The viewer/reader is confronted with Catch Phrases masquerading as descriptive of Thought. E.g., ‘The Closing of the American Mind’, ‘The Clash of Civilizations’ , ‘The End of History and the Last Man’, ‘Tenured Radicals’, ‘Illiberal Education’ , ‘The Right Nation’, ‘The Thucydides Trap’ , ‘The Coddling of the American Mind’ , ’12 Rules for Life’ ‘The Boy Crisis’ the latest expression, in this genre, that looks at boys in an increasing ‘Feminized World’? Too many would be Technocrats,of the Human Endeavor, diagnosing what is wrong with us! The descriptive wedded to the prescriptive, that seeks to emancipate us from our ‘condition’ ! Its as if Kant’s imperative of self-emancipation from tutelage, was never thought, nor written down, as a reference point : ‘”Out of the crooked timber of humanity no straight thing was ever made” (Aus so krummem Holze, als woraus der Mensch gemacht ist, kann nichts ganz Gerades gezimmert werden)!
Queer Atheist
Peterson is always a defender of The Patriarchy, in all of its incarnations. So the ‘Boy Crises’ and ‘Gender Politics’ are an integral to the Conservative World View, that marries politics/culture/gender into a seamless garment. The only problem is his penchant for Jungian Archetypes, as his binding agent, it resembles 19th Century phrenology. Freud and Jung represent both opportunism and ambition. The Age of Depth Psychology in all its iterations is no more!
In his his essay of April 13, 2021, Mr. Ganesh proclaimes ‘A raucously free society is hard to mobilise against a rival in a lasting way’ ! He riffs on ‘rugged individualism’ ,in his surprising lack of mastery of American self-congratulatory sloganeering ! Note, that not one day later, in his newspaper, reports this :
Headline: Biden imposes tough new sanctions against Moscow
Sub-headline: Measures include restrictions on Russia’s sovereign debt market and expulsion of diplomats
Biden and his advisors Blinken, Nuland (Neo-Con) , Power (R2P Zealot), etc. , etc . are waging The New Cold with the ferocity of Neo-Cons! Having no experience with waging actual war, combat ,has made this alliance between Neo-Liberals, Neo-Cons, and an R2P Zealot, a threat to Humanity!!!
Even framed by Mr. Ganesh’s potted history of America’s Old Cold War, and the mention of Kennan, but not his ‘The Long Telegram’ nor his ‘Mr. X article’, this reader finds his whole article lacks anything like a viable case that The New Cold War is not at full cry, even in his own newspaper. This headline speaks volumes as to an argued political sophistication, of American citizens: ‘The US is too changed since the cold war to repeat it’ Here are a set of ‘reviews and assessments’ of Kennan’s career, and the evolution of his thought’s on his ‘Containment Theory’
The Journal of Cold War Studies Volume 15,Number 4 of the Fall of 2013 offers this:
FORUM: George F. Kennan and the Cold War: Perspectives on John Gaddis’s Biography
Gone is the use of the telling aphorisms, and other Ganesh rhetorical signatures. It reads like low political comedy, that demands, deserves more focused application of serious thought!
Thank you for your thoughtful comment. Yet this, ‘The author penned an observation. This was not an essay or thesis.’ , doesn’t quite match the evidence of the essays’ intent, which was to declare that a New Cold War can’t exist , argued ,absent Mr. Ganesh’s usual curlicues, to borrow from Auden, …
Yet the fact of Biden’s comment on Putin, goaded by Stephanopoulos: Note that Biden attacks Putin, framed theologically, utterly preposterous, almost comic if …
…
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Director of National Intelligence came out with a report today saying that Vladimir Putin authorized operations during the election to under — denigrate you, support President Trump, undermine our elections, divide our society. What price must he pay?
PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: He will pay a price. I, we had a long talk, he and I, when we — I know him relatively well. And I– the conversation started off, I said, “I know you and you know me. If I establish this occurred, then be prepared.”
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: You said you know he doesn’t have a soul.
PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: I did say that to him, yes. And — and his response was, “We understand one another.” It was– I wasn’t being a wise guy. I was alone with him in his office. And that — that’s how it came about. It was when President Bush had said, “I looked in his eyes and saw his soul.”
