China is the most sophisticated, elegant, and patient adversary the West has faced. Sun Tsu wrote that “supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.” An engineered virus is the embodiment of this principle. The art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. This China has done… and a template has been set.
By Charles Mortimer for TAKI’S Magazine
The virus is our enemy. We need a modicum of clarity here. If the virus was deliberately seeded into this country, it is not the enemy—it’s the weapon. The enemy lay elsewhere.
If we are to be open-minded, we must consider that while China halted all travel and grounded all domestic air travel in February 2020 to contain the pandemic, it continued international flights unabated until March 27.
With less supporting evidence is the assertion of a high-ranking Chinese defector that the virus was intentionally released in October 2019 into the World Military Games in Wuhan.
Biological warfare is not new. The most significant event occurred in 1346 in the Siege of Caffa, a Venetian port on the Black Sea.
Muslim forces catapulted plague-infected corpses into the fortified city to infect the population. Fleeing by sea to Venice and Genoa, those who escaped carried the Black Death to Europe.
Here in the U.S. there has been biological electioneering.
The Rajneeshees seeded restaurants throughout Antelope, Ore., with salmonella in a test run to determine if native (non-cult) residents could be sufficiently incapacitated to influence results for an upcoming election day. Over 300 were hospitalized. In terms of fortifying elections, the strategy was sound. It was in the execution of their tactics that they failed—the strain of salmonella they mail-ordered was insufficiently virulent for their ends.
While biological warfare is not new, genetic engineering would be; and engineering to target a specific racial group would be taking that engineering, exponentially, to yet another level.
The American public is oblivious of the extent to which the Chinese military has embraced the concept of racially targeted biological warfare.
The textbook Science of Military Strategy, published by the PLA’s National Defense University in 2017, notes the potential for biological warfare to include specific ethnic genetic attacks.
General Zhang Shibo, President of the National Defense University of China, has written that biological warfare is one of seven new domains of warfare, and could be used to target specific ethnic groups.
He Fuchu, Vice President of the Academy of Military Sciences, states that biotechnology will be the new “strategic commanding height.”
It is the CCP that endorses this agenda, not the Chinese people. Whether in Ukraine, Cambodia, or China, a relative indifference to human life appears to be a recurring feature of communist regimes.
The word “Oriental” was banned in federal law in 2016, and race is now considered merely a social construct. Nonetheless, in this pandemic, countries with overwhelmingly Oriental populations have a fatality rate per population roughly 1/600 that of Caucasians and Africans.
There are only two possible explanations—the varying degrees of seriousness and preparation taken in planning for a pandemic, and racial engineering. There is no evidence to suggest a third—surreptitious vaccination via the food supply. As regards the former, in the U.S., the CDC focused on educating the public on how to prepare for, and survive, a zombie apocalypse. At the onset of this current pandemic, the CDC had 1% of the N95 face masks needed for medical personnel in event of a full-blown coronavirus pandemic.
As for engineering, this has been impermissible to raise.
The evidence supports the first. In countries (Malaysia) and provinces (British Columbia) with multiracial populations, the impact on the ethnic Chinese population is 1/4 to 1/3 that of their non-Chinese neighbors.
In the U.S., fatality rates are collected under White, Black, and Asian categories. The latter includes Indians and Pakistanis. About 1/3 of the Asian population is of Chinese extraction.
Nonetheless, within that greater Asian group the death rate from the virus is 118 per 100K, compared with 178 per 100K for whites and 212 per 100K for Blacks.
The CDC determined that a fatality rate in Black Americans 1.4 times that of Whites is due to structural racism. It has shown no interest in the other disparity very evident here. The disparities in multiracial populations consistently favor Chinese and are unexplained.
Any argument for racial engineering is predicated on the virus being man-made, and evidence for that is being blocked from public view.
A British-Norwegian study found that the COVID-19 virus has within it inserted sections in its spike protein, showing beyond any reasonable doubt that it was artificially manipulated.
The paper has been censored. There are only scattered reports of the study found on the internet, and the paper itself was compelled to alter its conclusions.
Similarly, a paper by multiple Indian scientists, independently finding the virus to be man-made, was also suppressed.
The academic scientific journals have censored evidence on the virus being man-made, and any such suggestion is labeled a conspiracy theory. The Wall Street Journal did publish a piece speculating on such an origin. For what it’s worth, the virus has all the functional characteristics of being weaponized specifically for biowarfare—with high infectivity and a prolonged incubation period to allow for maximum spread.
The CCP has the political will for such an endeavor, and no legal constraints. They also have the technical capability. The CDC, between 2004 and 2015, trained 2,500 Chinese scientists in virological techniques, including gene sequencing and reverse genetics. China is now a world leader in genomic editing.
