligent and industrious citizens will eventually destroy itself. However, there are a lot of people in China, so this will take time.
I am always puzzled at the way Xi managed to gain dictatorial control of China. I have never seen any explanation for it. Since the days of Deng Xiao Ping, the CCP had run on a largely collegiate basis, electing a Chairman every five years, who was not a dictator for life. Not perfect, of course, but it allowed the economy to grow and Hong Kong was largely left to its own devices, as per the treaty with Britain. How did Xi manage to attain a Stalin-like level of control? No good will come of it, but one has to hope he meets with an accident before there is a nuclear war over Taiwan.
There was a lot of graft in the party (corruption, backhanders and other kickbacks) when Xi was just a junior party leader. By knowing who was getting what he was able to bring down other contenders who were unable to use graft accusations against himself, either because that wasn’t his thing or because he was well insulated from it by other 3rd parties.
Xi is not better or cleverer than his colleagues, just more ruthless.
Critic of Xi Jinping expelled from party on graft charges
JohnK. The CCP has always been a one-party system. When they saw that opening up might lead to more than one party, they panicked. They want the best of Free Enterprize Capitalism, and no-freedom government. No deep mystery. Xi promised to give them both. And maybe Xi blamed the collegiate system for the troubles.
John & Nicholas:
Good points, but I would love to know how Xi managed to stage what was, in effect, a coup against the CCP’s collegiate leadership. If they had stood together, they could have swatted him away. One must therefore conclude that they did not stick together. But it is odd that so little has leaked out. Perhaps one day Armando Iannucci will be able to make a film about the death of Xi, and we will learn a bit more.
Paul is quite right, the Democrats got us into this mess by not standing up for the KMT government of China against the Reds. Now it is looking like the Red Chinese will own the next Democrat president, if Mike Pence fails to do his duty. More by the end of the day.