I said, “Looked in your eyes and I don’t think you have a soul.” And looked back and he said, “We understand each other.” Look, most important thing dealing with foreign leaders in my experience, and I’ve dealt with an awful lot of ’em over my career, is just know the other guy. Don’t expect somethin’ that you’re– that — don’t expect him to– or her to– voluntarily appear in the second editions of Profiles in Courage.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: So you know Vladimir Putin. You think he’s a killer?
PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: Uh-huh. I do.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: So what price must he pay?
PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: The price he’s gonna pay we’ll– you’ll see shortly. I’m not gonna– there’s– by the way, we oughta be able that ol’ — that trite expression “walk and chew gum at the same time,” there’re places where it’s in our mutual interest to work together.
Biden and Blinken are still operating on the notion that Trump was the political creature of Putin. In sum ‘soft on Putin’. as the in order too of an utterly misbegotten the Biden/Blinken strategy of ‘getting tough’ on both China and Russia. This a demonstration that the fictional ‘Russia Interference’ in the 2016 election still lives and breathes as political subtext!
Even considering Mr. Ganesh’s rhetorical gifts, he like Jonathan Freedland, writes political fiction, in service to a respectable bourgeoise politics!
Oct 25, 2019 · France is already overshooting the treaty limit in 2019. The budget deficit at 3.1% of GDP is because of the extra spending ordered by Macron a year ago to help him tackle the “yellow jackets”…
Dec 27, 2018 · Paris had to admit last week that its budget deficit next year is set to stand at around 3.2 percent, which is 0.4 percent more than initially expected and higher than the three percent that the European Union deficit rules allow. The forecast comes following weeks of nationwide anti-fuel tax hikes and anti-Macron protests, that forced the French leader to announce wage increases for the poorest workers and a tax cut for most pensioners
Dec 18, 2018 · These measures will push the fiscal deficit for 2019 from a forecast 2.8 percent to almost 3.5 percent of GDP. The European Commission must now prepare a report under Article 126(3) of the 20-year-old Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to assess the case for launching an EDP against France.
In the November document, the EU executive said the French budgetary plan was “at risk of non-compliance” with EUrules because instead of improving the structural deficit by 0.6 percent of …
Oct 24, 2018 · In the case of France, the 2019 budget plan sees its structural deficit (the difference between spending and revenues, excluding one-off items) falling 0.1 percent this year and 0.3 percent in..
Jan 20, 2019 · Rome lowered its deficit target for 2019 to 2.04% from a previous 2.4%, which the EU had rejected as an “unprecedented” breach of the bloc’s rules, and Brussels held off on a disciplinary …
Mr Rachman offers this opinion on a Coal and Steel Cartel that evolved into the E.U. Technocrat Supreme Jean Monnet’s vision, and a check on the Soviets!
…
Scepticism about the EU’s long-term future is persistent, nonetheless. It may stem partly from the organisation’s unique nature. It is an international organisation with many of the characteristics of a state, including a currency, a parliament, a supreme court and a central bank. This hybrid nature of the EU invites outsiders, used to dealing with nation-states, to regard the EU as unnatural, or even deformed and therefore an obvious candidate for an early death, like a human born with its organs in the wrong place.
…
Perhaps Mr. Rachman should consult Bernard Connolly’s ‘The Rotten Heart of Europe’ revised 2012 edition, for an insider’s view of the E.U.
The Collection of Villains:
Marine Le Pen, Matteo Salvini, Viktor Orban, Poland ( Andrzej Duda doesn’t rate a mention? He’s part of a team that makes their own rules? See the first party of my essay. ) , China and Russia (The New Cold War)
A sign of hope? ‘Opinion polls show that young people are more pro-EU than older voters.’
The reader didn’t get a potent political drama in the hands of a Sidney Lumet, but the melodramatic kitsch of a Douglas Sirk!
Ganesh makes the argument that only Joe Biden, rather that Bernie Sanders, ‘can govern from the left’. Its ‘as if’ the Keynesianism of Bush The Younger has escaped Ganesh’s a-historical attention?
Mr. Luce opines about the ‘obstacles’ that stand in the way of the president’s infrastructure bill. These paragraphs, of his essay, features his former employer Larry Summers.
