X Close

Car dealers will decide America’s future The nation's gentry could finish Trump's revolution

Kurt Russell in Used Cars (Columbia Pictures)

Kurt Russell in Used Cars (Columbia Pictures)


March 28, 2024   7 mins

Ohio Republicans have a new candidate for US Senator: Bernie Moreno, who was endorsed by Donald Trump over establishment-backed Matt Dolan. With Moreno’s victory in last week’s hotly contested primary, the party’s MAGA faction has further entrenched its hold on this pivotal Midwestern state, with its large share of factory towns and labour voters. And should Moreno prevail over the Democratic incumbent Sherrod Brown in November, he would go on to join Ohio’s sitting Junior Senator J.D. Vance, probably the most intellectually sophisticated champion of America First nationalism in Congress.

Such a pairing would make for a politically fertile synthesis: while Vance built his electoral brand on his working-class roots, Moreno has advertised himself with a more traditional set of Republican credentials — namely those of a small businessman or, to be more precise, a car dealership owner.

Between these two poles, the outline of a post-realignment GOP may be sketched. Where the Reagan coalition of the Eighties united Wall Street with Main Street business (with some working class defectors), the emergent Trump coalition of the 2020s and beyond will be different. Because of the exodus of the corporate and college-educated segments of America to the Democrats, it will most likely be composed of a more solid pool of working-class voters allied with the petit-bourgeois class of the red-state and hinterland regions, sometimes known as the “American gentry” and stereotypically represented as rock-ribbed conservative car dealers, like Moreno. Yet while much ink has been spilled trying to understand the mindset of the MAGA working class (Vance’s 2016 bestseller Hillbilly Elegy was about precisely the kind of people who would go on to vote for Trump), comparatively little attention has been paid to the Bernie Morenos of America.

A 2023 account of these car dealers by Slate’s Alexander Sammon recounts the awesome scale of their collective wealth and influence on Republican politics: “Auto dealers are one of the five most common professions among the top 0.1%”; they (along with other gentry professions like gas station owners and building contractors) make up “a majority of the country’s 140,000 Americans who earn more than $1.58 million per year”; members of the industry association donate to Republicans “at a rate of 6-to-1”, through which they have worked “to write and rewrite laws to protect dealers and sponsor sympathetic politicians in all 50 states”. Such figures help to make sense of Moreno’s and his fellow car dealers’ status as the cream of the crop among America’s local elites.

Coverage of the gentry more generally diverges along partisan lines: Right-wing commentators usually praise their innate cultural conservatism and strong attachment to place, while Left-wing and libertarian critics decry what they see as the reactionary and racket-like nature of their enterprise, built as it is on intensive lobbying efforts to ensure their entrenched positions as middlemen standing between manufacturers and consumers. Given their political weight, it is surprising to see the dearth of analysis on the future trajectory of this class (other than prophecies that anticipate their extinction) in the context of debates about the fate of the US auto industry, not to mention the role this gentry should play as the Republican coalition lurches away from the Reaganite consensus.

Indeed, a case can be made that the central question for the future of conservatism revolves around this class. It is not whether they will embrace a populist-nationalist political outlook — this much should already be clear to any observer of American politics in the last eight years — but whether they will become populist-nationalist in their economic preferences as well? For beneath their reputation as regressive opponents of change, it should be remembered that it was this unheralded elite of small-town millionaires who came out early and overwhelmingly for Trump in 2016, rejecting free-market orthodoxy and legitimising previously heretical stances on trade and the need to re-industrialise. It was to their ears as local elites spread out across the country that Trump’s incessant calls for rebuilding America’s “bridges, tunnels, freeways, and airports 
 our great plants and factories” were most resonant.

In other words, by anointing a brash New York City businessman as their tribune, it was the gentry that arguably did the most to light the spark of the populist-nationalist revolution, though a combination of inertia and diversion prevented a fully-fledged nationalist programme from taking shape when Trump was in office. However, in the years ahead, a more forceful break with laissez-faire policy on their part along with an embrace of state-guided industrial policy would bring them into much closer convergence with the material interests of the working class, and should actually enable Republicans to follow through on the promise that launched Trump’s insurgency: to restore America’s strength and prosperity by bringing industry back to the heartlands. But it remains to be seen how a conservative class of provincial entrepreneurs can be made to support a nationally-directed interventionist agenda.

