丙午年，有些什么事发生？

有的，道家 和 道教 的英文翻译不同，而且区别很重要，对应的是中国语境中“哲学传统”与“宗教体系”的差别。 一、道家 的英文翻译 ✅ Daoism / Taoism (philosophical Daoism) 最常见、也最规范的译法是： Daoism（拼音式，现代学术界主流） Taoism（威妥玛拼音，旧式但仍常见） 👉 当“道家”指思想流派、哲学传统时，常用： Philosophical Daoism （哲学道家） 使用场景 老子、庄子 《道德经》《庄子》 无为、自然、齐物、反功利 作为哲学、思想体系讨论 📌 示例： Laozi and Zhuangzi are central figures of philosophical Daoism. Daoism emphasizes wu wei (non-action) and harmony with nature. 二、道教 的英文翻译 ✅ Daoism / Taoism (religious Daoism) 道教在英文中仍然用 Daoism / Taoism，但必须加限定语，否则容易混淆： Religious Daoism （宗教道教） 使用场景 张道陵、天师道 道观、道士、符箓、斋醮 内丹、外丹、炼气、神仙体系 宗教组织、仪式与信仰实践 📌 示例： Religious Daoism developed elaborate rituals, priesthoods, and cosmology. Daoist temples are important centers of religious Daoism. 三、为什么英文容易混淆？ 因为英文里只有一个词： Daoism / Taoism 而中文有清晰区分： 道家 → 思想 / 哲学 道教 → 宗教 / 制度 / 修行体系 所以在严肃写作中，英文通常通过 修饰语 来区分。 四、常见但不推荐的译法 ⚠️ 中文 错误 / 不推荐译法 原因 道家 Daoist Philosophy School 不地道 道教 Tao Religion 学术上不用 道家 Lao-Zhuang School 太局限 五、最规范的对照总结表 中文 标准英文 说明 道家 Philosophical Daoism 老庄思想 道教 Religious Daoism 宗教体系 道 Dao (Tao) 核心概念，不翻 道士 Daoist priest 道观 Daoist temple 六、学术语境中的一句“标准说法” Scholars usually distinguish between philosophical Daoism (associated with Laozi and Zhuangzi) and religious Daoism, which developed organized rituals, institutions, and pantheons. 如果你愿意，我也可以： 帮你润色一段英文学术文本，避免道家/道教混淆 或比较 Confucianism / Ruism（儒家） 的类似翻译问题 丙午年，有些什么事发生？ “丙午年”每 60 年一次，所以你这个问题要看指的是哪一个丙午年。历史与民间讨论中，最常被提及的是 1966 年丙午，其次是 1906、1846 等。我按常见理解 + 历史脉络给你一个清晰说明。 一、最常被问的：1966 年（丙午年，火马年） 这是现代中国语境里影响最大、讨论最多的丙午年。 1️⃣ 重大历史事件 文化大革命正式开始（1966–1976） 5 月《五一六通知》 红卫兵运动兴起 教育、文化、政治体系剧烈震荡 中国社会结构发生深层断裂 知识分子、传统文化遭到系统性冲击 👉 在历史研究中，1966 丙午年常被视为一个时代的断裂点。 2️⃣ 民间说法：「丙午火马年，不吉」 这是民俗层面，不是科学结论，但影响非常大。 常见说法包括： “火马年多灾多难” “丙午年出生者命硬、克父母” 因此 1966 年出生率明显下降 📌 这个现象在人口统计学上是真实存在的，但原因是： 社会动荡 民俗恐惧 政策与现实压力 而不是“天命”。 3️⃣ 命理象征（文化解释层面） 丙：阳火 午：火 丙午 = 火上加火 在传统象征体系中： 火 → 变动、激烈、破坏、更新 因而被后人事后解释为“应验” ⚠️ 但要强调： 这是文化解释，不是历史因果。 二、其他重要的丙午年 🔹 1906 年（丙午） 清末危机加深 列强势力扩张 革命思潮高涨（距辛亥革命仅 5 年） 铁路、工业、学生运动开始活跃 👉 常被视为旧帝国崩溃前的加速期 🔹 1846 年（丙午） 清道光年间 社会矛盾严重 鸦片问题加剧 为之后的**太平天国运动（1851）**埋下伏笔 三、为什么“丙午年”总被记住？ 不是因为“天干地支有魔力”，而是： 历史选择性记忆 大事件发生后，人们会回头寻找“象征” 丙午 = 火极 → 容易被用来解释“剧烈变化” 一句话总结： 不是丙午年导致动乱，而是动乱发生后，人们记住了丙午年。 四、一句话总结 丙午年 = 每 60 年一次 1966 年丙午：文化大革命开始，影响极深 “火马年不吉”是民俗心理 + 历史创伤的叠加 从学术角度看： 👉 社会结构决定事件，纪年只是标签 如果你愿意，我也可以： 从 道家 / 易学 / 历史社会学三个角度分别解释丙午 或专门分析 1966 丙午为何成为“集体记忆中的禁忌年”

The History of Tantra

In the New York sector, only Ganesha truly understands the history of Tantra. When Ba’Ba’ visited Taiwan and delivered this talk, Ganesha was beside Him. These photographs were presented to demonstrate the antiquity of Chinese civilization. When we interpret the concept of “civilization,” we do so according to the Chinese understanding, rather than the Western definition or framework. When ancient Chinese thinkers explained “civilization,” they consistently approached it from spiritual and mental dimensions, with little or no emphasis on physical or material perspectives.