…
Nobody can be sure whether Biden’s roughly $5tn in new spending will lead to runaway inflation. Lawrence Summers, the former US Treasury secretary, puts the risk of inflation at about a third. He gives the same odds to the prospect that America will continue to enjoy non-inflationary growth. For what it is worth, the US bond market’s inflation expectations have leapt in the past few weeks. But neither the bond markets nor most economists foresaw the era of inflation that began in the late 1960s or the “great moderation” that replaced it in the 1980s.
…
Which leads to the odd situation where both the centrist Summers and the socialist Bernie Sanders are saying almost the same thing. Sanders believes Biden’s infrastructure bill is far too small. Summers believes the stimulus was far too big. Both may be right at the same time. It is worth stressing that investment spending is less inflationary than stimulus as, in principle, it boosts long-term productivity growth.
…
How much loyalty, to a former employer does a former employee owe? Larry Summers is not a ‘Centrist’, but an unapologetic Neo-Liberal, who was an enthusiastic proponent of the catastrophic Gramm-Leach-Bliley. The debt to former employers has to be paid? Not to forget Mr. Summers comments on women in Science. Here is a report on his weaseling self-apologetic:
SUMMERS: We should put money into the economy. The question is how much. If your bathtub isn’t full, you should turn the faucet on, but that doesn’t mean you should turn it on as hard as you can and as long as you can. And so the question isn’t whether we need big stimulus. The question is, do we need the biggest stimulus in American history? It’s the overall scale of the stimulus and it’s whether we’re using any of it to build a stronger economy or just to give money to people.
Mr. Summers has demonstrated his utter incompetence, in matters Economic, and his impolitic opinions, on matters outside the sphere of his vaunted ‘expertise’. A vexing question occurs to this writer: when will Ganesh, Luce and Summers call for the imposition of Austerity, as the necessary intervention, to maintain an ‘Economic homeostasis’? Its only a matter of time!
Mr. Crenshaw manages the shot-gun wedding of the year: the Neo-Liberal Trinity of Hayek/Mises/Friedman to the self-hating, hysterical American Divine Johnathan Edwards’ ‘Sinner in the Hands of an Angry God’! Neo-Liberalism marries Christianity with Mr. Crenshaw officiating. The Estate of ‘Man’ : suffering/redemption, with Government standing watch, declaring its neutrality, in this dull-witted Social Darwinist Melodrama. (Pamphleteer Ayn Rand waits off-stage)
Macron’s signature ‘Jupertarian Politics’ is the deadest of dead letters! He (M. 37%) has stumbled over his own egoism, and his toxic ambition to lead the foundering EU, Neo-Liberalism’s in all its ghostly apparitions, has stalled in answer to The Pandemic . But Victor Mallet repeats the Party Line on Macron and the gilets jaune. The violence of the French Police, against demonstrators, has been well documented, except on Corp. Media, who act as apologists for Macron’s ‘reforms’.
…
Macron’s signature economic reforms, for example to the costly state pension and unemployment benefits systems, have also been stopped in their tracks by the pandemic. Those reforms had already been challenged by the sometimes violent anti-government gilets jaunes protests that erupted across the country in 2018 and persisted for more than a year, but they had appealed to many of the country’s centre-right voters.
By keeping the reforms on his to-do list, Macron alienates many working-class voters, and by failing to follow through with them he alienates entrepreneurs and much of the middle class. Significantly, many gilets jaunes protesters at the start of the movement were Le Pen supporters from outside Paris, even if some of the later demonstrations were taken over by anarchists and supporters of the far left.
These protests have continued every Saturday, and haven’t been reported in this newspaper, an impediment to the worship to this incompetent énarque . Twitter is a ‘source’ antithetical’ to Corp. Media?
Macron once looked like the political actor, who would eviserate French Socialism. Here is Neo-Con Bret Stephens in 2017, in The New York Times, in thrall to his own infatuation with the ‘reformer’ Macron.
Here is a telling part of Ben Hall’s essay on Macron:
…
It was always hard to slot Emmanuel Macron into a political category. He ascended the pinnacle of the French state as a party outsider who went beyond left and right while borrowing from both. “En même temps” turned into an early trademark. Progressive on cultural issues and a critic of the over-weaning state, Macron has never been the true liberal foreigners saw or wanted to see.