Turning to history will reveal that it isn’t as much of a long-shot as it seems: after all, it was small business elites — not unlike today’s gentry — who fuelled American industrialisation in the late-18th to 19th centuries under the banners of the Federalist, Whig, and early Republican parties, when the term “nationalist” meant precisely support for the federal government’s role in directing modernising investments toward the country’s developing regions and frontiers. Henry Clay’s “American System” was the most ambitious expression of this philosophy, and later served as the inspiration for Abraham Lincoln’s programme for reshaping of the American economic order during the Civil War. But what would be the equivalent programme for revitalising today’s moribund post-industrial economy?

The answer may have to do with Trump’s unexpected and ingenious proposal, made during a speech at a Moreno rally in Dayton, of letting Chinese firms build car factories in America as the only way around a new 100% tariff wall he’d place for Chinese cars made elsewhere. This would seem to contradict his image as the ultimate China hawk. But as David P. Goldman points out, Trump is a dealmaker first and foremost, and his idea (coverage of which was lost amid furor over Trump’s “bloodbath” comments from the same day) would not only diffuse Sino-American tensions but deliver benefits to US workers, consumers, the auto industry (in the long-term), and yes, the car dealer gentry. The Chinese themselves are in need of new markets, and as Politico reports, for them, “the United States market is the holy grail”.

Trump has claimed, under this proposal, US workers would get to work in the car factories, though the scale of automation involved and the advanced skill set required could mean that most of the existing American workforce may not be qualified enough to man such factories. In any event, manufacturing would still create lots of “spillover” jobs in the communities that receive the factories. Just as American consumers would, of course, benefit from access to the latest Chinese EV models — such as the BYD Seagull.

The auto industry, meanwhile, despite having to deal with fierce new Chinese competition initially, would nonetheless be able to, as Goldman put it “appropriate their IP the way they appropriated ours”. This may sound like a flippant statement, but historically this is how catch-up industrialisation worked, through subtle processes of IP transfer from the more advanced to the less advanced economies, in which case a new cycle would just be repeating itself — this time, to America’s advantage. Or as Goldman wrote: “It’s easier to let [China] bring industrial automation to the United States than to try to catch up after the fact. That’s the path of least resistance, and one that Trump has opened up.” (Though as a means of cushioning the effect of China’s market entry, its factories could be brought in at a controlled pace and assigned to limited geographic areas so as not to overwhelm domestic competition totally.)

“The American gentry started the Trumpian populist-nationalist revolution: they may yet be the ones to finish it.”

But the greatest beneficiaries may be the car dealers, who, in this scheme, would be the ones to sell Chinese cars to consumers. In theory, car dealers should be able to sell EVs such as the Seagull the same way they sell gasoline-powered cars, but in practice, it hasn’t worked out that way because of a number of factors, namely the more expensive costs of servicing EVs and lack of available technical expertise. This is why Moreno and the gentry have been consistently hostile to EVs; and it also doesn’t help that Tesla has sought to market its models directly to buyers through online sales.

But there is another instructive example from the annals of American economic history, namely the state-sponsored mechanisation of agriculture in the New Deal South, where an ultra-conservative local oligarchy profited from state subsidies that allowed them to pay for modern farm equipment, thereby reducing the cost of innovation and helping the semi-feudal South of the Thirties to develop and industrialise. A similar effort to subsidise costs for any EV transition, in which the US government transfers funds and capital assets directly to the dealers, would both accelerate the adoption of new technologies and preserve the civic leadership of the gentry. Such a programme would smooth the economic transition for them— if not the cultural one, which may prove more difficult, given their engrained suspicion of EVs. In any event, electric would still be far off from becoming the mainstream of the US auto industry and will likely co-exist with traditional and hybrid models for some time: but this endangered class would nonetheless be given a chance to not just survive but thrive amid an otherwise disruptive paradigm shift.

Furthermore, the accompanying new infrastructure of such a programme would be incredibly costly, to say the least, and neither the Chinese nor the US government should be expected to foot the entire bill. This is where the state can step in to channel private capital into the underdeveloped regions where the gentry live by setting up such things as infrastructure banks, guidance funds, and shared manufacturing facilities as the pillars of a modern-day equivalent to Henry Clay’s “American System”. Best of all, through such a programme, Washington — under Trump or any future Republican president — could pressure the financial sector to disgorge its hordes of stagnant capital into these new developmental institutions and stimulate re-investment into the heartland. This would, in effect, create a massive wealth transfer from Wall Street to Main Street, reversing the logic of the Reaganite coalition in which Wall Street called all the shots.

