I salute the dauntless courage of the protesters across the length & width of the PRC who exclaimed "Enough!" to this incessant--and irrational--biosecurity tyranny.
Slogans, Party Central Committee, State Council reminds me of the days of USSR where I grew up, however not the USSR of the 1980s, but USSR of the late 1970s, under Brezhnev, with one big difference - nobody among people there paid real attention to this crap back then. Why China thinks it is so drastically different from other countries where it needs to fight "great COVID danger" with drastic measures? Why not go about life with understanding that viral infections would always be among us and the only path for a respiratory virus natural development is from a strongly contagious strain with high rates of mortality to a one that is much milder? Doesn't China have enough of smart scientists to explain to the government that mRNA vaccines are not a panacea and just the opposite - they have a negative long term effect on population's health?
In my understanding the situation with fighting COVID in China has an entirely different undercurrents. This is clearly not about health of the population, but about the fight of the two major political clans - nationalist authoritarians closely affiliated with PLA (People's Liberation Army) where Xi Jinping is a key figure now and the liberal forces affiliated with CYLC (Communist Youth League of China) that maintains a close relationship with US Democratic party. Highest ranking official representing that clan today is prime minister Li Keqiang. But most of the fight is happening not at the very top, where it resembles a dog fight under a carpet, but this is an open fight at the local level where local leaders are trying to stir population's discontent with central authorities, especially after defeat of the liberal wing by the PLA clan at the 20th Congress of CCP.
Overall we can see, China is following Globalist's plans to a tee and has now become the world's testing ground including the limits to which population tolerance to authoritarian measures can be pushed. I think no matter which clan will have the upper hand in China, principle of following the Globalists' directives will remain intact.
Thus far there is no hint of an approval in the pipeline for mRNA vaccines. Likewise, I don't think China suffers from a lack of scientists (or people for that matter!) with a low opinion of the decisions taken by the government. The problem was not a lack of knowledge but rather a weakness of hearing on the part of the big chief in Beijing. This past week it seems someone flipped on his hearing aid.
True about mRNA vaccines - none came to market in China yet. I wasn't sure about that. So thanks for pointing this out.
Not certain if you saw this, but there was an interesting article in Off Guardian on why China is acting the way it does with COVID measures: https://off-guardian.org/2022/12/01/the-real-reason-behind-chinas-zero-covid-policy/ . They also look at political and geopolitical reasons, not population's health, as main cause for the zero-covid policy in China. One thing in your article I definitely agree with is that what we see on the ground in China with exaggerated reaction to "cases" by local authorities is not the indicator of the strength of the central government, but is rather the opposite, indication of their weakness that allows local authorities to pursue their own policies that allow them to reach their goals, whatever those might be.
The author Kit Knightly's hypotheses regarding the role assigned to China by the internal Western spinmasters seem plausible. Some of his other claims are more debatable, e.g.
- We know it’s not because Covid is a real disease.
- We know it’s not because lockdowns work.
- We know it’s not because the Chinese government holds the lives of their citizens as more precious than their Western counterparts.
- We know it’s not because they were the victim of some bio-engineered viral attack by the West.
The author may "know" these things, but I don't think he would find much agreement to any of these claims in China. Just to cite one, the data FROM CHINA clearly show that lockdowns CAN "work", though at an enormous cost. "Work" here means that they can at least in some cases stop the spread in the short term. It does not mean that they are necessarily a viable medium term or long term strategy. How long they "work" seems to be a function of how transmissible the sickness is from person to person.
This is perhaps not surprising because the article seems to mostly be referring to a mythical China image projected in the West rather than to the real China.
Let's hope you are wrong! The Shanghai government has been steering an independent course for a while now, so perhaps it's not surprising that it is adopting a wait and see attitude?
True. Since we can be fairly sure that almost no-one in Shanghai (or China in general for that matter) is willing to go back to being poor, I think we all know which of those alternatives is going to win out in the end.