为什么美国害怕委内瑞拉、伊朗和俄罗斯联盟？

There exists A fundamental principle in international relations that has governed empires for millennia. No hegemonic power can maintain its global dominance while simultaneously losing control over its own strategic periphery. It's a law as ancient as Rome, as verifiable as the fall of the British at Suez. For 75 years, since the end of World War 2, the United States defied this principle. They controlled Europe through NATO, dominated the Middle East through oil, and kept Latin America as their backyard. Through the Monroe Doctrine, 3 Continents 1 master. But this week, something changed. And what the corporate media doesn't want you to know is this. In Caracas, Venezuela's Oil Minister Pedro Telechea signed energy cooperation agreements with Iran worth $4 billion simultaneously. Russian warships docked at the port of La Guira, less than 2000 kilometers from Miami. Washington's response? Deafening silence. No new sanctions, no military threats, no Pentagon statements. Why? Because for the first time in 75 years, the United States can't do anything. About it. And that impotence reveals something that transcends Venezuela, Iran, and Russia. It reveals the collapse of the very architecture of American power in the Western Hemisphere. I worked for years analyzing capital flows in emerging markets for international financial institutions and what you're about to hear. Won't appear on CNN, nor in the Washington Post, nor in any corporate media outlet that depends on Washington's official narrative. Today, we're going to dismantle the hidden truth behind this alliance that terrifies Pentagon strategists. Let me take you back to 2017. Then President Donald Trump declared that Venezuela represented a threat to US National Security, not because Venezuela had nuclear weapons, not because Venezuela had a fleet capable of threatening US territory, but because Nicolas Maduro refused to sell Venezuelan oil exclusively in dollars. Washington's response was brutal and systematic. First aggression In August 2017, the United States imposed the first financial sanctions against Venezuela, prohibiting US institutions from participating in any Venezuelan debt transaction. The immediate impact was a loss of $11 billion. And access to capital markets. Second aggression. In January 2019, the United States declared that Juan Guido, a deputy that most Venezuelans didn't even know, was the legitimate president of Venezuela. There were no elections. There was no transition. Simply a declaration from Washington. And with that declaration came the freezing of $7 billion in Venezuelan assets in U.S. banks. 3rd Aggression In March 2020, the US Department of Justice formally accused Nicolas Maduro of drug trafficking and offered a reward of $15 million for his capture, $15 million for the head of the elected president of a sovereign nation, as if he were an outlaw from the Old West. 4th Aggression In June 2020, the United States physically confiscated an Airbus A340 aircraft belonging to Venezuelan state airline Conviasa while it was undergoing maintenance in Argentina valued at $70 million. It wasn't a legal seizure, it was state piracy. Shift Aggression oil sanctions imposed since 2019 reduced Venezuelan oil exports from 1.5 million barrels per day to less than 400,000 barrels per day. This property I acquired a couple of years ago, it was going to be my son's college fund. I heard about this pad split idea. So I was like, yeah, I'm gonna try that with this property. And I was able to cash flow, I mean, significantly more. And just doing a long term. And so, I mean, it really was a numbers game. I work here in Portland and I moved out here for a job opportunity. And so it's been kind of easy to be able to come here studying for school, go to class pass. But it has allowed me to be really flexible as far as on finances. I get paid weekly and I have to pay my rent. So it's like as soon as I get paid, I just go ahead and pay my passport rent and then boom, I have different finances to be able to do whatever else I want to do in the city. So what I have enjoyed most about living in a Pats Blade house is how unexpectedly nice like it's been. Like, you know, like when I was moving in, I noticed that the the railing. On the stairs was loose and she had to like, fixed within a couple of days. And it's like in, you know, in apartment complexes, it's hard to get stuff like that done that fast. So that was pretty cool. I really don't do any advertising. As soon as the room opens up, it's booked. I think my record is 20 minutes. Possibility with payments is especially helpful, like the fact that it's rented out weekly and we've had different movie nights, different potlucks, we've listened to music together. Using passport has been a great way to over 10X by cash flow. This is probably if not the nicest place I've ever lived one of. The cumulative economic impact, according to studies by independent economists, exceeded $232 billion in GDP losses between 2017 and 2023. Sixth, aggression the United States pressured more than 50 countries not to recognize. The 2018 Venezuelan presidential elections in which Maduro won with 67% of the vote. They declared the elections fraudulent before they even occurred. Now, let me be absolutely clear about what these sanctions really mean. When the United States sanctions a country's oil sector, they're not sanctioning. The politicians, they're sanctioning the civilian population. Sanctions against Venezuela directly contributed to shortages of medicines, medical equipment, and food. A study by the Center for Economic and Policy Research documented that sanctions caused approximately 40,000 deaths between 2007. Seen in 2018 due to lack of access to medicines and medical treatments. Sanctions kill people. That's their function. It's not a side effect, it's the objective. So what happened? Venezuela didn't collapse. There was no color revolution. There was no democratic transition. There was no regime change. Instead Venezuela. But did something Washington never anticipated. It found new partners. And those partners had something the United States had lost long ago. The ability to operate outside the dollar controlled financial system. Iran, which had been sanctioned by the United States for 45 years, taught Venezuela. How to build refineries that processed heavy crude oil without American technology? Russia provided S300 anti aircraft defense systems and military training. China bought Venezuelan oil paying in yuan and provided direct investment in mining infrastructure. And suddenly Venezuela became something more. Dangerous than an enemy, it became a successful laboratory of how to survive and thrive outside the American system. Now I want you to understand the position Washington finds itself in at this precise moment. And for that I need to introduce you to someone, Admiral Craig Fowler, who until 20/21 was the commander of. US Southern Command responsible for all U.S. military operations in Latin America and the Caribbean. In March 2020, Admiral Fowler testified before Congress and said something extraordinary. Russia, China and Iran are coordinating efforts to undermine US. Influence in the Western Hemisphere, and Venezuela is the center of that coordination. His job wasn't to protect democracy in Latin America. His job was to maintain US hegemonic control over an entire continent. And he was publicly admitting that control was crumbling. Why? Because the United States. Has lost the three traditional tools it used to keep Latin America under control tool #1 the IMF and the World Bank. For decades, when a Latin American country faced economic crisis, it had no choice but to turn to the International Monetary Fund, and the IMF came with conditions. Privatization, austerity, opening markets to US corporations. It was debt converted into political control. But look at what has happened. Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, Bolivia under **** all have rejected IMF loans. And what happened? They didn't collapse because. China offered loans without political conditions. The BRICS Development Bank offered financing for infrastructure. Russia offered credit lines for energy and defense. The IMF monopoly was broken, and with it Washington's ability to convert debt into obedience tool #2. SWIFT and the dollar payment system. When the United States wanted to punish a country, it disconnected it from the SWIFT system, the messaging system that enables international bank transfers. It was like cutting off economic oxygen. But then Russia was disconnected from SWIFT in 2022. After the military operation in Ukraine and instead of collapsing, Russia built its own system called SPFS. China already had SIPS, its alternative interbank payment system. Iran had developed SAPAM after decades of sanctions, and all these systems are now interconnected. Venezuela can receive payments from China through ships, from Russia through SPFS, from Iran through SAPAM without touching a single U.S. dollar tool #3 the direct military threat. This is the most important one and the most devastating for Washington in the 1000. 980 seconds. the United States invaded Grenada with 7600 soldiers in 1989. They invaded Panama with 27,000 soldiers. For decades, the simple threat of you. Come to love, There is now a ceasefire in Gaza and with your support, humanity wants to ramp up its operations to ensure that we are able to help our relationship as much as we as military intervention was enough to keep Latin American governments aligned. But today that threat is hollow. Why? For three devastating reasons. Reason one, the United States has approximately 800 military bases around the world with significant presence in 80 countries, but its force projection capability is compromised after 20 years in Afghanistan with spending of $2.3 trillion. A humiliating withdrawal After the debacle in Iraq, the American public has no appetite for more military adventures. Reason 2. Venezuela now has Russian S300 anti aircraft defense systems capable of shooting down US aircraft at 200 kilometers away it has Yakan. Coastal missiles that can sink US warships. It has Iranian drones that cost $20,000 each but can neutralize US tanks that cost $9 million. An invasion of Venezuela wouldn't be Grenada, it would be Vietnam in the tropics. Reason 3. And this is the absolute comedy of the situation. The United States can't risk a war with Venezuela because Venezuela has something the United States desperately needs, oil. Yes, you read that right. The country that the United States has tried to destroy for seven years now possesses the largest oil reserves on the planet, 303 billion barrels of proven reserves. More than Saudi Arabia, more than Russia, more than the United States. And here's the master stroke in 2022, after the United States and Europe sanctioned Russian oil. Guess what the Biden administration did? They quietly sent you S delegates to Caracas. To negotiate the purchase of Venezuelan oil, the country that had put a $15 million bounty on Maduro's head was now begging for his oil. You can't declare war on your own energy supplier. That's the trap the United States finds itself caught in. And now with Iran providing refining technology. Russia providing military protection and China buying all the production Venezuela can export. Washington is watching its former backyard become a fortress of its strategic adversaries. Now I want to mention here John Mearsheimer, professor of political science at the University of Chicago and one of the most respected. Geopolitical strategists of the last four decades, Mearsheimer developed what is known as offensive realism theory, which holds a simple but devastating premise. In an anarchic international system, great powers are condemned to compete for power, and regional hegemony is the primary objective of any great. In his book The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, Mearsheimer argues that the United States spent more than a century ensuring that no rival power could dominate Europe or Asia precisely because the United States had already achieved hegemony in the Western Hemisphere. Here's the prophetic part. But your Shimmer wrote in 2001 that if China continues its impressive economic growth, the United States and China will likely engage in intense security competition with considerable potential for war. This was 20 years before the US China rivalry became the central axis. Of global geopolitics. But there's something else Mere Simer said, that is directly relevant to what we're witnessing with the Venezuela, Iran, Russia alliance. In various conferences and interviews, Mere Scheimer has argued that the US attempt to maintain global hegemony rather than limiting. Itself to hemispheric hegemony is fundamentally overloading its strategic capacity. And here's the devastating irony. While the United States spends resources trying to contain China and Asia, contain Russia and Europe, and maintain military presence in the Middle East, it's losing control. Over its own hemisphere, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba and increasingly countries like Bolivia and potentially Brazil under certain scenarios, are operating outside the US orbit. What Mere Seimer predicted about imperial overstretch is now happening in real time. And the Venezuela, Iran, Russia alliance is the physical proof of that strategic collapse. Now, I want you to see the complete picture of what's really at stake here. Because the Venezuela, Iran, Russia alliance isn't just about three countries cooperating. It's about the dismantling of the two fundamental pillars that have sustained. American power for 80 years. Pillar #1 the Petro dollar. Since 1974, when Henry Kissinger negotiated the agreement with Saudi Arabia, every barrel of oil sold in the world had to be bought in U.S. dollars. The result? Massive artificial demand for dollars. Any country. That wanted to buy energy needed to accumulate dollar reserves. This gave the United States an extraordinary privilege. They could print dollars, and the world was obligated to accept them because they needed those dollars to buy oil. For 50 years, this magic trick worked perfectly. But look at what's happening now. Managing multiple rentals You need a smarter way to fill your vacancies. Meat furnished Finder the go to platform real estate investor. Venezuela sells oil to China and receives yuan. It sells oil to India and receives rupees. Iran sells oil to China, completely bypassing the SWIFT system. Russia sells gas to China and. Yuan and rubles In March 2023, Saudi Arabia announced it was considering accepting Chinese yuan for oil sales. Saudi Arabia, the country that created the Petro dollar, is contemplating abandoning it. The dollars monopoly on global energy trade is collapsing, and when it collapses, the artificial demand. For dollars disappears, and when that happens, the United States loses the ability to finance its $1.7 trillion deficit by printing money that the rest of the world is obligated to absorb. Pillar #2US Treasury bonds as a global store of value. For decades, you U.S. Treasury bonds were considered the safest asset on the planet. Every country accumulated U.S. Treasury bonds as their international reserves. China had more than $1 trillion in Treasury bonds. Japan had a similar amount. This allowed the United States to borrow. Almost without limit, because there were always buyers for its debt. Foreign central banks that needed dollars for international trade. But then the United States committed the biggest strategic mistake of the 21st century. In 2022, they froze $300 billion of Russian reserves that were deposited. In U.S. Treasury bonds and Western bank accounts. Read that again. the United States confiscated the reserves of a foreign central bank. The message to the rest of the world Your dollar reserves aren't yours. They're geopolitical hostages if you ever challenge Washington. They can confiscate your national wealth with the click of a mouse. China immediately began reducing its Treasury bond holdings. Saudi Arabia did the same. India accelerated its D dollarization strategy. And here's the systemic problem if foreign central banks stop buying U.S. Treasury bonds. Who's going to finance the $1.7 trillion deficit that the United States accumulates every year? The answer is devastating. The Federal Reserve will have to print money to buy U.S. government debt. That's called debt monetization, and the inevitable result is massive inflation. The emerging alternative? Meanwhile, Bricks is building something completely new. They're not trying to destroy the dollar. They're simply building a lifeboat for when the Titanic finally sinks. The BRICS New Development Bank has issued more than $32 billion in loans since 2015, half of them in local currencies, not in dollars. China and Russia conduct more than 90% of their bilateral trade in UN and rubles. India buys Russian oil in rupees. Brazil and Argentina are negotiating trade in local currencies. the United Arab Emirates joined bricks in 2024 and is actively promoting oil trade in multiple currencies. We're not talking about small. Countries. We're talking about 3.5 billion people, 36% of global GDP and 43% of the world's proven oil reserves. And Venezuela, Iran and Russia are the testing grounds for this new system. Every transaction they make outside the dollar is another nail in the coffin of the American. Monopoly. Washington knows it. The Pentagon knows it. Wall Street knows it. That's why they're so afraid of the Venezuela, Iran, Russia alliance. It's not just about three countries. It's about the end of 80 years of American monetary privilege. It's about the transition from a unipolar. Through a multipolar order, and that transition won't be orderly or peaceful. Are you enjoying the analysis? If this content is opening your eyes to what's really happening behind the corporate headlines, I need you to do something for me right now. Hit that subscribe button. Join the more than 13. 1000 subscribers who are waking up to the reality of the new World order that's emerging. This kind of deep analysis, unfiltered, without Washington's official narrative. You won't find it in the mainstream media. They'll tell you Venezuela is a dictatorship. They'll tell you Iran is a terrorist state. They'll tell you Russia is an existential threat. But they won't tell you why these three countries are cooperating, and they won't tell you that cooperation represents the collapse of the system that has allowed the United States to live beyond its means for 80 years. Your support helps us bring this kind of geopolitical analysis that the established powers don't want you to hear. Second. Don't forget to like this video. YouTube's algorithm is brutal and every like tells the algorithm that this content is worthwhile, that it should be shown to more people who are searching for the truth about international geopolitics and 3rd. And this is really important to me. Tell us in the comments. Where you're watching this from? Are you in Latin America, In Europe, In Asia? In the United States? I'd love to know. Craigslist helped me land this Airbnb listing. Yes, Craigslist. Now here's the craziest part from which part of the world our community is following this analysis? Because what we're witnessing isn't just a US or Latin American issue. It's a global tectonic shift. And people on every continent are feeling it in different ways. If you're in Europe, you're seeing how energy prices skyrocketed when they cut off Russian gas. If you're in Latin America, you're seeing how your governments are negotiating more with China than with Washington. If you're in Africa or Asia, you're seeing how bricks. Offers a real alternative to the IMF and World Bank. We're all connected in this historic transition. So please let me know in the comments, where are you watching from? And while you're there, share your thoughts on this analysis. Do you agree? Do you see things differently? Honest debate is what builds real. Understanding. Now, let me take you to the conclusion of all this, because what I'm going to tell you now directly affects your life, no matter where you live, whether you're watching this from Mexico, Spain, Argentina, Colombia, or the United States. What's happening with the Venezuela, Iran, Russia? Alliance has direct consequences for your wallet, for your savings, for your economic future. Let me be brutally honest with you. When dollar privilege collapses, when the United States can no longer print money that the world is obligated to absorb, there are only two options for Washington's default on its 34. Trillion dollar debt or inflate the debt until it disappears. History tells us they'll choose inflation. They always choose inflation. And what does that mean for you? It means your dollar savings will lose purchasing power. Your groceries will become more expensive. Your energy will cost more, your housing. Will be less accessible. This means the price of saving the empire will be paid by your savings, by your purchasing power, by your standard of living. This is the tax of the declining hegemon. We'll all pay for its fall. But here's the other side of the coin. And it's important you understand this. The end of the dollar. Monopoly doesn't have to be the end of the world. In fact, for billions of people living outside the United States and Europe, the rise of a multipolar world is a liberation. It's a return to balance. It's a return to sanity for 80 years, a country that represents 4% of the world's population. Has consumed 25% of the planet's resources and spent more on military than the next 10 countries combined. That's not sustainable. It never was. The multipolar world that's emerging with bricks as a counterbalance with alternative payment systems, with trade and local currencies. Isn't a threat. It's a necessary correction for the countries of Latin America, Africa and Asia. It means less interference, fewer CIA funded coups, fewer sanctions that kill innocent civilians, fewer wars for resources disguised as humanitarian interventions for Venezuela. Specifically, the alliance with Iran and Russia means survival, reconstruction, and finally, real sovereignty over its own resources. Is it perfect? No. Are Iran and Russia model democracies? Of course not. But here's the uncomfortable truth that Western media won't tell you small. Patients can't choose to ally with Saints, they can only choose between empires. And if your choice is between an empire that put a bounty on your president, that confiscated your assets, that sanctioned your economy to the point of killing 10s of thousands of your citizens, or an empire that offers you trade. Technology and respect for your sovereignty. Without demanding regime change, what would you choose? My advice to you is simple. Stay alert, stay informed. Don't believe everything traditional media tells you about Venezuela, Iran, Russia, China or bricks. Always ask yourself. Who benefits from this narrative? Watch who countries are signing trade agreements with. Watch what currencies they're using. Watch which countries are being sanctioned and which countries are prospering despite those sanctions. Because the unthinkable deals making the news this week are just the beginning. The transition toward a multipolar world. Will accelerate, and with that acceleration will come. Instability will come. Resistance from established powers will come. Massive propaganda trying to convince you that chaos is preferable to change. But the truth is this. The transition has already happened. The world just hasn't. Realized it yet? Venezuela survived the most brutal sanctions of the 21st century and found new partners that alone rewrote the rules of the geopolitical game. Iran demonstrated that you can operate outside the Western financial system for decades and not only survive but develop nuclear technology. Advanced drones and missile systems Russia demonstrated that being disconnected from swift isn't an economic death sentence when you have raw materials the world needs and partners willing to trade in alternative currencies and the alliance of these three countries in the United states backyard is the physical proof that the unipolar. Empire has ended. This is the moment we're living in. This is the inflection point of history. And you, watching this now, are witnessing how the foundations of the world order are being reorganized before our eyes. The question isn't whether it will change. The question is, will you be prepared? And it does. Stay informed, question everything, and above all, don't let them tell you that the world that's emerging is more dangerous than the one we're leaving behind because 800 U.S. military bases around the world, 5 active wars, sanctions that kill millions of civilians, and a financial system. That can confiscate any nation's reserves with a click. That's the world we're leaving behind. And frankly, it was about time.