Of course, many things would have to go right for this scenario to take place. The Republicans could fumble their chance at leadership and go back to more Paul Ryan-style tax cuts, which would do nothing but enrich increasingly Democratic-aligned corporate America; or they could actually base their policies on the interests of their primary elite constituency, the gentry, along with the working class. Realising this possibility would require a future Senator Moreno to imbibe the heterodox ideology of his colleague J.D. Vance, as he employs his entrepreneurial skills to convince his fellow Republicans to entertain a programme radically different from the free market dogmas of the past. After all, it was the American gentry that started the Trumpian populist-nationalist revolution: they may yet be the ones to finish it.


Michael Cuenco is a writer on policy and politics. He is Associate Editor at American Affairs.
TrueCuencoism

Join the discussion


Rejoignez des lecteurs partageant les mĂȘmes idĂ©es qui soutiennent notre journalisme en devenant abonnĂ©s payants.

Subscribe

To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

25 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mike Doyle
Mike Doyle
2 months ago

A very interesting article. Looking forward to see if there is any truth in its vision of the future.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
2 months ago

Several years from now my state will forbid vehicle dealers to sell anything with an internal combustion engine. Only electric vehicles will be allowed for sale. We will be allowed to keep our old gas/diesel vehicles and can buy one in another state and register it here. so new gas stations will not be built. service stations will retool for electric. tractors, big earth movers, semis, log trucks, RVs, airplanes, fishing vessels, etc. will be things of the past.

Studio Largo
Studio Largo
2 months ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Sounds like Greta Goblin having a fever dream. No wonder your state’s been losing hundreds of thousands of people to other states.

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
2 months ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Time to move, I’d say.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
2 months ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

it’s almost as if elections really do have consequences.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
2 months ago

Maybe car dealers dislike EVs because they sit on their lot forever, and manufacturers are forcing them to make expensive renovations and add charging stations to their dealerships. Or maybe they don’t like the high costs of EVs, and the increased costs of ICE vehicles due to emission reduction offsets.

Having said all this, I thought this was an interesting essay.

Morry Rotenberg
Morry Rotenberg
2 months ago

The idea that the author seems to be all in for, namely EVs being the future of ground transportation demonstrates his misunderstanding of free markets. He obviously doesn’t care for free markets but markets dictated by governments. There is little consumer appetite for EVs since they fill dealers parking lots looking for buyers. It’s not an accident that at the end of the Soviet Union a shoe factory warehouse was full of size 12 men’s shoes.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
2 months ago

Imagine being a small-town car dealer being forced to make millions in renovations for EV sales, such as the installation of fast chargers, even though no one is buying them..

Brian Doyle
Brian Doyle
2 months ago

And who on Earth would ever consider
Placing their future prospects by placing
Their trust (votes ) in the hands
Of ‘ A car salesman ‘
And when the car begins to fall to pieces
As it was designed to do. Then What springs to mind is the
Rise and Fall of The Nazi’s upon whom
A minority of Germans 1st placed their hopes in the hands of a failed Artist
Most of whom them committing suicide as the Soviet tanks and hordes hell bent on revenge were gathering in the outskirts of Berlin
Dreams and Hopes are a entirely different matter than reality