Perhaps. But we remain optimists. I think that recent events have proven that his is not the only opinion which matters. As we have written before, Chinese are a patient people, but their patience is not unlimited.
Dec 4, 2022·edited Dec 4, 2022Liked by Austrian China
This is clearly not a one man operation as the media would have us believe, there is an entire faction that has substantial military weaponry under its control.
If the rest of the world boycotts China, its going to result in WW3, and perhaps this is already in play.
I admire your optimism, and as you said, the masses surely don't want to revert back to the stone age.
• "make steady progress in prevention and control" – Solution here is to read, understand and implement the Great Barrington Declaration
• "continuously improve diagnosis, testing, admission, isolation and other measures" – the PCR test is not accurate. The inventor of the PCR (Dr. Kary Mullis) said the PCR should never be used as a diagnostic test.
• "strengthen the immunization of the whole population, especially the elderly" – there has never been an effective vaccine against any corona virus. Most attempts have created a condition called ADE(Antibody-dependent enhancement).
• "accelerate the preparation of therapeutic drugs" -- See FLCCC.net for treatment protocols that work.
• "implement the following requirements: “the epidemic must be ‘prevented’" -- without implementing the Great Barrington Declaration or something similar, this is a fool's errand.
BTW, there is no evidence masks prevent the spread of COVID. None. Zero.
I would hesitate to take any of those points very seriously. They look more like window dressing to cover up what is in reality a tacit acknowledgment of the bankruptcy of their previous policies. Judging by the fact that people diagnosed as infected are typically offered no treatment at all, they don't seem to believe their own words. In the recent Guangzhou outbreak with over 160,000 cases only FOUR people were identified as serious cases. No-one died. Their actions hint that they don't believe in the vaccines or masks either. Sign of the times: Many of the local health commissions very publicly removed their masks for press conferences announcing new policies.
I salute the dauntless courage of the protesters across the length & width of the PRC who exclaimed "Enough!" to this incessant--and irrational--biosecurity tyranny.
Slogans, Party Central Committee, State Council reminds me of the days of USSR where I grew up, however not the USSR of the 1980s, but USSR of the late 1970s, under Brezhnev, with one big difference - nobody among people there paid real attention to this crap back then. Why China thinks it is so drastically different from other countries where it needs to fight "great COVID danger" with drastic measures? Why not go about life with understanding that viral infections would always be among us and the only path for a respiratory virus natural development is from a strongly contagious strain with high rates of mortality to a one that is much milder? Doesn't China have enough of smart scientists to explain to the government that mRNA vaccines are not a panacea and just the opposite - they have a negative long term effect on population's health?
In my understanding the situation with fighting COVID in China has an entirely different undercurrents. This is clearly not about health of the population, but about the fight of the two major political clans - nationalist authoritarians closely affiliated with PLA (People's Liberation Army) where Xi Jinping is a key figure now and the liberal forces affiliated with CYLC (Communist Youth League of China) that maintains a close relationship with US Democratic party. Highest ranking official representing that clan today is prime minister Li Keqiang. But most of the fight is happening not at the very top, where it resembles a dog fight under a carpet, but this is an open fight at the local level where local leaders are trying to stir population's discontent with central authorities, especially after defeat of the liberal wing by the PLA clan at the 20th Congress of CCP.
Overall we can see, China is following Globalist's plans to a tee and has now become the world's testing ground including the limits to which population tolerance to authoritarian measures can be pushed. I think no matter which clan will have the upper hand in China, principle of following the Globalists' directives will remain intact.
Thus far there is no hint of an approval in the pipeline for mRNA vaccines. Likewise, I don't think China suffers from a lack of scientists (or people for that matter!) with a low opinion of the decisions taken by the government. The problem was not a lack of knowledge but rather a weakness of hearing on the part of the big chief in Beijing. This past week it seems someone flipped on his hearing aid.
True about mRNA vaccines - none came to market in China yet. I wasn't sure about that. So thanks for pointing this out.