Now, nearly four years into his presidency, it is harder than ever to identify the essence of Macronism. But the question of what he stands for is becoming ever more pressing. In little over a year, France will be in the midst of another polarising presidential election campaign. In all likelihood, it will end in a repeat of 2017’s run-off between Macron and the far-right leader Marine Le Pen. If November’s election was a pivotal moment for US democracy, next year’s contest will determine the fate of the Fifth Republic and probably survival of the EU if an ultranationalist like Le Pen took over the Elysée Palace.
Mr. Ganesh employs his talent for aphorism, here, for a remarkable assertion, wrapped in a pastiche of that rhetorical gift. Or is it the product of the headline writers? The reader might just ask many questions and consider many avenues of thought…
At some point, these figures become less striking than Biden’s ability to propose them without political cost. More than a decade ago, Republicans framed President Barack Obama as a spendthrift radical for vastly less. Against Biden, the same line of attack elicits more giggles than nods.
Should the reader look to Bush The Younger’s Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson’s approach to the Crash of 2008, and his adaptation of Keynesianism? A crisis of massive proportions demands both swift action and policy flexibility? The Pandemic is a catastrophe: 30,532,965 cases and 554,064 deaths according to the CDC. At 77 Biden had better secure ‘his legacy’ with bold and decisive action : forgetting that $2000 and the $15 minimum wage?
Mr. Ganesh opines on ‘troubled Progressives’ which is the stand-in for ‘The Left’ ?
If they care to notice, there is a lesson here for troubled progressives in Westminster, Paris, Berlin, Canberra and beyond. Only an established moderate can win from the left and then govern from there.
Biden then acts as ‘outwardly innocuous a leader’ : the heroic political actor of Ganesh’s political imaginings? Does Ganesh stand for or against the Progressive Agenda, if it is consonant with The Left Political Program: if that can even be defined by its antagonist? Or is Mr. Ganesh engaging in some word play, just fancy foot-work, that might just pass for political analysis? Which by some form of ‘logic’, as the in order to win, via this scenario, constructed by Ganesh: the Left/Progressives coterie must put forward an innocuous candidate? Mr. Ganesh is not deterred by such ‘logical‘ demands!
The more outwardly innocuous a leader, the bolder the schemes they can smuggle under cover of superficial blandness. Journalists never see them coming. Voters back them not to over-reach. Opponents who allege extremism radiate an unbecoming hysteria.
If anything, Biden is one of the less vivid examples of this phenomenon. What stands out about the greatest US reformers of the last century is how fantastically improbable they were.
A history made to measure relying on American and British sources , follows featuring FDR. Then these two paragraphs attaching two Left-Wing Social Democrats, as exemplars of his reviled ‘Left’, are given a strategic walk-ons. Except that Warren didn’t drop out of the 2020 contest even though she only received eight delegates, in her home state. And her declaration that she was ‘a Capitalists to her bones’ places her in the Neo-Liberal category. In sum Warren entered the Clinton Coterie by doing its dirty work! Mr. Ganesh unctuous prose, enlivened by near paradoxes can’t quite match the headline. Propaganda is about serving evocative political purposes, here this writer almost makes it work
As long as the one emits a Tuscan-tanned perkiness, and the other daunting intensity, the misperception will hold. Such are the heuristics with which our erring species forms some of its deepest judgments.
To wish away the superficiality of politics is itself frivolous. The point is to bend it in one’s favour. Consciously or not, Biden is putting on a masterclass. We can never know, but I suspect he is spending more than a President Bernie Sanders or a President Elizabeth Warren could have done as out-and-proud leftists. Even that is to assume the White House was ever plausibly theirs for the taking.
In Andy’s essay of 1,599 words, the pronoun ‘I’ is used 44 times and ‘me’ 10 times. This essay is not just about Andy’s returning to Worship, after the Covid-19 Pandemic, but a retrospective on the failings of that Church during the AIDS crisis, and the denial, obfuscation, not to speak of criminal conspiracy to protect pedophile priests.
Its the anguished, bewildered cry of one betrayed, who continues his addiction or can’t leave an abusive relationship! The reader can name their own descriptors. It’s as if Andy, for all his ‘expertise’ , his ‘knowledge’, all self-proclaimed, had missed Kant’s well known imperative of ‘self-emancipation from tutelage‘?