Cantab Man
Cantab Man
2 months ago

This is the first time I’ve heard that used car dealers living in Middle-Of-Nowhere, USA, are actually ‘American Gentry.’ Fascinating.
If you really want to understand middle-America, I’d recommend not spilling more intellectual ink on the subject from London or New York City. Rather, get to know the people themselves.
The best and most plausible reason that Hillary lost to Trump was penned within the month after the 2016 election…before the political spin-meisters could concoct their silly false narratives about Trump Russia Collusion (!!!!) that we talked about for three years before those narratives were utterly debunked.
The penned article was published in the Boston Globe by a very knowledgable research analyst within Hillary Clinton’s team who was getting to know (i.e. speak with) undecided voters in middle America:
“There was one moment when I saw more undecided voters shift to Trump than any other, when it all changed, when voters began to speak differently about their choice. It wasn’t FBI Director James Comey, Part One or Part Two; it wasn’t Benghazi or the e-mails or Bill Clinton’s visit with Attorney General Loretta Lynch on the tarmac. No, the conversation shifted the most during the weekend of Sept. 9, after Clinton said, ‘You can put half of Trump supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables.’
“All hell broke loose.
“[Undecided voter] George told me that his neighborhood was outraged, that many of his hard-working, church-going, family-loving friends resented being called that name. He told me that he looked up the word in the dictionary, and that it meant something so bad that there is no hope, like the aftermath of a tsunami. You know, he said, Clinton ended up being the biggest bully of them all. Whereas Trump bullied her, she bullied Wilkes Barre [his small town in Pennsylvania and its people].
“Things were not the same after that, at least with my voters.
Those who live in less prosperous regions of the United States live with the reality of barely being able to pay the bills each month. They live raw lives in which making a living matters more than the highbrow concerns of the political party you support or if you hold correct views on climate change.
When those on the Left stereotype and demean middle-Americans of any creed or color, the neighbors and towns rise up to defend one of their own. Because they personally know those middle-Americans who are being bullied. And they know that these neighbors (whoever they are) are trying hard to live decent lives, provide for their families and be good citizens.
Until those on the Left decide to stop creating fake bogeymen that represent middle-Americans to them and start to truly get to know as many middle-Americans as they can, they will continue to get it all wrong.

Rick Frazier
Rick Frazier
2 months ago
Reply to  Cantab Man

“Whereas Trump bullied her, she bullied Wilkes Barre [his small town in Pennsylvania and its people]. The one thing I’ll say about Trump is that he doesn’t seem to punch below his weight. If you have a platform as a politician, actor or journalist say, you’re fair game. But I don’t recall him ever denigrating voters who might not vote for him, or voters who did not for him.

Brian Doyle
Brian Doyle
2 months ago

Ah at last a Few members of American elite are awakening to the realities that America is now actually trapped in
And beginning to realise that unless they
Cooperate with China each affording mutual respect for each others cultures,
History , Religions and beliefs
Then the USA like it not must yeild it’s Hegomonic controls and affairs
If not then either

They left totally so far behind and left to
Wither and die by the Rest of the world
( Including their Allies who refuse to come to terms with what is unfolding )

Or by accident or design blunder into
Military conflict with China which for certain shall not end favourably for The USA and Allies who are stupid enough to hold hands with them

Go and actually look and pay attention to
Exactly what President Xi is not only saying but acting out
Furthermore take a look at the Chinese National flag particularly the 4 small yellow stars if you do then you shall realise that
The principles set out for the Stars 1 , 2 and 3 now fullfiled and those of Star 4
Now firmly being implemented and virtually complete
Thereby you shall become truly aware of all I speak off

Please never and even think about War with China because if you do walk the path of War then your demise and defeat and demise certain
China and Xi have all been working with regards all this by as Stated by the Chinese warrior who wrote The Art of Warfare
Whereby at the conclusion of his writing,s he say this
Tis the most clever of Warriors who wins
By merely placing his hand upon his Sword
China is merely saying to America
Do you really want me to place my hand upon my sword
Once more go back to the 4 yellow stars
And should manage to open your closed minds enabling you to comprehend and
Then learn to cooperate if not so then
” It’s Closing Time ” so enjoy yourselves
As you dance upon the table tops whilst
The Ladies tear of their blouses off
And the Whole dam place goes crazy twice
Once with the Devil the other with Christ
Common sense screams at you as to who and what The Devil and Christ are