Not certain if you saw this, but there was an interesting article in Off Guardian on why China is acting the way it does with COVID measures: https://off-guardian.org/2022/12/01/the-real-reason-behind-chinas-zero-covid-policy/ . They also look at political and geopolitical reasons, not population's health, as main cause for the zero-covid policy in China. One thing in your article I definitely agree with is that what we see on the ground in China with exaggerated reaction to "cases" by local authorities is not the indicator of the strength of the central government, but is rather the opposite, indication of their weakness that allows local authorities to pursue their own policies that allow them to reach their goals, whatever those might be.
The author Kit Knightly's hypotheses regarding the role assigned to China by the internal Western spinmasters seem plausible. Some of his other claims are more debatable, e.g.
- We know it’s not because Covid is a real disease.
- We know it’s not because lockdowns work.
- We know it’s not because the Chinese government holds the lives of their citizens as more precious than their Western counterparts.
- We know it’s not because they were the victim of some bio-engineered viral attack by the West.
The author may "know" these things, but I don't think he would find much agreement to any of these claims in China. Just to cite one, the data FROM CHINA clearly show that lockdowns CAN "work", though at an enormous cost. "Work" here means that they can at least in some cases stop the spread in the short term. It does not mean that they are necessarily a viable medium term or long term strategy. How long they "work" seems to be a function of how transmissible the sickness is from person to person.
This is perhaps not surprising because the article seems to mostly be referring to a mythical China image projected in the West rather than to the real China.
Misleading title!
Accurate summary of events, yet this false retreat is only temporary. (nothing has changed here in Shanghai)
They have taken names and will be back for blood, if historical precedent has any say.
Let's hope you are wrong! The Shanghai government has been steering an independent course for a while now, so perhaps it's not surprising that it is adopting a wait and see attitude?
Shanghai is the model example that the rest of China often gets forced to emulate.
Intended to replace Hong Kong as a financial center in Asia.
Martial law and economic prosperity don't mix very well.
True. Since we can be fairly sure that almost no-one in Shanghai (or China in general for that matter) is willing to go back to being poor, I think we all know which of those alternatives is going to win out in the end.
Dear Leader would rather grind his "people" into bloody bits than relinquish control.
Kill the chicken to scare the monkey!
Shanghainese people are ripe for slaughter, possibly even more so after recent events.
Perhaps. But we remain optimists. I think that recent events have proven that his is not the only opinion which matters. As we have written before, Chinese are a patient people, but their patience is not unlimited.
This is clearly not a one man operation as the media would have us believe, there is an entire faction that has substantial military weaponry under its control.
If the rest of the world boycotts China, its going to result in WW3, and perhaps this is already in play.
I admire your optimism, and as you said, the masses surely don't want to revert back to the stone age.
• "make steady progress in prevention and control" – Solution here is to read, understand and implement the Great Barrington Declaration
• "continuously improve diagnosis, testing, admission, isolation and other measures" – the PCR test is not accurate. The inventor of the PCR (Dr. Kary Mullis) said the PCR should never be used as a diagnostic test.
• "strengthen the immunization of the whole population, especially the elderly" – there has never been an effective vaccine against any corona virus. Most attempts have created a condition called ADE(Antibody-dependent enhancement).
• "accelerate the preparation of therapeutic drugs" -- See FLCCC.net for treatment protocols that work.
• "implement the following requirements: “the epidemic must be ‘prevented’" -- without implementing the Great Barrington Declaration or something similar, this is a fool's errand.
BTW, there is no evidence masks prevent the spread of COVID. None. Zero.
I would hesitate to take any of those points very seriously. They look more like window dressing to cover up what is in reality a tacit acknowledgment of the bankruptcy of their previous policies. Judging by the fact that people diagnosed as infected are typically offered no treatment at all, they don't seem to believe their own words. In the recent Guangzhou outbreak with over 160,000 cases only FOUR people were identified as serious cases. No-one died. Their actions hint that they don't believe in the vaccines or masks either. Sign of the times: Many of the local health commissions very publicly removed their masks for press conferences announcing new policies.