U.S intelligence agencies have stated they are unable to determine the source of the pandemic because of a lack of cooperation. China has refused access to critical information and viral samples.
The motives of the CCP for the seeding can only be speculated, but most plausibly, considering trade, Taiwan, and other issues, it was to remove Donald Trump from office.
It is of course coincidence, but the goals of the CCP on that point comported with those of the DNC and much of the ruling class.
Just as the virus has had a disparate impact, so too has the lockdown. Never let a crisis go to waste, is a quote from Rahm Emanuel in 2008.
Rump America is suspicious of the motives for the lockdown.
For progressives, it’s had the fortuitous benefit of defunding the last class of Americans—the “mom and pops”—Main Street, who still resist their agenda. A boon for the Amazons, it’s crippled small business.
As for Democrats in general, they were able to piggyback on the lockdown to alter the mechanics of the 2020 election.
Draconian lockdowns work. The question, though, is at what cost? In matters of life and death, there has always been a cost benefit ratio. For instance 35,000 people are killed each year in automobiles. All cars and trucks could have been modified years ago to have a maximum speed of 30 mph—an inconvenience, but certainly doable. This we haven’t done.
In The Art of War, Su Tsu wrote that all warfare is based on deception.
Deception is an art, but it doesn’t take much art to deceive a media and academic class that believes, or wants to believe, in bat soup and pangolins. Then again, like much of the elite, perhaps they are just indifferent.
The beginning of wisdom is the willingness to acknowledge an unpleasant fact: World War III is over, and we lost. The CCP accomplished the regime change it desired. Posturing aside, we fit the definition of a client/vassal state, dependent on another for the industrial production that used to be ours.
We have two options. Acquiesce to the new world order or resist.
A rational man might resign himself to the former.
In accepting a subservient position politically, we would merely be ratifying what we have already done economically. “It doesn’t make any difference whether a country makes potato chips or computer chips” is the free-trade policy, enunciated during the George H.W. Bush administration. Our prior president attempted to change that policy, when China pulled the trigger. Any further moves toward economic independence could lead to new variants, with potentially higher fatality rates.
This is the expedient route—politically, economically, and socially.
The second option is also rational—it “follows the science.” However, it is not merely politically incorrect but, at present, politically impossible.
The science is this. Quarantines are effective.
But as long as we have an open border we are not merely vulnerable, we are naked. Three million people fly from China into the U.S. each year. From the stated policy and actions of the CCP, all are potential vectors.
And even if there was no deliberate decision from the CCP to infect America, the reckless indifference in seeding this county warrants a defensive posture. As long as the CCP is in power, we should therefore shut down that entry.
But that itself would be of little practical good. We could be infected by variants seeded into or arising in other locations, e.g., Italy, India, Colombia, South Africa. For this reason, residents of any country accepting visitors from China, as well as any country that accepts visitors from countries even two and three steps removed, would need to be placed in isolated quarantine for two weeks, at their expense. Over 32 million people fly into the U.S. each year. This ends globalization, or at least our part in it.
This is a line in the sand to isolate the CCP, and it should be clear on which side the world will line up. They will line up with China. This strategy will be labeled a racist, xenophobic overreaction (particularly by the CDC, and possibly thrown out by the courts), but its rationale is this.
The CCP postures itself as our partner. It’s not.
This present pandemic had an overall fatality rate of 0.51% yet shut down this country and killed hundreds of thousands. Natural pandemics in this hemisphere with the arrival of Europeans (measles, smallpox) killed over 95% of the indigenous population.
We do not know what is possible with engineering—a prolonged incubation period, asymptomatic spread, high infectivity? It is wisest, therefore, to act on a plausible worst-case scenario.
There are, of course, consequences that must be considered. Taiwan, for instance, could well be drawn toward China. Our economy depends on their chip industry. And China will stop buying our soy and stop providing our pharmaceuticals.
Moreover, in formulating a resistance, we have two very large problems:
(1) China is not solely responsible for this virus. Their program at the Wuhan lab was funded in part by our public health agencies, the NIH and NIAID. The Obama administration issued a ban on gain of function research in 2014. The agencies circumvented the prohibition by funding the research indirectly through a foundation. The $600,000 was clearly a minor component of the Wuhan effort—but the result was the granting of a legitimacy to the Chinese program. Politically, it gave the Chinese cover—a free pass for a free release.
(2) There will be no significant action inimical to China. The governing class has interests that run parallel to the CCP. It is the elite who set policy. The rump—the mensches—is left behind.
China is the most sophisticated, elegant, and patient adversary we have faced.
Sun Tsu wrote that “supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.”
An engineered virus is the embodiment of this principle.
As for breaking the enemy, the regime there is nationalistic and on point. The regime here is preoccupied with carbon footprints and critical race theory.
The art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. This they have done. A template has been set.