And China ain’t The Devil

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
2 months ago

Trump’s idea to force the Chinese to build their factories here isn’t new. This is how the Japanese got around the import quotas laid down by Reagan back in the eighties. Back in the eighties there were import quotas on Japanese cars as part of an ongoing trade dispute with Japan that was similar in many respects to the one we are now having with China. The Japanese market was closed to imports and they had heavily subsidized their auto industry (sound familiar?). The quotas were one attempt to force Japan to open its market. They eventually did, but the auto companies themselves got around the problem long before that by building assembly plants in the US and just importing the parts, and since they were building factories in places that hadn’t had factories before, such as the American south, and since the cars themselves were very popular with the people, the whole row just kind of evaporated. Protectionism actually worked. The Japanese invested in the American economy, American workers, and American infrastructure. It was a win win. Trump is clearly angling to force the Chinese into a similar arrangement. That would be lovely but they won’t. Japan was obliged to cooperate for several reasons that don’t apply here. First, the Japanese market was close to American imports entirely so they had very little standing to complain about unfair treatment, but second and more importantly they were militarily dependent on the US. The Chinese, on the other hand, have a huge military of their own and are a geopolitical competitor, not an ally with a standing defense agreement. They won’t hand the US anything that looks like a victory for us or a compromise for them, not for any amount of money because unlike the corporate powers that drive the US, they are concerned with other things besides GDP, stock prices, and pure efficiency. They are committed to developing their own domestic market so they won’t have to rely on exports because they know the US response is likely to get worse over issues like Taiwan and the South China Sea.
Aside from that, the author makes a great case. This author calls them the American gentry, and that’s not a bad name for them. They’re wealthy but not wealthy enough to exert any real power except collectively. This is as it should be. This is how capitalism is supposed to work. Why would they support higher taxes and protectionism if they’re wealthy businessmen? They aren’t stupid. They see what’s happening as corporations increasingly try to maximize shareholder value by pushing out competition and eliminating middlemen. They know that they may be the last generation of their kind, and they want to stop that from happening and push back the other direction if possible.
The struggle between populism and globalism runs a lot deeper than is generally realized, especially by the political class, who by and large seem to consider it an obstacle to be overcome. They don’t get it because the differences are more profound than black vs. white or rich vs. poor. A lot of people are comfortable in the corporate world. A lot of people are content making a monthly salary and going about their own lives. They’re content to toe the line, attend the DEI seminars, parrot whatever fad management technique the company is following and, quite frankly, let the corporation step all over them by demanding more and more of their time and taking more and more control of their lives. Salaried corporate employees usually don’t get paid overtime.
That’s fine, but some people just won’t live that way. Some people are just built different. They don’t want to be squished into a bustling city with millions of other people. They want to have their own little communities with their own little eccentricities and quaint local cultures. They have their own thing going and want to protect it, but there’s no good political or demographic analysis tool that really captures it any better than populist/nationalist. Some of them are working class people who want to get paid by the hour, working at the local factory, chemical plant, or steel mill. Some want to work for a small business where if the owner is just down the hall if they have a problem, concern, or personal issue to deal with. Some are tradesmen who work in those professions that are needed everywhere, like plumbers, electricians, mechanics, etc. Some of them are the business owners, and gentry is a good term, because they are similar in many ways to the European gentry. Many of them build these businesses to have something to leave for their families, to put down roots in a community that will last for generations. Many of them are born into it as the gentry were. Some car dealerships and other such businesses have been held by a single family for generations. They’re allied politically with those much poorer than themselves for the same reason anyone forges a political alliance. Their way of life is threatened by globalism and they need allies whose interests align with theirs. The big money is against them, and they know it. Witness how every candidate supported by the big donor Republicans was easily defeated.
What most of the globalists don’t seem to get is that they can’t win. People aren’t lumps of clay that can be molded into anything the economy needs. An economy needs to have a healthy balance of different sorts of jobs that favor different personality types and skill types. Even if the globalists get their way, it will cost them, and a few of them realize it. They know that at the end of the day, you pay the piper in one way or the other. Either they’ll accept that they can’t have pure globalism and accept some level of inefficiency and economic nationalism to preserve civil order and pay that cost, or they’ll have to deal with a perpetually unemployed and perpetually angry underclass and pay that cost, likely some form of universal basic income (the Roman Empire model). I credit Andrew Yang for at least understanding where we are at this point. We can debate which is cheaper but the idea that people will happily adapt to whatever the economy needs without causing problems should be fairly well dead at this point.

Brian Doyle
Brian Doyle
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Just how deluded are you ” Trump,s idea to force China ”
No One Forces China to do anything right down to blow their Nose
The one and only way to work with China is to do so in cooperative manner with mutual full respect for all parties involved Cultures, History, Beliefs and Religions
And as off 2024 such projects must comply with the following and they are top of the agenda and if not able to comply or make it for them the joint project dies immediately
So No.1 The project must be ecological and environmently not only friendly but must vastly improve what currently exists Carbon neutral is a must
No.2 The project must improve the local
Population first and foremost
Employees and suppliers must be
Given above average living wage ,
No Zero HR contracts , holiday pay,
Sick pay ,pension provisions and
Many more benefits such as employee representation at Board level
In a positive way and voting rights of a
Equitable nature wth all shareholders
Company profits a agreed ,% of must be paid annually into a local welfare social fund and the elected members of the local area are the sole deciders as to how these funds are to be deployed if giving appropriate planning consent
And all employees shall be fully trained
And continually so all in order to be a high
Quality Productive and responsible workforce not only to the company but also to the environment and local community And all by way of ensuring the products of their labours are of the highest possible quality