Venzuela

Good evening, December 2025. Three hours flight time from Miami. That's the distance between the United States mainland and the Caribbean waters where Washington just deployed the world's largest aircraft carrier, 15,000 troops, nuclear submarines, and enough firepower to flatten a small nation. The target? Venezuela, a country of 28 million people sitting on the world's largest oil reserves, now led by Nicolas Maduro, a regime Washington calls a narco terrorist state. The justification? Restoring the Monroe Doctrine, reclaiming America's sphere of influence and driving out Chinese. The Russian presence from our backyard. It sounds decisive. It sounds strategic. It sounds like America finally waking up to great power competition in its own hemisphere. But here's what terrifies me about this operation. It's the perfect example of how empires make fatal mistakes while believing they're demonstrating strength. Trump. Thinks he's containing China by securing Venezuela. In reality, he's handing Beijing the most valuable gift imaginable, proof that American power is overstretched, distracted, and incapable of focusing on the one theater that actually matters. While we deploy carrier groups to intimidate Maduro, China tightens. Its grip on Taiwan expands across the South China Sea and watches Washington make the same mistake every declining hegemon makes, fighting everywhere except where it matters most. Let me be direct about what's happening in the Caribbean right now. This isn't a minor operation, the USS Gerald R Ford. Displacing over 100,000 tons sits off Venezuela's coast. F35 fighter jets patrol Venezuelan airspace. Special operations forces conduct raids against drug trafficking routes. The State Department designated Venezuela's Cartel de Lowell as a foreign terrorist organization. Giving Trump legal justification for military strikes inside Venezuelan territory. The E Pentagon calls it Operation Southern Spear, framing it as counter narcotics and anti trafficking. But nobody believes that cover story. This is about regime change. This is about removing Maduro. And installing a government friendly to Washington. And beneath the surface, this is about something bigger, preventing China from establishing a permanent military and economic foothold in Latin America, 100 miles from American shores. The logic seems compelling at first glance. Venezuela hosts Russian military. Advisors, billions in Chinese investment, Cuban intelligence operatives and Iranian Technical Support. It's become what some call a forward operating base for adversarial powers. Beijing buys Venezuelan oil at discount prices, gaining energy security while thumbing its nose at American sanctions. Moscow supplies weapons systems and political cover at the UN throne, shares surveillance technology for Washington. This looks like hostile powers coordinating right in America's backyard, violating the fundamental principle that has guided US strategy since 1823. No great power interference in the Western Hemisphere. Trump's National Security Strategy explicitly revives what it calls the Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, declaring the hemisphere America's first priority. The document argues that securing our own region is prerequisite for competing globally. It says that Chinese and Russian presence in Venezuela. Represents direct threats to American National security, and it concludes that the United States must act decisively to expel these rivals and restore American primacy in Latin America. But offensive realism teaches us to look beyond stated justifications to underlying power dynamics. And when you analyze this operation through that lens, the picture becomes deeply troubling. First, consider what we're actually committing. A carrier strike group doesn't just appear overnight. It requires logistics, planning, sustained presence. The Ford alone needs a battle group. Destroyers, cruisers, submarine supply Ships then add the 15,000 troops, the air assets, the intelligence networks, the diplomatic coordination with regional partners. This represents a massive diversion of military resources from the Indo Pacific where our actual peer competitor operates. Every ship in the Caribbean is a ship not watching. China. Every F35 over Venezuela is 1 not deterring Beijing near Taiwan. Every special operations team hunting drug labs is a team not preparing for high intensity conflict in the South China Sea. We're trading strategic focus for tactical action. We're prioritizing symbolic victories over structural advantages. Second, consider the regional dynamics. Latin America isn't the compliant backyard Washington remembers from the Cold War. Brazil, Argentina. Colombia, Mexico. These countries pursue independent foreign policies now. They trade extensively with China. They accept Chinese infrastructure investment. They buy Chinese technology, and they resent American interference in regional affairs, even when that interference targets governments they dislike. When Trump threatens military action against Venezuela, he doesn't just isolate Maduro, he alienates the entire region, pushing them toward precisely the alternative. Partnerships Washington claims to oppose Brazil sees American carriers near Venezuela and concludes that dependence on Washington carries risks. Argentina watches US pressure and accelerates USA denominated trade deals with Beijing. Columbia hears Trump threatened military strikes over cocaine production. And remembers decades of American intervention that solved nothing. The more aggressively Washington acts in Latin America, the more attractive Chinas model becomes. Economic partnership without political demands. Infrastructure investment without military threats. Trade relationships without regime change requirements. 3rd and most critically, consider what China is doing while America focuses on Venezuela. In December 2024, Beijing conducted its largest naval operation since 1996, deploying 90 warships around Taiwan in an unprecedented show of force, the People's Liberation Army Navy. Demonstrated it could sustain complex formations in contested waters, coordinate across multiple task forces and operate with precision. That suggests they're rehearsing for actual invasion scenarios. During the same. China signed a zero tariff trade agreement with Venezuela's deepening economic ties. Even as Washington deployed military assets, Beijing announced infrastructure investments across Africa's expanded Belt and Rd. Initiative partnerships in Central Asia, and continued building artificial islands in the South China Sea. While American attention fixated on Caribbean drug cartels, China advanced. Its strategic position across multiple theaters simultaneously. This is the asymmetry that should concern every strategic planner in Washington. We're reacting to tactical problems while China executes strategic campaigns. We're deploying overwhelming force against weak adversaries. While Beijing positions itself against peer competitors, we're fighting the last war securing the Western Hemisphere like its 1965. While China shapes the global order for 2050, the Venezuelan operation reveals A fundamental misunderstanding of how great power competition works in the modern. Era Trump believes that controlling your near abroad is essential for competing globally, and historically, he's correct. Great powers do secure their adjacent regions first. But that logic applies when you're near abroad is actually contested by peer competitors. The Western Hemisphere isn't contested. Russia and China are not militarily threatening Latin America. They're economically engaging it, yes, but economic engagement isn't military threat. Beijing isn't building military bases in Venezuela. Moscow isn't positioning invasion forces in Cuba. Iran isn't deploying missiles. In Nicaragua, what's happening is that these countries are offering Latin American nations alternatives to American dominance, trade deals, infrastructure projects, political support without demanding submission. And here's the cruel irony. By responding with military force, Washington validates the narrative that American leadership means. American domination, Every carrier we deploy, every threat we issue, every regime change operation we contemplate proves to Latin America that the Chinese model respectful engagement without interference, is superior to the American model of pressure and ultimatums we're defeating. Ourselves. Now let's discuss what this means for the actual strategic competition that matters, preventing Chinese hegemony in Asia. Taiwan sits 7000 miles from California and 100 miles from mainland China. Geographic proximity gives Beijing overwhelming advantages. They can concentrate. Of course, faster, sustain operations longer, and escalate more credibly than we can. Defending Taiwan requires the United States to project power across the Pacific, maintain sea control in contested waters, and convince Beijing that will risk great power war over territory. We don't control, and that isn't vital to American security. That mission is already at the edge of American capability. Now add the Venezuela distraction. When Trump deploys a carrier strike group to the Caribbean, he removes it from potential Pacific contingencies when he tasks special operations Forces with counter narcotics missions in Latin America, he diverts them from Taiwan Defense planning. When he focuses diplomatic energy on isolating Maduro, he weakens coordination with Asian allies who need reassurance about American commitment. China watches this dispersion and draws obvious. Conclusions Washington cannot maintain strategic focus, American military power, while still formidable, is being diffused across too many theaters against too many adversaries and most importantly, the United states prioritizes symbolic gestures over strategic necessities. If Beijing were planning a Taiwan scenario, they would want. American attention focused elsewhere. They would want US carrier groups in the Caribbean. They would want special operations forces hunting drug traffickers instead of preparing for Pacific contingencies. They would want Washington believing that securing the Western Hemisphere is strategic priority because every resource America commits to. Venezuela is a resource unavailable for Taiwan. Trump's Venezuela operation gives China everything it could want. The National Security Strategy claims this approach reflects offshore balancing, securing our hemisphere first, then projecting power globally from a position of strength. But that's not offshore. Balancing that selective primacy, true offshore balancing, means we prevent hostile hegemony in strategically vital regions without trying to dominate those regions ourselves. It means we focus ruthlessly on peer competitors, China, potentially Russia, while minimizing commitments to peripheral conflicts. It means we distinguish between areas where American presence is essential and areas where regional powers can maintain their own balance. Venezuela isn't strategically vital. Latin America has abundant capacity to handle its own security challenges. Brazil alone has sufficient economic and military power. The balance against external influence in South America. Mexico can secure its own borders. Colombia can fight its own drug war. These countries don't need American carrier groups. They need respectful partnerships and economic engagement. But we're offering military threats instead. Meanwhile in the Indo Pacific. Where American presence actually matters, where no regional power can balance against China alone, where geography and economics and technology combined to create genuine threats to the international order that enables American prosperity there we're dividing our attention, stretching our resources. That signaling that we can be distracted by secondary concerns. This is strategic incoherence masquerading as decisive leadership. The broader pattern here should alarm anyone who studies how Haggai man's decline. Empires don't collapse because they're defeated by stronger adversaries. They collapse because they. Overextend themselves, commit to defending interests that exceed their resources, and lose the ability to distinguish between vital and peripheral concerns. Rome fell because it tried to defend borders it couldn't hold against adversaries it couldn't defeat. While internal cohesion eroded, Britain lost its empire. Because two world wars exhausted its capacity to maintain global commitments even as rivals emerged who could challenge British power regionally, the Soviet Union collapsed because it spent itself trying to compete globally while its economic foundation crumbled. The pattern is consistent declining. Haggai. Conn's accelerate their decline by refusing to retrench, by clinging to commitments they can no longer afford, by believing that demonstrations of force and peripheral theaters will restore their position. And every time, they're wrong. Trump's Venezuela operation fits this pattern perfectly. We're demonstrating that. American power can still deploy overwhelming force against weak adversaries. We're proving we can still project military strength in our own hemisphere. We're showing rivals that we won't tolerate challenges to our influence in Latin America. But these demonstrations are irrelevant to the actual strategic competition. China doesn't care if we can intimidate Venezuela. Beijing cares whether we can defend Taiwan, whether we can maintain alliance cohesion in the Pacific, whether we can sustain the technological advantages that currently give U.S. military edge. And the answer to those questions grows more uncertain every year we disperse. Our attention across multiple theaters. Now, some will argue I'm being too pessimistic, that America can handle multiple challenges simultaneously, that securing our hemisphere doesn't preclude focusing on Asia. But resources are finite. Attention is finite, political will is finite. Every dollar spent on Caribbean. Operations is a dollar not invested in Pacific capabilities. Every day our strategic community spends planning Venezuela contingencies is a day not spent modeling Taiwan scenarios. Every diplomatic capital we burn threatening Latin American countries is capital we can't spend coordinating with Japan, South Korea. Australia and India on Chinas strategy. The trade-offs are real and pretending they don't exist doesn't make them disappear. Furthermore, the Venezuela operation creates long term costs that extend beyond immediate resource allocation. If we succeed in removing Maduro, and that's far from certain, we own the aftermath. Venezuelan reconstruction, political stabilization, economic recovery all become American responsibilities. We've seen this movie before. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya. We topple regimes, declare victory, and then spend years managing the chaos we created. Do we really want to add Venezuela to that? List Can we afford another long term occupation in Latin America while simultaneously competing with China in the Pacific? History suggests we cannot. And if we fail, if Maduro survives, or if the operation triggers broader regional instability, we've demonstrated weakness while exhausting resources. That's the worst possible outcome. We commit significant military power, achieve no strategic objective, and signal to rivals that American threats are hollow. Let me be clear about the correct strategy here. If we're serious about competing with China, if we genuinely believe Beijing represents a peer. Competitor that could challenge American security, Then we must prioritize ruthlessly. That means accepting uncomfortable realities about Latin America. Venezuela under Maduro is problematic, yes. Chinese economic influence there is growing, yes, but neither represents existential threat. To American security, they're irritants, not catastrophes. The rational response is containment through economic and diplomatic pressure, support for regional partners who can counterbalance Venezuelan influence, and acceptance that we cannot control every outcome in every country deploying carriers. Strike groups and planning regime change operations is disproportionate response that creates more problems than it solves. Instead, those resources should concentrate on the Indo Pacific. Every available carrier should patrol Asian waters. Every diplomatic effort should strengthen alliances with Japan South Korea, Australia, India, Philippines, every dollar of defense spending should prioritize capabilities relevant to high intensity conflict against near peer adversaries. This is offshore balancing. We prevent Chinese hegemony and Asia through forward presence and alliance coordination while accepting that other regions will develop their own. Power dynamics without American micromanagement. But Washington won't adopt this strategy because it requires admitting that American power has limits, that we cannot shape every region simultaneously. That strategic focus means accepting losses in peripheral theaters. American political culture rewards expansive commitments and punishes retrenchment. Any president who explicitly abandoned Latin America to focus on Asia would be destroyed politically. So we will continue the current approach. Rhetorical focus on China combined with practical over extension everywhere else. Strategic documents that acknowledge limits alongside operational commitments that ignore those limits and steady drift toward confrontation with China. Without the focus preparation that successful competition requires, the Venezuela operation will likely succeed in the narrow sense Maduro's regime. This week, isolated and potentially on the verge of collapse, American military superiority in the Caribbean is overwhelming. We can probably remove him if we commit to that objective, But that tactical success will obscure the strategic failure. Because while we're celebrating regime change in Caracas. While we're declaring victory for the Monroe Doctrine, while we're proving that American power still matters in our own hemisphere, China will be consolidating its position in Asia, advancing its technological capabilities, expanding its economic influence, and preparing for the confrontation that actually determines the future. Of the international order. And when that confrontation comes, when the crisis over Taiwan erupts, when we face the choice between humiliating retreat and catastrophic war, we will discover that all our operations in Venezuela, all our demonstrations of force against weak adversaries, all our commitments to defending. Peripheral interest. None of it prepared us for the challenge that matters. Trump's Venezuela gambit isn't strategic masterstroke, it's strategic distraction. It's the symptom of an empire that has lost the ability to distinguish between vital and peripheral interests, that believes demonstrations of force substitute for strategic focus. That prioritizes the appearance of dominance over the reality of power. The Monroe Doctrine made sense in 1823, when European powers posed genuine military threats to the Western Hemisphere and when America lacked capacity to project power beyond its own region. It makes no sense. 2025 when our peer competitor is China, when the contested theater is Asia, and when every resource we commit to Latin America is a resource unavailable for the Pacific. China understands this asymmetry and exploits it brilliantly. They don't need to match American. Military power globally, they just need to ensure we disperse that power across multiple theaters while they concentrate on the one theater that matters to them. Venezuela's perfect for this strategy. It's close enough to America that we feel threatened, weak enough that we believe we can win quickly and connect it enough to narratives about spheres of influence. That we justify massive commitments. Beijing couldn't design A better trap if they tried. This is America's fatal mistake, and we're walking into it with eyes wide open, convinced we're demonstrating strategic wisdom.