The featured players in Andy’s Psychodrama: Cardinal McCarrick, Cardinal Wuerl, Christopher Hitchens, Michael Oakeshott, Jean Cocteau, Gallup, Millennials, psychedelic drugs, Prosperity Gospel, evangelical Christianity, Christianity, the Capitol, Eric Metaxas, GOP, organized Christianity in America, wokeness, Manichean, the individual soul, confessions of sin, the Kingdom of Anti-Racism, pseudo-religions will fail, transcendent/redemptive, Christianity/humility/conviction.
Headline: A Clash of Civilizations with Chinese Characteristics
Sub-headline: A civilizational struggle of the “rest” versus the West articulated by Mao Zedong and embraced by Xi Jinping is at the very core of the ideological foundations of the grand strategy of the Chinese Communist Party.
The author of this essay: Wesley Jefferies is a graduate student at the Walsh School of Foreign Service’s Security Studies Program at Georgetown University in Washington, DC. Is Mr. Jefferies following the time honored tradition, of cultivating the favor of his teachers, and adapting to the current climate of opinion, of the Foreign Policy Security Experts, who will judge his academic worthiness to receive a Degree in ‘Foreign Service’s Security Studies’ ? It seems like the obvious question. The reader should consider the cost of pursuing a post-graduate degree of such a specialized area of study. In line with that, the establishment of your political credentials seems the paramount consideration?
‘The Clash’ has lain fallow for sometime, Prof. Huntington’s hysterical xenophobia, all dressed in World Historical finery reads just like what it is, a paranoid screech against the ‘other’ that threatens the hegemony of Pax Americana. Even though later in his essay he denies the ‘othering’ of the Chinese.
This sentence :
‘The central problem of these analogies that they all refer to competition between powers or systems of Western origin. The rise of China poses conceptual and strategic challenges that do not lend themselves to ready-made analogies from the official canon of Western military and diplomatic history.’
And the next sentence:
The conceptual and geopolitical dimensions of the Chinese threat are not accounted for the historical and theoretical explanations to which Western scholars and commentators are accustomed.
‘The rise of China’ in all its benignity, is followed by ‘the Chinese threat’: propaganda must always appear to be benign, in Mr. Jefferies hands it is self-canceling? Yet the last iteration of what ‘China is’ in ‘conceptual and geo-political terms’ is ‘threat’ the most likely to be recalled is that final term.
What precedes this is a collection of cliché’s : The Cold War, The Great Game, the so called Thucydides Trap, as ways of providing rhetorical ballast to his essay, by mere reference, rather than an actual consideration-in sum-a of presentation of relevant arguments. Should the critical reader dub this pseudo-knowledge, as maladroit a descriptor as I could produce in the moment!
What follows is a potted history of the geopolitical outcomes of world wars: decolonization. Here is Mr. Jefferies dizzying historical reductionism:
The most significant geopolitical outcome of the world wars was decolonization. The most dynamic and deadly manifestations of the competition between the new superpowers that emerged after the world wars occurred in the contested spaces left behind by the former empires. The most dynamic and deadly manifestations of the competition between the new superpowers that emerged after the world wars occurred in the contested spaces left behind by the former empires. What was once the greatest prize among these spoils has become the largest player among them and the character of its resulting challenge to world order represents the axis of contemporary geopolitics. A civilizational struggle of the “rest” versus the West articulated by Mao and embraced by Xi is at the very core of the ideological foundations of the grand strategy of the Chinese Communist Party.
The titles of the successive parts of this essay are illustrative of Mr. Jefferies ‘methodology’. I will select from the essay what captures the reader’s attention. I will treat this essay as propaganda.
Mao’s Revolution and the Rise of the Third World:
This section is devoted to a made to measure history of China, in the International System. And its participation in the colonial and post colonial eras.
…
The paradoxical interplay between China’s superiority complex as a former empire and victim mentality as post-colonial framed a set of ambitions and grievances for Mao that would set him at odds with the superpowers. The first task at hand for Mao, as the leader of this emerging colossus caught between the superpowers, would be to secure freedom of action in a bipolar system. The second task would be to leverage China’s sovereignty and status to claim a position as leader and champion of the post-colonial spaces over which the superpowers were competing for influence. This, in turn, would lay the ground for the third task of world revolution, in which colonialism, as much as class struggle, would be a theme. China would regain a central place in international affairs through this process. In other words, world revolution would be the vehicle for world domination.