This is what China refers to as a WIN/ WIN
Situation for all parties
And also Large yard, Small fence mentality
If not so Then China walks
Over to you Donald maybe just you really can make
America great again

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
2 months ago
Reply to  Brian Doyle

Well, yes, I said that China would never agree to that, didn’t I? You’re right, no one forces them to do anything, What’s also not going to happen is the USA continue to let China manipulate the global economy to serve their national interests and doing nothing to stop them. Same goes for a lot of other countries. This is geopolitics. National interests collide and nations fight each other. Hopefully it won’t end up in actual war but there will be serious consequences because the bipartisan consensus and the voters all agree on this issue even while disagreeing on basically everything else. The US isn’t going to get everything they want and neither are the Chinese. It’s not going back to how it was in 2012 when China could do whatever it wanted and expect the US to look the other way. Call it the burden of great power status if you like. What’s going to happen is that the US will keep erecting trade barriers to protect their domestic industry and/or heavily subsidizing them through government funding and tax breaks. Given the state of the federal budget deficit, I’m betting on more of the latter and less of the former, but since they can create money out of thin air, who knows.

Brian Doyle
Brian Doyle
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Yes I knew that you understood no one dictates to China and none ever has any had success in attempting to do in China,s long history which is now fast approaching 2500 yrs old
The nearest any who got to it was the
Mongols which resulted everyone of them being killed or run away as fast they could and China building their 1st great wall which ensured none ever were so stupid and attempt
Forcing China into anything
When Obama reconfigured US forces to encircle China then that shall prove to as big mistakes as the Mongols made

Because China immediately knew what the real purpose of the US moves were
Therefore on the principle of prevention is far better than that of cure
So China set about with great determination to cleverly design a 2nd great wall by way of it’s, technology, Ancient Wisdom ( USA and the West complety lack such wisdom) , their hard working population and their manufacturing Prowess which USA would be most wise to pay close attention too
By way of in the event of any serious
Conflict and heavy losses on all sides
China very quickly can easily not only
Replenish but actually increase all their conflict resources and in a Manner that would rapidly tip the balance in their favour.
What I find most disturbing with your
Well presented reply is that that you state by way of bi-partisan parties agree
If so then this is a most highly dangerous situation as it would appear that those in power in US
who bang upon the war drums could do easily become a victim of their own rhetoric and given the electoral system in order to win they then trapped and simply must attack in order to hold onto the power they hold
Ask yourself this Q. Why do Wars begin
A. Always and always so at least one of the belligerent parties truly believe they shall prevail
Now please pay very close attention to what follows
China shall never instigate any time , anywhere or by any means ever start a war That is 100 % certain
And should any Force them to go to war Then China knows for certain it shall win
Suppose Chinese philosophy is
We never start a way We only end wars
And today such is so obviously so
By way of clearly drawing it’s Red lines in the Tawain Straights and Sth.China seas
And once more by it’s Ancient Wisdom has not only acted upon
But informed all that such red line is extended by way of what China terms
As Fwd. defence ( not aggression)
That any base or area that enables hostile actions within the boundaries of their Red Line and 2nd great wall
Then those bases and resources shall be destroyed
Thankfully but only recently powerfull
US personnel are tapping upon the shoulders of those who bang upon the war drums and saying look at this
Before you leap
1.Cninese hypersonic technology so
Far advanced it’s impossible to catch up now ( by way of the only hypersonic wind tunnel globably and it’s simple ingenious technology of generating suffice wind speeds to be able to study what happens when a missile flies at hypersonic speeds in excess of 10 k miles per HR )
China can launch these 5th generation hypersonic by land , surface warships , submarine and Air