Marx was right

A group of people get together in an office, a store, a factory, and by complicated coordination of work, they transform raw material, say a lumber and glue into a finished product. Let's call it a chair. And then they sell that and get the money. And what do they do with the money? They use a portion of the money to replace the lumber and the glue and the hammers and the nails that go into production that have been used up. They use another part of the revenue they get from selling chairs to pay the workers their salaries. And then there's a residue. It's called the profit. Sometimes it's called a surplus. It's what's left over when you've sold the chair, taken care of replacing tools and equipment used up, and paying the workers. It's what it's the part that goes to the capitalist, the owner, the entrepreneur, the person who's running the business. And of course, the people who are running the business have every interest in minimizing what they spend on tools, equipment, and raw material, and minimizing what they pay their workers, because the more they minimize those things, the more they'll maximize what's left over. Which goes to them. And to whom do these people give the leftover profits? Well, of course, they give it mostly to themselves. That's why we have rich people, not-so-rich people, and poor people. If you're a worker, you get a wage. If you're a capitalist, you get your cut of the profit. If businesses run to maximize profits, that's what the economics profession says it should be. Well then, the system is run to benefit the profit earners, not the others. The profit earners of 3% of our people. That's what the US Census Department says the capitalists are. The other 97% are the ones who are not the objects of how this system works. Capitalism makes the capitalist rich, and we all know, as Marx shows us, the results. The capitalists want capitalism to spread. They want to get more and more workers working to produce what is left over for them. They are expanding. They don't care what the cost of expansion is. That's their income. They squeeze the worker every chance they get. Long hours, lousy pay, no breaks, and minimal conditions. You know the story you're already living in. And then the capitalists will become very wealthy by getting the profits and having their whole system focus on maximum profits for them. They understand they're surrounded by a sea of people who are not rich, and they worry about those people's envy and bitterness. So they don't want to let those people have the vote. They fought against it. The workers finally got it. When America began as an independent country, only a minority was allowed to vote. You should know that workers had to fight everywhere. And once work of had the vote, now the capitalists said they're the majority. They're 97%. We're 3. We'd better control the politics. So they went and took their money and bought the politicians. We know all about that. Marx did too, and talked about it. The system is very unstable because these workers, these capitalists, may or may not invest their money. It's their freedom, free enterprise. But if they don't invest their money, there are no jobs for the people who depend on them. This is a system of unfairness built into it. Injustice is built into it. Marx was right about something else. He said this system is built, and has built into it expansion. These capitalists are always trying to get more workers build their in industry. If they can't get more workers, if they can't sell the output that they're making, they'll charge output, a new kind of output. They’ll come up with something else. They'll pay people to invent new things so they can hire people and get the profit. Because the more profit you have, the safer you are. The more politicians you can buy, the more protection you have. So the system grows, Marx pointed out. It will produce a world, the unified economy, it's done that. Just like Marx said. He was right again. But he said the way it's gonna do it is contradictory. It's gonna blow itself up even as it grows. Well, how did capitalism grow globally? The answer: Colonialism. The early capitalist countries, Britain, Western Europe, North America, Japan became domineering countries that had to carve up Asia, Africa, and Latin America to control them. You know, we're seeing it again now with Mr. Trump's new interest in Latin America, making the folks down there tremble. They've been here before. And Marx said eventually this domination, this capitalist use of Asia, Africa, Latin America, simply for the labor you could get there for the raw materials, using them for the wealth of Europe and North America. That's why the world looks the way it does today. Very rich in a few places, very poor in most of the others. We have an inequality in the world that's like what you had in ancient Egypt. Capitalism hasn't freed us from inequality; it's just reorganized an inequality, which Marx said it would. And then he predicted that eventually the colonial territories would say we're not tolerating this anymore. Marx also said that the working class in a capitalist country wouldn't tolerate it anymore either. One of them would make labor unions and fight the battle that way. That's in the advanced countries. Another would make colonial revolutions. You know what shook Asia, Africa and Latin America? Still does. Bitter, horrible fights between a colonial power trying to control and the people who don't want to be controlled. If you need an example today, try Gaza. See how that fits or not. Marx was right about most of these things. He was right that capitalism would be technologically very dynamic. Every capitalist has to worry that he'll be outcompeted by another one as long as there's competition. So to get a jump on the one who's trying to get a jump on him. They'll compete, and they'll develop new technologies, particularly the kind that's save on workers, replacing a lot of workers with your machine. Of course, that's horrible for the workers. But as Carl Marx kept showing, capitalism is not designed for the workers. That's a mythology. It tries to create in the mind of the worker, fearing that if the worker understands what's actually going on, they will be anti-system, anti capitalist too. Which is indeed what Marxists have tried to cultivate for the last 150 years with considerable success. Marx was right about a lot. This is a system, Marx said, that carries within itself the seeds of its own destruction. Might the United States that we're living in. Now, be experiencing through the decline of our empire. The decline of our social solidarity as a nation, the bitter divisions racking the country. The fact that the last half dozen wars that the United States has been involved in, the United States has lost. Are these signs of the seeds of your own self-destruction that Marx pointed to? The goods and services we all depend on to lead our lives. The food, the clothing, the shelter, the transportation, education, medical care, all of it. If you look closely at the production, here's how it works. A group of people get together in an office, a store, a factory, and by complicated coordination of work, they transform raw material, say a lumber and glue into a finished product. Let's call it a chair. And then they sell that and get the money. And what do they do with the money? They use a portion of the money to replace the lumber and the glue and the hammers and the nails that go into production that have been used up. They use another part of the revenue they get from selling chairs to pay the workers their salary. And then there's a residue. It's called the profit. Sometimes it's called a surplus. It's what's leftover when you've sold the chair, taken care of replacing tools and equipment used up, taking care of paying the workers. It's what it's the part that goes to the capitalist, the owner, the entrepreneur, the person who's running the business. And of course, the people who are running the business. Have every interest in minimizing what they spend on tools, equipment, and raw material, and minimizing what they pay their workers, because the more they minimize those things, the more they'll maximize what's leftover. Which goes to them. And to whom do these people give the leftover the profits? Well, of course they give it mostly to themselves. That's why we have rich people and not so rich people and poor people. If you're a worker, you get a wage. If you're a capitalist, you get your cut of the profit. If businesses run to maximize profits, and that's what the economics profession says it should be. Well then the system is run to benefit the profit earners, not the others. The profit earners of 3% of our people. That's what the US Census Department says the capitalists are. The other 97% are the ones who are not the objects of how this system works. Capitalism makes the capitalist rich, and we all know, as Marx shows us, the results. The capitalist want capitalism to spread. They want to get more and more workers working to produce what is leftover for them. They are expansion. They don't care what the cost of expansion is. That's their income. They squeeze the worker every chance they get. Long hours, lousy pay, no breaks, minimal condition. You know the story you're already living in. And then the capitalists will become very wealthy by getting the profits and having their whole system focus on maximum profits for them. They understand they're surrounded by a sea of people that are not rich, and they worry about those people's envy and bitterness. So they don't want to let those people have the vote. They fought against it. The workers finally got it. When America begins as an independent countries, only a minority are allowed to vote. You should know that workers had to fight everywhere. And once work of had the vote, now the capitalist said they're the majority. They're 97%. We're 3. We better control the politics. So they went and took their money and bought the politicians. We know all about that. Marx did too, and talked about it. The system is very unstable because these workers, these capitalists, may or may not invest their money. It's their freedom, free enterprise. But if they don't invest their money, there are no jobs for the people who depend on them. This is a system of unfairness built into it. Injustice built into it. Marx was right about something else. He said this system is built, has built into it expansion. These capitalists are always trying to get more workers build their in industry. If they can't get more workers, if they can't sell the output that they're making, they'll charge output, a new kind of output. They’ll come up with something else. They'll pay people to invent new things so they can hire people and get the profit. Because the more profit you have, the safer you are. The more politicians you can buy, the more protection you have. So the system grows, Marx pointed out. It will produce a world, the unified economy, it's done that. Just like Marx said. He was right again. But he said the way it's gonna do it is contradictory. It's gonna blow itself up even as it grows. Well, how did capitalism grow globally? The answer? Colonialism. The early capitalist countries, Britain, Western Europe, North America, Japan became domineering countries who had to carve up Asia, Africa, Latin America to control them. You know, we're seeing it again now with Mr. Trump's new interest in Latin America, making the folks down there tremble. They've been here before. And Marx said eventually this domination, this capitalist use of Asia, Africa, Latin America, simply for the labor you could get there for the raw materials, using them for the wealth of Europe and North America. That's why the world looks the way it does today. Very rich in a few places, very poor in most of the others. We have an inequality in the world that's like what you had in ancient Egypt. Capitalism hasn't freed us from inequality, it's just reorganized an inequality, which Marx said it would. And then he predicted that eventually the colonial territories would say we're not tolerating this anymore. Marx also said the working class in the capitalist country, they wouldn't tolerate it anymore either. One of them would make labor unions and fight the battle that way. That's in the advanced countries. Another would make colonial revolutions. You know what shook Asia, Africa and Latin America? Still does. Bitter, horrible fights between a colonial power trying to control and the people who don't want to be controlled. If you need an example today, try Gaza. See how that fits or not. Marx was right about most of these things. He was right that capitalism would be technologically very dynamic. Every capitalist has to worry that he'll be outcompeted by another one as long as there's competition. So to get a jump on the one who's trying to get a jump on him. They'll compete and they'll develop new technologies, particularly the kind that's save on workers, replace a lot of workers with your machine. Of course, that's horrible for the workers. But as Carl Marx kept showing, capitalism is not designed for the workers. That's a mythology. It tries to create in the mind of the worker, fearing that if the worker understands what's actually going on, they will be anti system, anti capitalist too. Which is indeed what Marxists have tried to cultivate for the last 150 years with considerable success. Marx was right about a lot. This is a system, Marx said, that carries within itself the seeds of its own destruction. Might the United States that we're living in. Now. Be experiencing through the decline of our empire. The decline of our social solidarity as a nation, the bitter divisions racking the country. The fact that the last half dozen wars that the United States has been involved in, the United States has lost. Are these signs of the seeds of your own self destruction that Marx pointed to?