…
The Rise of Xi and the “Rest” versus the West:
…
The relationship between the United States and China that emerged after the Sino-Soviet split has similarly encountered tensions and contradictions following the end of the Cold War. Mao’s vision of geopolitics has seen its greatest comeback under the highly personalized rule of Xi Jinping. A civilizational-scale challenge from the CCP has now emerged that goes beyond simply competing with U.S. strategic and commercial interests.
China under Xi is emulating Mao’s call for Chinese leadership of the ‘rest’ against the West while simultaneously working to undermine the societies and institutions of Western countries. The former has been articulated by Xi Jinping’s argument that the Chinese model of government and development is a better example for developing countries than the West because it will “speed up their development while preserving their independence” from Western influence. The latter is manifested by the use of corruption, espionage, and disinformation by agents of the CCP, including Chinese academic researchers and business ventures, in what FBI Director Christopher Wray described as “a whole-of-society threat” posed by Beijing.
…
The Geopolitical Axis of the Clash of Civilizations:
…
Since the original thesis for a ‘clash of civilizations’ was popularized by Bernard Lewis and Samuel Huntington as a prediction for the international system after the end of the Cold War, it has become deeply controversial and unfashionable to suggest that ideas and perceptions about culture and identity might play a role in future tensions and conflicts. U.S. diplomat and scholar Kiron Skinner drew intense criticism for suggesting in 2019 that the wider civilizational gulf that exists between China and the United States than between the United States and the USSR would require a vastly different understanding and approach than what was applied to the Soviet threat.
The purpose for this focus is not “othering” the CCP or the billion and a half people subject to its rule. It is to reveal the “center of gravity” through which China under the rule of Xi seeks to displace the West and thus point to where and how U.S. strategy must change.
…
Mr. Huntington’s ‘Clash’ was a political document predicated upon an hysterical xenophobia, of World Historical proportions. This followed by his ‘Who Are We? The Challenges to America’s National Identity’ It is an attack on the Mestizo Hordes that are threatening Anglo-Protestant Virtue. Call Mr. Huntington a white supremacist with an impressive set of academic credentials.
The ‘Clash’ available on the internet: The version printed in Foreign Affairs ; New York; Summer 1993; Huntington, Samuel P; (9 pages)
I read this essay, thanks to one of the Librarians , at the Angelo M. Iacoboni Library in Lakewood California. She printed out a copy of the essay, whose link is above. This essay seemed bloated when I first read, in this form, and the book remains on my shelf ,unread. Fukuyama’s ‘End of History’ essay suffered from the same rhetorical malady! The ‘critics’ swooned over the mention of Hegel.
The ‘Reverse Kissinger’ is the high point of Mr. Jefferies remaining ‘history made to measure’:
…
.For similar reasons, the United States must also consider the urgent necessity for exploring options for a modus vivendi with the Russian Federation. The “reverse Kissinger” proposed by some astute writers and commentators should be considered more seriously by policymakers. Washington should see the opportunity in the risks the CCP’s ambitions in Central Asia and the Middle East pose to a Russia facing demographic decline and long vulnerable borders. What the United States has been doing instead has been adopting a punitive approach to the only country in Europe that could still conceivably balance against China. If a “grand bargain” can be reached with the Russian Federation regarding its deep-seated insecurities about its territorial integrity and historically precarious borders in Eastern Europe, as well as lingering concerns in the Kremlin over U.S. attempts to promote regime change in Russia, there will be fewer grounds for Russian leaders to convince a domestic audience that the real threat lies to the West.
…
Surprising this reader, Mr. Jefferies advocates an alliance with Modi :
The United States should also be working for a closer partnership with India. It is the only country with a population that may exceed China’s, as well as untapped economic potential that could rival what has been achieved in China since the reforms of Deng Xiaoping. For this to work, Washington must be willing to fully support the reform agenda of Narendra Modi to overcome the myriad obstacles India faces in exploiting its domestic talent and demographic advantages. A closer alignment between India and the United States would also strike at the heart of the “rest versus the West” dynamic that lies at the ideological core of the CCP’s grand strategy.
Mr. Jefferies shares this idea with Janan Ganesh of The Financial Times of March 30. 2021. Although Ganesh looks upon it as a hypothetical.
‘As for the largest potential friendship of all, that with India, is there anything Prime Minister Narendra Modi could do there to make the US spurn so grand a prize?
StephenKMackSD's Blog 