2 China can design , build, launch , fit out , sea trial and commission 14 Capitol war ships every year

3. The pentagon were shocked to the core when a F35 in full Stealth mode
And as usual tactic of F22 raptors
Lying in wait at distance using the F35 as lure to come in and destroy those approaching the F35 all as guided by overhead Sentinel early warning
What shook the Pentagon out of nowhere and completely undetected
A Chinese J 20 Stealth fighter bombers appeared on the F35 tail
Drew up along side the F35 cockpit
And waved and smiled at the Pilot then began to soar vertically into the
Ether and completely out of sight and detection
What alarms the Pentagon is that their no doubt the J 20 never switched it’s Radar on nor it’s electronic warfare components
Conclusion the only way that the J20
Appeared upon the F35 tail was it was guided the whole way by fully integrated land raider , Satellites, AI
and sosphicated computing
And that’s what the Pentagon work out
This was China’s way of telling you
Be very very careful

3. When Nancy Pelossi stupidly made a visit to Tawain
Then that was Red Rag to the Chinese Dragon
China once more gave the Pentagon
Much food for thought by way of unbeknown to any until 1 day before they as required by international law
Informed all that the next day a major
Logistical excerise that was now in position would be put into place
What did The Pentagon observe
Within 48 hrs China had deployed and put in position the following from
Existing resources on the East Coast
But also from all other command areas consisting of all personnel, full war footing weaponry , replenishment stock along with all rear logistics and manufacturer all primed to kick into full war production
Basically
Over 800 K personell, 1000 aircraft , 250 Warships, Hundreds of Missile batteries etc
But to cap it all which opened and dropped the Jaws of the Pentagon,s
Hurriedly gathering to observe of what they were notified
China demonstrated more of their Ancient Wisdom in that once the 1st shot fired then as sure as night follows day then some of your plans
And deployment,s shall prove to be either highly vulnerable or requires
Rapid redeployment to hammer home your success against the opponents weaknesses that have now became evident
This was executed by sudden cancellation of various orders to various command centres to Stand down and prepare fully for redeployment
Pentagon’s conclusion not only did they believe what they had observed
But said such for The USA and NATO
would be utterly impossible to replicate and don’t even think that you can
I could go on more and more
But I have Studied China for many years now
And in order to comprehend any matter whatsoever their no need for you to become a expert because such shall only lead you into a forest
Where you shall never be able to see a tree
Therefore you study profusely the Fundamentals of what you study to
Discover ‘ What makes it Tick ‘
And for China that it’s History, culture,
Beliefs and Religion’s
But to do so with China is a most serious task in that they think and act
In a manner that totally baffles us
As we have little or exposure or access to
Buddhism
Zen Buddhism
And more importantly that of Confuciouis
Once you have grasped and understand the basics
You now have the keys to China’s mind
And should you open such door then not only are you in for a very big surprise but almost instantly you will
Soon realise and understand all that
You gaze in wonder upon
Eventually come to the conclusion
To cooperate but compete fairly
And never to even as much as shake your fist at them far less throw a punch
In China you shall find your best friend
If not so you will have just found your
Worst enemy
That encapsulates Chinese philosophy and what makes them Tik

Excuse the pun Tik Tok Tik Tok Tik Tok
And none ever shall or be able to alter that Tick Tock of the Chinese
Mechanism of their minds and thoughts
To finish then I give you a excellent example of the vast distances that exist in Chinese and Western belief systems
America believes in Hegomny and for those who opposed then you apply
Overwhelming force
Such went well for you in Vietnam, Iraq and more recently in Afghanistan
I think NOT
Whist China believes the exact opposite of Hegomonic overwhelming force why because the fully aware the to be so is
A bad wrong thought
That leads to
Bad views
Bad Speech
Bad Actiond
Bad Efforts
Bad consequences
Bad Work
And even worse
Bad mind
And Complete lack of Mindfulness

And know if you walk such a path and no matter how long it takes
Then you shall eventually have to suffer and pay all that is due

This once more is known
As The Universal Truth and that is the
Only truth that can ever exist
Thought of any other kind shall prove to be none other than a figment of your imagination
Not believe me then if you applied all I speak of and prior your mad rush into Afghanistan then the result you now have to live with is entirely of your own making

Please forgive any Typo errors , grammar and punctuation
Because they play no part in coming
To the terms and fundamentals of these Universal truths
If you don’t forgive such there be little
Hope for you

chris sullivan
chris sullivan
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

well put sir !