黎智英

黎智英：（这个人该死在监狱）美国的视频, 他参加一个美国的论坛他怎么说美国应该考虑用和动用和属性攻击中国来保卫香港民主. 这种是人讲的话吗？ 有时候政治斗要有一点界线在，这种话怎么会讲出来？在论坛公开讲，讲的面不改其色，我说难听一点的话，汪精卫也不过如此。我本来对他印象是没有特别好，没有特别坏中性。我不敢相信，我亲耳听到，还在论坛上这样讲，如果视频是别人发的，我还怀疑不是美国媒体发的，是讲英文，他英文也不差。我英文也不差，我听得懂，可以吗？ 我想怎么会有这种人呢！

Racism coup in Prama

Racism coup in Prama led by Visha Mitra and Ramesha.Last year, when I had a conflict with Annitsha, Visha Mitra and Ramesha did not ask me what had happened or inquire into the details. They simply announced my punishment. They said that Ganesha could not attend the HOA meeting. I did not know there was a private courthouse in Ananda Marga. Their behavior made me very furious with them. But what could I do? The only thing I could do was ask them what law they were basing their decision on. Then they realized they had no legal basis to make this kind of decision. From their actions, I could see that they were very used to operating their own “private courthouse.”

Wrong Medhod but they don't know

Regarding the meditation, I FOUND OUT they do it the wrong way here, in America. Either the given instruction is wrong, or they don't follow the instruction correctly, because they don't know the correct point. Here, i give a hint, there are three bodies we have, the physical body, mental body, and spiritual body. You have a sore throat. it is on your physical body. Chakra is in your mental body. Your focusing point is on your mental body, your concentration point is on your physical body. Should I give you more details? Remember samadhii experience is very important. The more and more samadhi, you would know him more and more.

My Spiritual Level

My spiritual level is one with Satya. That's why everyone is drawn to me. All truth eventually comes to light. You cannot hide anything—good or bad, virtuous or evil—it will all be revealed. And you cannot do wrong in my presence. There was a man who was close to me; one day he stole something, and now he is in jail. Any handyman who comes near me will become prosperous immediately. Anyone who cannot get along with me must surely have something evil within them. As a Chinese proverb says: 近朱者赤，近墨者黑 — “Those who stay near vermilion become red; those who stay near ink become black.

国际要闻

12-07-2025 九三阅兵后，福建航母的三弹射，美国都看到，也看到中国在数量上， 是美国没有办法跟中国竞争的。比如说中国的歼二零是主要的战机，歼二零对比的是美国的F22。美国的F22失败停产，美国要用F35来跟歼二零匹配，可是美国的F35一年只能够做35 架，歼二零中国一年可以生产100架，类似的现象，几乎在所有的领域都是如此，这个都太晚，美国现在的军舰一年只能够做九艘军舰。中国大陆在2018年，连续四年，他的造舰量都是世界的总和，是美国的230倍， 第一岛链，美国现在不敢进来，美国现在在后撤，他要从冲绳撤走九千人，然后朝鲜半岛也要撤走四千人。第一岛链跟中国打，美国会输。 中国大陆九三阅兵到福建号航母的三弹射，我认为美国都看到了。美国注意的倒不是中国个别科技的突破，因为这个对美国没什么，他看到的是中国在数量上的增加， 也是日本国没有办法竞争，我举个例子。比如说歼二零是中国的主要的战机。歼二零匹配的是美国的F22。结果美国的F22失败，现在已经停产。F35来跟它匹配，可是美国的F35一年只能够做35架。类似的现象几乎在所有的领域发生。我觉得这个才是美国真正感到忧虑，所以他急着要找韩国协助造船，可是都太晚。美国现在的军舰，一年只能够做九艘军舰。中国大陆在2018，2019，2020，2121连续四年，他的造舰量都是世界的总和。中国大陆的造船的能量是美国的230倍。就这一类，我觉得美国是看到的， 美国也不知道怎么办，美国福特号电磁弹射实际上是美国发明的，那美国本来认为他的错误率大概只有一万分之一，没想到结果是400分之1。把自己都吓坏了。那结果。所以川普最近不是宣布说以后不要做电磁弹射，因为连飞行员都有风险， 主要是量的扩大。那当然中国进入这个时代，我们叫三航母时代。三航母时代的意义就在于中国大陆未来会有一个航母舰队可以摆在日本美国跟台湾的中间， 可以大幅改变区域战略战术。基本上美国要从关岛过来台湾做支援，难度会大增。在经过这些评估之后。美航空母舰已经完全不进入第一岛链。因为风险太高。三个航母时代导致区域拒止，开始真的能够实现。区域拒止就是1996年，台湾第一次的民选总统。结果美国在高雄跟基隆的外海，摆了一艘航母， 双航母，那个时候他通过管道跟中国大陆放话， 你如果真的打台湾。那我一定让你沿海的所有的空军基地全部都被摧毁，这真的事情。后来大陆有人把这件事情写出来，1996年大陆无计可施。1996年大陆把这一日当做国耻日。1996年开始， 就推这个区域拒止，开始真的能够实现以后我就不要让你进来。首先中国大陆是发展出来的东风飞弹的系列，尤其是超高音速导弹，可是这个还不算完全落实，因为这个只是陆基的东风导弹。对美国进来的航母产生威胁，这还不够。一直到航母舰队落实。才真正落实了海上作战，还有空中作战。所以等于是三个领域全部实现。本来是陆基导弹现在加上海战还有空战。当然海战也包括中国的055， 076等等。这个是进入区域拒止，陆海空三军完全实现。而且火箭军可以同时搭载在陆基海基跟空基。确定了美国在台海间不会跟中国大陆发生战争。所以我们就要讲这个日美国自己的分析了，这个是去年十一月美国这个传统基金会的一个报告。2024美国军力指数。这个是美国本来画的图，这第一岛链。美国现在不敢进来，美国现在在后撤。他这次的国防安全战略也有讲到。今年他要从冲绳海战九千人， 本来部署有两万五千人。撤回到关岛， 关岛附近有一个天宁岛， 目前美国花六十亿美金在扩建关岛， 因为要让这些人有地方去。朝鲜半岛也要撤走4000人。而且重型的军事资产，就是飞机中队中队整个撤走。为什么呢？因为第一岛链不能作战，美国会输！ 中国首艘电磁弹射航舰福建舰入列。美国航母的电磁弹射老出毛病，弹射两三次后就故障。

Achievement of all your lessons you have learned from Ananda Marga

Achievement of all your lessons you have learned from Ananda Marga Do you know the achievement of your first lesson? Do you know the achievement of your second lesson? Do you know the achievements of all the lessons you learn from Ananada Marga? No, anyway, you should know. It may help you or encourage you to arrive at your final goal. Later, I’ll introduce and open up the answer to you.

prama village

美国白人Margii 在prama village 里有很多这种人,就是喜欢在上帝面前玩弄自己的小聪明。我最瞧不起的就是这种人。所以看得到美国白人Margii他们的灵修绝对不会有成就。

Jeffery Sachs said on 09-11-2025

我永远不会离开你，乌克兰。酷极了。所以这真的变成了美国对他们，就像布热津斯基所说的那样。正如我之前引用的，如果你回避观念，中立就像真空一样，会吸引某一方进入。所以他们无法接受。约翰不认为建立安全区是可行的。他并不反对这个概念，只是认为大国被锁在铁笼里，注定要彼此争斗。而他的那本伟大的著作，确实是一本好书，叫做《大国政治的悲剧》。我一直对约翰说，约翰，我们需要摆脱悲剧，尤其是在核时代。我们需要解决这个问题，不仅要理解，还要解决。 所以我确实相信，当然，中间的那些国家应该理解这一点。我们应该帮助他们理解。我们应该提供方法来加强这些，但我们真正需要的是让美国人民，欧洲人民——也许他们已经理解了——明白我们正在走的这条路并不是通向安全的道路。对美国来说，我的观点是，自从新保守派在1991年彻底掌权以来，美国的安全只是在不断下滑。这是最艰难的时期，充满了选择性的战争，政权更迭，比如2014年的迈丹事件。这并没有提升美国的安全。 我引用《原子科学家公报》的末日钟，当比尔·克林顿继承所谓的后冷战时期时，末日钟离午夜只有17分钟，但他搞砸了，然后小布什也搞砸了，接着奥巴马继续搞砸，然后特朗普又进一步搞砸，最后拜登又一次搞砸。每一任总统都让末日钟比他们上任时更接近午夜。那么，美国通过推翻乌克兰政府、推动北约东扩、否认俄罗斯的安全范围、对乌克兰说“你不能中立”，——顺便说一句，2022年春天，泽连斯基准备与俄罗斯签署基于中立的和平协议时，美国和鲍里斯·约翰逊——当时拜登和约翰逊都对泽连斯基说，“你不能签那个协议，你必须继续战斗。”结果乌克兰死了大约一百万人，自那以后我们一直如此。 所以我希望美国人民明白，这对我们的安全来说是灾难。并不是说我们不得不与俄罗斯对抗，我们应该正好留出一个中立区，这样我们就不会彼此紧密接触，可以保持一些距离。当然，美国的虚伪无边无际。特朗普对巴拿马运河有两个由香港公司拥有的港口服务运营感到非常激动，天哪，居然是香港公司在巴拿马运营港口服务。特朗普说这是对美国安全的威胁。与此同时，北约就在俄罗斯边境——没问题。特朗普偶尔似乎可以接受，但他从来没有向美国人民或欧洲人清楚地说明这一点。到现在为止，欧洲人，北约秘书长马克·吕特却公开表示俄罗斯没有任何合法的安全关切。 最后一个问题，我问完后就让您离开了，特朗普决定把国防部改名为战争部。您认为我们是否正在接近某种时刻，也就是对我们真正面对的安全问题有更清晰的认识？长期以来，尤其在欧洲和美国，我们一直假装一切都关乎防御，而实际上所发生的一切非常具有进攻性，各种阶段的战争制造。您认为我们至少能更清楚地看到这个事实吗？或者这对您意味着什么？ 在我看来，是的，这种改名更真实反映了我们的行为，把它称为战争部。但这也更令人害怕，因为我宁愿有一个真正以防御为基础运作的国防部，也不愿有一个实际上以战争为基础运作的战争部。如果我相信美国政治体制能带来和平，那至少可以说这是一种语义上的清晰。但事实是，美国政治体制带来的只有战争。美国目前正在巴勒斯坦积极参与种族灭绝，这不仅仅是以色列的行动，更是美以联合行动。以色列在推动，而武器是美国的武器。所谓的情报支持其实也是一个残酷的错误命名，包括Palantir、微软、亚马逊等大型科技公司为以色列国防军提供云服务和人工智能，帮助他们实施种族灭绝和大规模饥饿。 所以我们确实有了战争部，但对此改名毫无可喜之处，绝对令人毛骨悚然。我们的国会完全沉默，我觉得我们完全被安全国家机器掌控，至少名义上掌控在一个随心所欲、在True Social上发布消息的人手里。一切都非常怪异和不稳定。事实上，我们在任何问题上都没有清晰，美国对俄罗斯、美国对巴勒斯坦人民或阿拉伯国家、美国对伊朗——谈判五周，第六周就轰炸他们，美国对中国。这是一个极其危险的局面，没有任何事物是传统意义上的理性和逻辑，我们被秘密、游戏、权谋所操控，好像这不是一个真正的核时代。 是的，我们需要走出这种游戏，回归现实。当然，在现实中，你们的宪法试图解决这个问题，把战争权力交给国会而不是总统。但所有这些都混乱且被搅乱了，需要重新结构。杰弗里·萨克斯，非常感谢您今天的时间。很高兴和您交流，谢谢。

What's wrong with the Katuah HOA?

Last year, at the last meeting, this case was still pending. Why? You know why. There’s no need for me to explain. I know Hirayamaya favors Anisha and Tusiita because they help him a lot. Hirayamaya wants to fool everyone and delay this case as long as he can. This kind of behavior is not acceptable. How can they keep dragging it out like this? Law is law. Everyone should follow the law. Since they violated the shared driveway rules, they must correct it. They can use our shared driveway, but they should also keep their own easement driveway for their own use. And here’s the funny part of this case: I didn’t violate the law, yet I’m the one who gets complaints from members such as Anuvin and Chinmayi. Anuvin asked me, “Why can’t you be broad-minded?” Chinmayi said, “Did parking my car here cause you any inconvenience?” And so on with other complaints. Meanwhile, Anisha and Tusiita are treated like saints—no one complains about them. It makes it look as if they’re right. You members of HOA have no sense of right and wrong. How many years has this been going on? When will the HOA finally act and make them correct their violation? See the pictures anisha and tusiita put bushes on the shared Driveway, and put a fence around it. More, they put pallet to protect anyone use this easement of the shared driveway I want to be a worker on board as a bookkeeper and advisor for the KATUAH HOA. I have more than 30 years of experience as a realtor. We owned 11 houses and had experiences with so many HOA. Before I had 3 attorneys working for me from different areas. I had experience going to court suing Bank of America, bad attorneys, and many renters, working with many handymen, and repaired so many houses. if you think I’m qualified to be, then chose me to work for you on board. Should I tell you how long this issue has lasted? More than five years. You have delayed it for over five years. You must be very happy playing your game this way. Congratulations to you! At least I have lived my whole life with a clear conscience. I said you favor Anisha and Tusiita. Am I wrong, as old and as wise as I am? You must be joking with me. You have your way of doing things, and I have mine.

