🚨 Shocking U.S. Defeat: China's Rare Earth Checkmate Is NOT What Media Pretends.
www.youtube.com
While western media pretends the latest Chinese announcement about export licensing restrictions is all about the trade war with the US, the real story is al...

Everyone in the corporate press is framing China’s rare earth controls as just another trade war escalation. They’re missing the point entirely, probably on purpose. China is directly dismantling the US war machine’s supply chain.

The US has been burning through its weapons stockpiles in proxy wars for years. Now, just as the Pentagon desperately needs to rebuild, China moves to restrict the very materials needed to make advanced weapons like F-35 jets, missiles, drones, you name it. China controls over 90% of the global supply for this stuff, and restricting output is a strategic move to defang the imperial core.

And the beautiful part is how they’re doing it. They’re using the US’s own playbook of “national security” export controls, highlighting the blatant hypocrisy. They’re not even doing a full ban, just forcing licenses that will block military use. So all the hand-wringing in Washington is pure theater. They’re angry because their ability to produce weapons for future interventions in Venezuela or Iran is being critically hampered.

We’re seeing a fundamental shift here. China insulated its own supply chains first, and is now using its economic sovereignty to challenge US military dominance at its weakest point. They’re actively constraining the empire’s capacity for violence. This is a win for global peace, and the panic in the imperial press proves it.

  • GlueBear
    2·
    4 months ago

    Well for starters: that trade between Russia and China was going to shrink and that China wasn’t going to commit to dedollarization 5 years ago bc that would require they give up their net exporter status and attempt to replace the US as a market. I’m heavily paraphrasing to the point where I (most likely) have failed to capture the nuance in their takes, but idk about linking them here. I feel like that’s weird and that they may not appreciate having their comments copy pasted w/o context.

    I don’t have a hexbear account (and I don’t want to make one), so maybe someone could DM them and ask them for their take.

    • rainpizza
      3·
      4 months ago

      Well, from the takes that I have read and the comments that other comrades have offered regarding that person, then your paraphrasing doesn’t seem wrong to me.

      Regarding his takes, those aren’t that very impressive and it is usually found in anti china slanderers that love to decontextualize and push their idealism into China. The only difference with your typical “China will collapse” type is the spicing with leftist rhetoric. Michael Parenti has a wording for that type which is called the “nonfalsifiable orthodoxy”:

      • “During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.
      • If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.”

      If you want to open discussions about anything specific about China with your own questions and inquiries, please do in c/askLemmygrad so that more comrades could offer their perspective.