M To the Tea
M To the Tea
2 months ago

China is home to about 1.43 billion people compared to the US’ 342 million in 2024. Free market is only good when you have the power not when you are bargaining. Tell me why China will open a factory in US and pay its workers a decent salary to live in US and yet do the same at home and pay the fraction of the salary to the Chinese workers same factory? China already found another ripe market for its cars/products/services: Africa’s 1,485,715,146 population(which they are also investing to increase its GDP to create/stimulate markets) and not counting other markets around the world wanting cheaper cars and products. The cycle of wealth repeats with a new way of thinking not with negotiations (like US technological innovation in 70s, 80s and 90s sped up the wealth of US until they went global). So America may end up isolating to rethink its governance (laissez faire capitalism does not work if others like China want to keep government intervention to tip the market whenever they feel threat). So IDK the solution obviously as I am an idiot online commenting about economics that I have no expertise but the pendulum has swung too far for free market regulating itself and others figured out a way to manipulate…. What is next?

Neiltoo .
Neiltoo .
2 months ago
Reply to  M To the Tea

I think charging an electric vehicle in much of Africa may well put people off buying them.

Brian Doyle
Brian Doyle
2 months ago
Reply to  Neiltoo .

China has already foreseen such problems even so within China
As they will soon be struggling to provide enough charging stations through the whole of China even though China now has more charge points than fuel pumps
And how has China overcome this problem
Well as usual by genuis and creative
Thought and given it’s ability to enact fast the process having been through a large trial
They now know what is required going forward and EV battery and EV manufacturers have now perfected the solution in by being able at the drop of a hat actually manufacture and fit to any EV vehicle
What’s this solution
A vehicle battery with you own personal ID number
Take it to EV battery station ( rather like you do with a gas station )
Report at reception go and have a on site coffee or whatever because your vehicle will have its existing battery removed and replaced with a full charged replacement
Along with you choose what is to be done with your empty battery
In that recharge at this Battery station and refit entirely at your time of choosing or have it forwarded onto any other station of your choosing
And how long does this EV battery change over take
Well no more than 4 mins from your entry till departure
Can you refill your empty gas tank in the same time I think not
Such merely demonstrates just how far in front China is with no possible hope for any to ever catch up therfore
Cooperate or Whither and go extinct
Not believe me 2 weeks ago a 10.storey high apartment block on a prepared ground platform foot c/ w all underground services Insitu only requiring connection to each of the 122 apartments which then had all the owners/ tenants able to inhabit immediately
How long did this take
28 months ? NO
28 weeks ? NO
28 days ? NO

Well then how long
28 hrs ? YES
You got it surely by now just how far China in front

Neiltoo .
Neiltoo .
2 months ago
Reply to  Brian Doyle

I wasn’t thinking of charging points but the electricity supply. Much of Africa doesn’t have a reliable electricity supply. How does China plan to fix that?

Konstantinos Stavropoulos
Konstantinos Stavropoulos
2 months ago

As pointed in other comments, EVs are not definitely -shouldn’t to my opinion- be the one and only way to go. It’s good we have them, it is not very good we are being forced to have them. In all terms, wiring the whole earth with electric cables and AI monstrous energy-consuming machinery, isn’t by any means friendlier to our home the earth, as most of us very well know. Excluding the sentimental ideologue fans, not excluding those who run the “ecology” show. Clever businessman as he is, Donald Tramp doesn’t hesitate to take part in the “eco” business.

For a cease fire period, the idea presented in the article could win the case. The thing is that if it were to be realized to the maximum of the author’s expectations we still wouldn’t have a viable proposal for the times ahead. The maximization of profit and consumerism are ills not addressed by the most. They are addressed by the left but most often in a naive way that is being engulfed by some super-rich idiocracy that wants to keep for their own the unlimited power to consume everything. Consume us humans and the whole earth alike, while pushing the “mass” into a communism for the poor and an “ecology” for the proletariat.

For the time being we are inclined to support the “crazy dude”, until something more viable shows up.

D Walsh
D Walsh
2 months ago

I doubt many Americans are interested in the BYD Seagull, its basically the Electric Yugo

0 0
0 0
2 months ago

“intellectually sophisticated champion of America First nationalism”
If that isn’t an oxymoronic statements I don’t know what is.

Elizabeth Bowen
Elizabeth Bowen
2 months ago

And don’t forget, the American Gentry are even more independently wealthy now from all those hard-earned PPP loans. https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/02/12/metro/they-bought-mansions-rolls-royce-chartered-jet-with-covid-relief-loans-prosecutors-allege/