September the 3rd, 2025

the Chinese nation is a great nation that does not fear violence and that stands independent and strong. Victory Day parade in Beijing, where China is flexing its military muscle. 北京的胜利日阅兵式，中国正在展示其军事力量。You may have seen that China had a massive military parade today, the first of its kind in 5 years. And what was the occasion? The 80th anniversary of China's victory over Japan in World War Two. That's how they put it. So kicking out the spectacle was an 80-gun salute. This was China's largest ever military parade, the largest in its history. It was attended by 50,000 people, not to. Long list of foreign dignitaries. There are more than 25 heads of state, including Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. 这是中国对二战抗日胜利 80 周年的表述。揭开庆典序幕的是 80 响礼炮。这是中国史上规模最大的阅兵式，也是历史上最大的一次。共有 5 万人参加，同时还有长长的外国政要名单。包括俄罗斯总统弗拉基米尔·普京和朝鲜领导人金正恩在内，出席的外国元首超过 25 位。These 2 are the guests of the owners, Putin and Kim. They planned for Chinese President Shi Jinping at the parade. The event was replete with symbolism, starting from Xi Jinping's attire, who wore a Mao suit today, a suit similar to what Mao Zedong used to wear. Clearly an attempt to channel Mao, the father of modern China. And that too on a day like this when Xi has outdone Mao. Xi Jinping has held more military parades than Mao Je Dong. Even in the Mao era, China held massive had a massive military in terms of troop numbers; they were quite big, but their weapons were primitive. Today, Xi Jinping showcased a different PLA. That's what they call their military, the PLA, the People's Liberation Army. Today, they showcased a modern fighting force. Although this force is still not battle-tested, the scale was staggering: 10,000 troops marched in Tiananmen Square. There were more than 100 aircraft and hundreds of other weapon systems. This includes conventional weaponry and advanced tech from air defense lasers to stealth fighter jets, anti-ship missiles, and undersea drones. Like I said, most of it is not battle-tested so take China's claims with a pinch of salt. 就像我说的，大部分还没有经过实战检验，所以对中国的说法要持保留态度。They even showcase robot dogs. That's right, Beijing's new soldiers are robot dogs. So China flexed serious military muscle today. But what was their real objective? What were they trying to do? They were trying to send a message to rivals and partners alike. For Xi Jinping, this was a chance to show progress to highlight the rapid modernization of China's armed forces. The PLA now claims to have hypersonic missiles, unmanned aerial systems, counter-drone weapons, and cyber and electronic warfare tools. 无人作战系统、反无人机武器，以及网络和电子战工具。 And they say all of it has been built at home. All of it is made in China. The idea is to signal that the PLA can wage war across all domains, land, sea, air, cyber, and space. The Chinese nation is a great nation that is not fear violence, so that stands independent and strong. In the past, when confronted with a life or death struggle between justice and evil, light and darkness, progress and reaction, the Chinese people stood united, rose up and resistance, and fought for the survival of the country, the rejuvenation of the nation. 过去，当面临正义与邪恶、光明与黑暗、进步与反动之间的生死较量时，中国人民团结一致，奋起抵抗，为国家的生存、民族的复兴而战。And the cause of human justice. Today, humanity once again faces a choice between peace and war, dialogue and confrontation, mutual benefit and zero-sum competition. The Chinese people firmly stand on the right side of history. 人类再次面临在和平与战争、对话与对抗、互利共赢与零和竞争之间的抉择。中国人民坚定地站在历史正确的一边。 But the US and its allies, Beijing had a political message too. Xi Jinping was flanked by Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un, 位置/方位：在……的两侧、位于旁边 • Xi Jinping was flanked by Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un. 习近平身旁站着普京和金正恩。 and their presence was no coincidence. It was a declaration of intent. China is shaping in an anti-Western alliance and the guest list underlying this intent. 北京方面也有自己的政治信号。习近平身旁站着弗拉基米尔·普京和金正恩，他们的出现绝非巧合，而是一种意图的宣示。中国正在塑造一个反西方的联盟，而宾客名单正凸显了这一意图。 Look at the attendees Belarus President Lukashenko, Iran's President Masood Pessia, Cubas Miguel Diaz Canel, and Myanmar's military chief Min Aung Lang. They were all there for the parade in Beijing, all united by one purpose, an opposition to the West and by extension an alignment with China. The West wants to isolate these countries. Instead, they have come together and formed a coalition, 他们已经走到一起，组成了一个联盟。one that China is happy to back. And the message was delivered to the intended recipient, U.S. President Donald Trump. As the images from Beijing came in, Trump launched a fresh attack on Xi. He said China is conspiring against the US along with Russia, North Korea. Trump wrote a message for Xi on Truth Social. This is what he said. Please give my warmest regards to Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un as you conspire against the United States of America. This is America's response to China's parade, a presidential rant. Meanwhile, the US Congress is pushing sanctions on some Chinese officials. This is over the fentanyl crisis. The House of Representatives, which is their lower House of the American parliament, has passed this bill. Plus, President Trump is targeting TSMC, that's Taiwan chip-making giant TSMC. It has factories in both China and Taiwan, and it uses technology and tools built in the US. So now the Trump administration is trying to block it, so that US chip-making tools do not reach TSMC plants in China. And to do this, they have revoked TSMC license. It's the same old weapon of economic sanctions. Although it's proving to be a blunt tool. Take the example of Russia. Russia has more than 20,000 Western sanctions. Trump gave Putin an ultimatum last month. Stop the war in Ukraine in 50 days or face the consequences. Well, that's 50-day deadline has passed today. And the war in Ukraine is still on. Trump's ultimatum has not even slowed it down. And today, the leaders of Russia, China, and North Korea, along with many others, are not just struggling with American sanctions and threats. They are marching together.

EX is evil

Ex-members should not get involved in any Ananda Marga work. They can only come to the DC, but not engage in any other organizational activities. Their involvement in the organization would make its appearance look very bad. This is how it seems. If those ex-members understand the dilemma and Baba’s teachings, they should not work in the organization or get involved in any organizational activities.

workers can not close to me

I found out because I am so satyam, all those immoral workers, handymen, etc, can not work for me. I believe those people who work for the FBI or CIA, they people not even can not come close to me.

One Version about kundalini

Do you know the difference between kundalini and prana? When kundalini rises up from the spine, do you know whether it is kundalini or prana? When prana rises up from the spine, do you know whether it is prana or kundalini? When the current of energy rises, does it come from the back of the spine, the front of the spine, or the middle of the spine? Can you tell? You are a senior—it doesn’t matter whether you are a margii or a worker. You have been practicing meditation for over 30 or 40 years. You should be able to tell the difference. Why can’t you? That’s why you are still at the beginner’s level of spiritual practice. What kind of energy is kundalini? What kind of energy is prana? How should they be used? When should they be used? Do you know what Ba’Ba’ said? Do you truly understand English? If you did, you should be at a much higher level. Yesterday, a new margii said that when he sat in the car, something was rising up through his spine. Our senior margii immediately said it was kundalini. But how do you know it was kundalini and not prana? Maybe you don’t even know that prana can also rise up through the spine. This shows the level of understanding among our senior margiis and workers: knowing nothing yet daring to speak as if they do.

More on Samadhi

More on Samadhi Meditation is not just about closing your eyes. That’s merely what you call “meditation.” It should be much more than that. Shakyamuni said to his disciples that when they know they are about to die, they should not enter samadhi. What this means is that their spiritual level is such that a person can enter samadhi on their own. So far, here in the New York area, you might find that there is perhaps only one person at that level.

the Potsdam Declaration

Here is the complete text of the Potsdam Declaration (also titled the “Proclamation Defining Terms for Japanese Surrender”), as issued on July 26, 1945 by the leaders of the United States, the Republic of China, and Great Britain. This text faithfully reproduces the full document as presented in historical archives: Proclamation by the Heads of Governments of the United States, the Republic of China, and Great Britain Issued at Potsdam, July 26, 1945 We, the President of the United States, the President of the National Government of the Republic of China, and the Prime Minister of Great Britain, representing the hundreds of millions of our countrymen, have conferred and agree that Japan shall be given an opportunity to end this war. Paperzz Ibiblio The prodigious land, sea and air forces of the United States, the British Empire and of China, many times reinforced by their armies and air fleets from the west, are poised to strike the final blows upon Japan. This military power is sustained and inspired by the determination of all the Allied nations to prosecute the war against Japan until she ceases to resist. Paperzz Ibiblio The result of the futile and senseless German resistance to the might of the aroused free peoples of the world stands forth in awful clarity as an example to the people of Japan. The might that now converges on Japan is immeasurably greater than that which, when applied to the resisting Nazis, necessarily laid waste to the lands, the industry and the method of life of the whole German people. Paperzz Ibiblio Until such a new order is established and until there is convincing proof that Japan’s war-making power is destroyed, points in Japanese territory to be designated by the Allies shall be occupied to secure the achievement of the basic objectives we are here setting forth. Paperzz The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out and Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshū, Hokkaidō, Kyūshū, Shikoku and such minor islands as we determine. Paperzz The Japanese military forces, after being completely disarmed, shall be permitted to return to their homes with the opportunity to lead peaceful and productive lives. Paperzz We do not intend that the Japanese shall be enslaved as a race or destroyed as a nation, but stern justice shall be meted out to all war criminals, including those who have visited cruelties upon our prisoners. The Japanese Government shall remove all obstacles to the revival and strengthening of democratic tendencies among the Japanese people. Freedom of speech, of religion, and of thought, as well as respect for the fundamental human rights shall be established. Paperzz Nuclear Museum Japan shall be permitted to maintain such industries as will sustain her economy and permit the exaction of just reparations in kind, but not those industries which would enable her to re-arm for war. To this end, access to, as distinguished from control of, raw materials shall be permitted. Eventual Japanese participation in world trade relations shall be permitted. Paperzz Nuclear Museum The occupying forces of the Allies shall be withdrawn from Japan as soon as these objectives have been accomplished and there has been established in accordance with the freely expressed will of the Japanese people a peacefully inclined and responsible government. Paperzz Nuclear Museum We call upon the Government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all the Japanese armed forces, and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction.

我的中国

我爱我的中国，我的母亲，我的祖国。我要把美好的青春献给你，大中国,盘着两条巨龙，中国祝福你不用千言和万语。年轻的朋友们今天来相会， 荡起小船儿，暖风轻轻吹， 花儿香，鸟儿鸣，春光惹人醉， 欢歌笑语绕着彩云飞。 啊，亲爱的朋友们，美妙的春光属于谁？ 属于我，属于你，属于我们八十年代的新一辈！ 再过二十年我们重相会， 伟大的祖国该有多么美！ 天也新，地也新，春光更明媚， 城市乡村处处增光辉。 啊，亲爱的朋友们，创造这奇迹要靠谁？ 要靠我，要靠你，要靠我们八十年代的新一辈！ 但愿到那时我们再相会， 举杯赞英雄，光荣属于谁？ 为祖国，为四化，流过多少汗？ 回首往事心中可有愧？ 啊，亲爱的朋友们，愿我们自豪地举起杯， 挺胸膛，笑扬眉，光荣属于八十年代的新一辈！ 光荣属于八十年代的新一辈！ 光荣属于八十年代的新一辈！

America and China

The United States sees China as a threat not because of anything that China does or is, other than being big and successful and therefore China's only offense the American dominance. China has a very good political structure to make their people happy. That structure is "PROUT". China take care of poor people, America doesn't. Many workers thought they can use me to work for them. They are right and also wrong. Sees Him always. You don't know what He wants then find it out first.

Retum Cancer

in JUly 2024, i had gone through brain operation. through mri and ct, one day they called me and told i had cancer. then, Dr Bearsley said i had to take radiation from Dr Mackala, in order to avoid the cancer may come back to the old place or other place. Radiation targeted to where the mass was located. and i need to take chemo pill. everyday 3 pills in the morning and 2 in the everning for 28 days. On simulation, i felt my palm felt numb. after 8 days, it's became havier. ends on August 22, 2025.

To build a big dam

Friends, China has officially started construction on the 1.2 trillion yuan hydropower project on the lower reaches of the Yarlung Tsangpo River. This major move not only completely reshapes China’s hydropower development layout, but also ushers the contest over water resources in South Asia into a brand-new stage. When the news spread from Beijing to India’s capital, New Delhi, it instantly blew up on social media. On Twitter, the dam in Tibet became a hot topic, and many Indian television stations repeatedly broadcast aerial footage of the Yarlung Tsangpo River. The anchors reported with such urgency that it sounded like a strong wind was blowing. So, just how impressive is this super project? It plans to build five hydropower stations continuously along a 500-kilometer stretch of the river, with a combined power generation capacity of 60 million kilowatts, producing about 300 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity per year—roughly equivalent to 1.5 times the output of the Three Gorges Dam. The plan is to complete the main construction in 12 years, and have all the generators fully operational within 15 years. How will the 1.2 trillion yuan investment be spent? About 40% goes into building dams and digging tunnels—these civil engineering works. Another 20% will be spent on purchasing generators, transformers, and other electromechanical equipment. Around 15% is allocated to building transmission lines to deliver the power. Another 10% is specifically reserved for ecological protection. The remaining 15% will be used to relocate and resettle residents. The environmental impact assessment report alone is 2,000 pages long. It not only aims to preserve the river’s natural form, but also to restore alpine meadows. In the future, the relocated locals will live in newly planned tourist towns. In fact, as early as 1919, Sun Yat-sen already proposed developing the Yarlung Tsangpo’s water resources in his National Development Plan. From then until the official groundbreaking on July 20, 2025, this “heavenly river” has waited 106 years. For over a century, the Chinese people have longed to tap into the Yarlung Tsangpo’s hydropower potential. Now, this dream has finally come true. This grand project is not just a pile of numbers, but a true technological upgrade. For the first time, China’s self-developed 800-megawatt hydro turbine units are being deployed at scale. The Beidou satellite navigation system works in tandem with hard-rock tunneling machines, and digital blasting technology enables millisecond-level precision monitoring during construction. All of these allow the project’s pace to far surpass that of the Three Gorges or Baihetan hydropower stations. China’s hydropower technology has risen from mediocrity to the world’s best—moving from following others’ standards to setting our own. And while building, we have not forgotten ecological protection. We deliberately left 33 kilometers of natural river channel as a sanctuary for fish, and restored 1,200 hectares of alpine tundra above the tunnels. This shows that our understanding of hydropower has become much more comprehensive: It’s not just about generating electricity, but about integrating energy supply, economic development, ecological protection, and people’s livelihoods—forming the backbone of green development. The Yarlung Tsangpo hydropower project carries enormous national significance. It secures energy safety and strengthens geopolitical security. It is also a crucial piece of the puzzle in the “West-to-East Power Transmission” and “carbon neutrality” strategies. When completed, it will generate 300 billion kilowatt-hours of clean electricity annually, equivalent to saving about 90 million tons of standard coal and reducing 240 million tons of CO₂ emissions. It will also provide green power for AI and new energy vehicle industries. Controlling the upper Yarlung Tsangpo means holding the initiative. After it flows out of China, the river becomes the Brahmaputra, supporting millions in India and Bangladesh. With cascade dams, China can store tens of billions of cubic meters of water, releasing it during drought and holding it during floods—optimizing water allocation. Every drop of water released can send an important signal. Thus, the project is not just a power plant but also a vital strategic water resource, giving China more say in South Asian affairs. The Yarlung Tsangpo project is truly extraordinary—it is rewriting the rules of international river development. It proposes a new approach of full-basin cooperation. At first, Bangladesh worried the river flow would change, but what they really care about is whether water supply can remain stable during dry seasons, because the Brahmaputra’s low flows in dry seasons cause over $1.2 billion in annual agricultural losses in Bangladesh. China’s cascade dams, on the other hand, can regulate flow and help reduce those losses. Nepal and even Bhutan see this as a great opportunity for cooperation; Bhutan has already approached China about jointly developing cross-border water resources and learning China’s advanced hydropower technology. China’s technical strength in managing international rivers is pushing people to rethink traditional water rights theories. Of course, there are also plenty of troublemakers. The U.S. jumped in, claiming to worry about downstream countries’ water security—but anyone can see it’s just trying to use this to rally South Asian countries to contain China. The EU isn’t much better, supporting environmental NGOs to accuse the project of harming glaciers—while ignoring the countless dams they themselves have built on the Rhine and Danube. This double standard only proves that the Yarlung Tsangpo project is no ordinary infrastructure—it breaks the rules set by the West and marks a milestone for China taking charge of its own water resource development. For India, the impact of this project directly affects the China–India border situation. After the 2020 Galwan Valley clash, India deployed 120,000 troops on the eastern border, trying to compensate for geographic disadvantage with manpower. But once this project is operational, the situation changes. China won’t even need to move a single soldier—just adjusting river flow could put pressure on India. For example, if during the dry season we reduce the water flowing into India by 10%, Assam’s tea plantations could suffer due to lack of irrigation. And if we release water early before the monsoon, India’s border roads could be paralyzed by flooding for a month. This kind of non-military deterrence is more effective than simply sending more troops and could strategically shift the border dynamics. Naturally, India won’t just sit idly by. So they’ve started building over 70 small hydropower stations in China’s southern Tibet in an attempt to weaken China’s control over the river by scattering development. But the combined capacity of those stations is only 3 million kilowatts, with outdated technology and serious ecological damage—clearly no match. On top of that, India’s intelligence agencies keep infiltrating Tibet and paying locals to stage so-called environmental protests. But China’s grassroots management in Tibet is strong, and none of these sabotage attempts have succeeded. Meanwhile, India’s own Tehri Dam on the upper Ganges has diverted so much water that Bangladesh suffers huge irrigation shortages every year—yet India still has the audacity to criticize China’s project. That’s India’s double standard. On the other hand, Tibet’s own development path is also changing thanks to this project. Previously, Tibet relied on state subsidies and tourism to get by. Now, with the hydropower, energy, and ecological industries booming, other industries are upgrading too, creating new ways to earn. Construction has driven cement demand in Tibet up several times over. Sichuan’s heavy equipment factories are overwhelmed with orders. Even before the Chongqing–Nyingchi railway is fully completed, its freight capacity is already near full. For the 18,000 relocated residents, it’s not just about moving—they’re being settled into planned tourist towns, made shareholders, and even given stakes in homestay businesses. According to the plan, by 2035, their incomes are expected to multiply several times over. Tibet will no longer depend on handouts but earn from its own resources. This hydropower project is like a bond, tightly linking Tibet with the nation’s energy supply, economic development, and progress. It’s not just about immediate results, but about China’s steady determination to grow stronger step by step. The great river roars, and the rules are rewritten. On the roof of the world, China is building not just dams, but also a steel backbone of national will. As for India—if it remains stubborn, this river will teach it who truly is the master of Asia’s water tower.

可恶的EX

你到大英博物馆就知道小偷是谁，他们在中国， 打，砸，烧，抢，无恶不作。更嚣张的是偷了人家的东西。还当作献宝现出来， 给世界观看。 最可恶的就是那些EX。怪不得Ranqi，他们是不让Ex再回到组织里面来。因为他们知道是与非。他们就利用巴巴的教导来欺负人。而且利用巴巴的教导，拿巴巴的教导。不去做好事， 反而去做坏事，帮助他们去做坏事，让他们变得更坏。所以Ranqi不让ex再回到组织里面来，他们可以回来，但是只能参加DC。不能做任何组织里面的工作，不能参加组织里面的活动。 When my Kundalini rose, I could feel I wasn’t human — I felt superhuman. Yes, when I practiced the second lesson, I immediately felt like a god. Each time my Kundalini hum rose to my throat, I knew there was some kind of superpower within me, or some kind of revelation coming. Those who haven’t reached this level of Kundalini will never understand this kind of feeling, this kind of power in the body, this kind of force that overwhelms you. Please, don’t think your meditation is the same as mine — it’s not. This power of concentration is beyond anything your mind can imagine. My meditation is far, far beyond your imagination if you are not at this level. So please, don’t say “my Kundalini is like this or that,” because you don’t know. Don’t say “this Shiva Tantra is like this or that,” because you haven’t even felt a drop of it. People born on islands tend to have narrow minds, such as the Japanese, Taiwanese, Hongkongers, and people from the Nordic countries. To change this kind of personality is difficult, difficult, difficult — the only way is to practice the Sixth Lesson more.

NO ONE KNOWS

按照我现在的标准, 这小区美国margii没有一个人懂得Ba’Ba’的教导， 密宗的历史由来出处，还有PROUT. 这个小区的美国白人， 那一个不是种族主义者， 那种种族主义已入到了他们的无意识的深度，不相信？ 我若说错了， 我下地狱， 我对，那你就下地狱。 According to my many years of experience in understanding people, those born on islands tend to have narrow minds — for example, people from Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong, the Nordic countries, and so on. To change this kind of personality is very, very, very difficult; the only way is to practice Lesson Six more.

In Sanskrit grammar, the plural of sūtra (सूत्र)

In all vertions of Ananda Sutra, 1-21 written in: Bhumavyapte mahatiaham cittayorpranashe sagunasthitih savikapalsamadhih va. i think should be written in " Bhumavyaptemahat Ahamcittayorpranashe sagunasthitih savikalpa samadhih va. Because "sutra" is neuter. So the singular term for "sutra" is "sutram" also as a object. dual type is "sutre", and plural type is "sutrani"; so "Ananda Sutra" should be in "Ananda Sutram" and also as object. In Sanskrit grammar, the plural of sūtra (सूत्र) is: ➡️ sūtrāṇi (सूत्राणि) — in the nominative plural neuter. Explanation: sūtra is a neuter noun (it literally means “thread” or “aphoristic rule”). Neuter nouns in -a in Sanskrit (like deva → devāḥ for masculine, but sūtra is neuter) have: singular: sūtram dual: sūtre plural: sūtrāṇi So for example: ekam sūtram — one sūtra dve sūtre — two sūtras bahūni sūtrāṇi — many sūtras What's the difference between dual and plural? Good question — and it’s an important distinction in Sanskrit grammar! In Sanskrit, nouns, pronouns, adjectives, and verbs inflect not just for singular and plural (as in English), but also for dual. Here’s the difference: Number Meaning Example Singular (ekavacana) Refers to one item «devaḥ» — one god Dual (dvivacana) Refers to exactly two items «devau» — two gods Plural (bahuvacana) Refers to more than two items (three or more) «devāḥ» — gods (three or more) Why does Sanskrit have a dual? Sanskrit (like ancient Greek and a few other Indo-European languages) preserved the ancient dual number, which specifically marks two things. For example: mātā-pitarau — “the two parents” (mother & father) nayanē — “the two eyes” In English, we just say “parents” or “eyes” regardless of whether we’re thinking of two or more, but Sanskrit distinguishes. On verbs: The verb endings also reflect this number: singular: गच्छति (gacchati) — he/she/it goes dual: गच्छतः (gacchataḥ) — the two go plural: गच्छन्ति (gacchanti) — they (3+) go So the dual is used only when the subject (or object) is exactly two. The plural is used when the subject (or object) is more than two.

Jeffery Slachs says 07-08-2025

Chna is no threat. The risk is from inside. Stop playing with Taiwan the way you're doing. Sorry, it's stupid. Stop provoking things. Anyway, so China's not gonna turn the US into a dictatorship. Maybe the US will turn into a dictatorship. Maybe it will just turn into a plain old plutocracy. Maybe it will turn into a military industrial state as the complete dominance. I don't know. But it's not going to come from China. It's going to come from Inside that's where our risk is ……………. China's not able to defeat us. The only risk we face from China, the only risk we face from China's nuclear war. So stay away from nuclear war. Stop playing with Taiwan the way you're doing. Sorry, it's stupid. Stop provoking things and footnote we provoke the war in Ukraine. I could go on for about 8 hours on that, and maybe it's worth 5 minutes. But we provoked the war in Ukraine absolutely surely, and we'll do the same with Taiwan and we'll lose any wars that happens, but maybe the world will end also over this stupidity and the people in Washington are stupid. I'm telling you. I know them. This is not my surmise. And I just read an unbelievably stupid article in an unbelievably awful journal called Foreign Affairs. What's her name? First name? I don't remember. Carlin is her second name. Oh my God. It's about how we have to prepare for the next war, not I don't think the word diplomacy is mentioned one time. So the first thing is Johnson, Professor Mearsheimer says yeah. China can't defeat us. We can't defeat China. But China could annoy us, and it will annoy us more if China's the hegemon of East Asia. So we have to prevent China from being the hegemon of East Asia so that the United States is the only hegemon in the world, the only regional hegemon. What a thing to do. That could provoke nuclear war. And I said, but, John, that could lead to war between the US and China. Yeah, yeah, it's actually likely. Very possible. He says maybe we could avoid it, but it's quite possible. I said, no, you take the expected value of total annihilation. It's got a big negative sign. It's minus infinity as far as I'm concerned. And so you don't do that. You don't put any positive probability on something like that. So this is the first point of disagreement. The second point of disagreement is essentially about game theory. Everyone here knows the prisoner's dilemma. The prisoner’s dilemma is a situation where it pays to cooperate, but the dominant strategy for each player is to not cooperate because if the other side cooperates, you cheat and you win, and if the other side doesn't cooperate, you certainly don't play the soccer and so you end up non cooperative, non cooperative and you're off to the races in war. And that's game theory. and that's what's taught at Rand and that's what these people in Washington think and that's how they play and that's how they talk. And the fact is though, you put real people and I mean non economic students. Real people into an experimental game and they cooperate half the time, 3/4 of the time, and then wonder of wonders, you let the two people talk beforehand. Not to make a binding agreement, just to chat. Hey, why don't we both cooperate? For example, no signed contract in game theory. That's called cheap talk. It should have no effect on the equilibrium. But in real human practice. If you put two normal people in the prisoners dilemma game, they cooperate half the time. If you let them have pre play communication they cooperate more than 90% of the time. Human beings. So my advice is, hey, why doesn't President Biden or somebody that actually can function as a president in the future? I actually talked to President Putin. You know, actually understand President Putin's point of view. Why is this war going on? Discuss it. You know, cooperation could rise enormously. There's a second point of game theory which is very important, called the folk theorem. Which is that if you were in a repeated play of the Prisoner's dilemma and there's no set terminal date. Then you should cooperate so you don't mess up trust of the two sides, because you're playing also against future actions and you wanna show I'm trustworthy, you're trustworthy. We can gain from cooperation period after period. And that's another way to sustain the good outcome in a prisoner’s dilemma. So I view international relations theory, realist theory as essentially being the prisoner’s dilemma or the Hobbesian dilemma of nation states in an anarchic environment. And my argument is, it’s not so anarchic. It’s not so threatening, the only real threat is nuclear war.So stay away from that. That’s the bright red line for all of us. And cooperation is just not so hard. And I look to many examples history where cooperation worked. And I wrote a book in 2013 about one such episode because I found it completely amazing when I learned about it, and that was the aftermath of the Cuban Missile crisis, when first of all, Kennedy rejected the advice of all his advisors except one because they all said go bomb these sites in Cuba. And now in retrospect we almost surely would not be here talking today, had we gone on to do that. But Kennedy was very much more cautious, and he spent all the days of the crisis asking, what's going through Khrushchev's mind? He's a human being. What's he doing? And he finally came to the realization, you know, this is not meant by Krushchev to be the end of the world. This is not meant. This is . We can both pull back. And that's what they ended up doing. And then that was October 1962. And in 1963, Kennedy made a campaign for peace that culminated that led to the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which was signed with the Soviet Union in July 1963. And it culminated, I think, in Kennedys assassination because there were enough people in the US government that didn't like his peace initiatives. And so I think it was an inside job. And I think the evidence grows all the time that it was on. But in any event, Kennedy's idea was the two sides can make peace. And when he said that, and he said it in the most beautiful terms, and his speechwriter was a gifted, gifted person named Theodore Sorenson that I got to know luckily because he lived in our neighborhood. When I came to Columbia University and I got to know him, he said in the most eloquent and beautiful words imaginable. We can make peace even with the Soviet Union, even at the height of the cold war. And he said it so beautifully that when Khrushchev heard the speech, he immediately called the American envoy, Averell Harriman, and said, I want to make peace with your president because he was inspired by the words actually, and they made peace and that treaty lasted, and it led to the Nuclear nonproliferation treaty. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is an international treaty aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear wapoons and promoting cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. It also seeks to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament. The NPT was opened for signature on July 1, 1968. And entered into force on March 5, 1970. Five years later it changed the world. And so that's the optimistic side. Go for peace instead. There's an awful president of ours when he could function still, he was terrible Biden, all he could do was insult Putin every moment. How you gonna make peace, all you do is throw insults at the one who had a country with 6000 nuclear warheads. This is crazy. It's reckless. And the whole place in Washington is filled with people who are playing game theory, who know just what Putin's going to do. You know, we have no alternative but to increase our military. This woman, Carlin, who was a senior official under Biden in the Defense Department that wrote this article says we have no choice but to deter through building our military. She doesn't even mention the idea that there could be diplomacy with China. This woman's an ignoramus. I'm sorry. I've been to China 100 times at least. There's no intrinsic battle with China. None whatsoever. China's not out to defeat the US and couldn't do so in a million years anyway. We'd all perish. I'm trying to never. China's never, by the way, even once invaded a country overseas in its whole history of 2245 years since 221 BC, when the Qin Empire unified China. Did they ever invade Japan? Not once did they ever invade Korea. Not once did they ever invade Vietnam? Yes, 17 years. In that 2000 years, 4 actually 17 years and one month. 1420 to 1436 and then one month in 1979. And the United States, we've never been at peace. All we do is war. And you know what the truth is? We learned it from here. Because the British Empire was the most militarized society imaginable. And unfortunately the leaders of this country, and it turns out not to matter which party, because Star Wars is as bad as Boris Johnson. All they know is the military. It's unbelievable. What's the first thing that Starmer does when he becomes Prime Minister? He goes to Kiev to pledge the endless support of the US, by the way, because Britain doesn't do anything. The endless support of the United States to the defeat of Russia, and then he flies across the Atlantic to try to convince Biden to authorize what authorized means is for the US military to enable deep strikes inside Russia. That's really a clever thing to do, especially. Because Putin said, well, then we'd be at war with each other and we'd be forced to reconsider our nuclear strategy. And then we have our CIA director in this. This would be great for the West End theater, by the way, because it's a kind of parody. The CIA director meets with the MI 6 director on stage recently here and says, oh, don't worry about Putin's bluff. Well, my advice is if you're gonna say that, say that before we're all annihilated, because no one's gonna hear you after we're all annihilated. How do we know he's bluffing? He's not bluffing if this if Russia is fundamentally threatened. So that's, I don't remember what you asked me, but that's my answer. I thank you very much. That was quite remarkable. It definitely isn't sort of the mainstream opinion, I guess. So you talked about how there isn't this kind of struggle with China and how the United States, the US empire doesn't need to position itself as kind of the leader. But there is kind of a struggle between, if not between US and China, between democracy and dictatorship in sort of various countries, various economies, various circles. And the United States is at the forefront of that, at least in economic terms. And of course, with dictatorships now becoming a lot more sustainable, you know, they're not kind of obsessed with this self subsistence. They're all trading with each other. Is there any way in which there is still a fight on our hands when it comes to politics? 好听到这儿暂停一下。这位观众提问非常典型，他完全套用了西方主流媒体的叙事框架，他问题的核心就是民主国家是不是应该对抗那些独裁国家？也想之际，美国作为民主灯塔，是不是要站出来主持正义？这其实是一种被洗脑后的提问方式他根本没有想过这套民主对独裁的叙事本身是不是一个骗局 Well, I'd love for the United States to be a functioning democracy and to be a good example for other countries. I don't believe the US has any right or any ability to put in place a democracy in any other country. Nor do I believe, by the way, that the American democracy functions as a real democracy anymore. On the life and death issues, nobody has asked the American people anything about all these wars for decades. And by the way, I can tell you. And I'm telling you authoritatively and truly, they lie about everything about these wars. And so that's not that's not democracy either. Everything is phony, everything is narrative. And so on the war and peace issues, the public has no say at all. If you were to ask the American people now and in fact Gallup does it do you support Biden's foreign policy? I think the support is you can look it up 25 to 35% perhaps. I don't even think it reaches 35%, whereas the Democracy in this, it's a game. This is the deep state and they have their wars and every war has been phony , some wars, the American people are basically never told about, for example, the war in Syria, and you may actually hear from grown up reporters. Who are lying through their teeth or ignorant beyond imagining that Ohh, the war in Syria. Yes, Russia intervened in Syria. Well, do you know that the that Obama tasks the CIA to overthrow the Syrian government starting four years before Russia intervened? What kind of nonsense is that? And how many times did the New York Times report on Operation Timber Sycamore, which was the presidential order to the CIA to overthrow Bashar al-Assad? Three times in 10 years. This is not democracy. This is a game, and it's a game of narrative. Why did the US invade Iraq in 2003? Well, first of all, it was completely phony pretenses. It wasn't. Ohh, we were so wrong. They didn't have weapons of mass destruction. They actually did focus groups in the fall of 2002 to find out what would sell that war to the American people. Abram Shulsky if you want to know the name of the PR genius. They did focus groups on the war. They wanted the war all the time. They had to figure out how to sell the war to the American people, how to scare the shit out of the American people. It was a phony war. Where did that war come from? You know what, it's quite surprising that war came from Netanyahu. Actually. You know that it's weird. And the way it is, is that Netanyahu had from 1995 onward, the theory that the only way we're going to get rid of Hamas and Hezbollah is by toppling the government, supporting them. That's Iraq, Syria, and Iran, and the guys, nothing if not obsessive and where he's still trying to get us to fight Iran this day, this week. He's a deep, dark son of a bitch, sorry to tell you, because he's gotten us into endless wars and because of the power of all of this in the US politics, he's gotten his way. But that war was totally phony. So what is this democracy versus dictatorship? Come on, this is these are not even sensible terms, and even if they were sensible terms under the UN. We can have our democracy. You do what you want. It happens to be the case that China has had a centralized administrative state for 2245 years. Ever since Emperor Qin Shi Huangdi unified the Chin dynasty, there have been a few periods of. Also of a disintegration of the dynasties, but if you look through the Chin, the Han, the Tang, the Song, you know the Mining, the Ching till today, till the PRC. This is the same structure by the way,. This is an administrative state ruling over almost the same. Region, by the way for more than 2000 years, so. And by the way, it has been wondrously effective for a long time at keeping the internal peace. China's only wars were nomadic invasions from the steppes in the north. And then one crazed, well then the Mongols invading, that's part of that. And one absolutely crazed Shogun in this in the 1590s trying to take over China and he made it as far as Korea and was killed. Other than that. This has been actually exceptional statecraft until Britain had the genius idea of fighting a war to sell opium in China in 1839. One of the most noble efforts imaginable. And that's the modern era of China, so I don't buy it at all. But even if it were true, it's illegal under international law. Unwise. And you know, look at the great accomplishment for me. Oh, I don’t know how many ? hundreds of billions of dollars into Afghanistan for 20 years to get from the Taliban regime to the Taliban regime. This is American genius at democracy promotion. They don't care at all about democracy by the way. AT ALL. They topple governments they don’t like that won’t do their bidding . They topple democracies if they don’t like them. they'll topper anybody that they don't like. That's how it's worked all along. They never said, oh, we can't topple most of that in 1953. He's a democratic government. No, they toppled the democratic government in Iran and put in a police state which LED to wonderful long term relations with Iran. Because they really love the American people for that. So this is not about democracy; this is a game. And it's a terrible game and it's secret game, and it's played by the CIA, which is the most important agency in the United States. Because they have complete secrecy. Complete unaccountability. There was one review of the CIA 49 years ago. The Church Committee, and nothing since then. And as one of our directors, they're all, I was gonna say one of the worst, but they're all the same by the time they get there or by the time they leave there, because the agency takes them over. Pompeo said as he was proudly explaining The role of CIA to some Texas students a few years ago and you can find it online. He said, what do we teach at the CIA? To lie, cheat, and steal. And that's a pretty good encapsulation of the methodology. And that's a very danger world being created that way. So China's not gonna turn the US into dictatorship. Maybe US will turn into a dictatorship, maybe it will just turn into a plutocracy. Maybe it will turn into a military industrial state as the complete dominance. I don't know, but. It's not going come from China. It's going to come from inside. That’s where our risk is.