Thursday, November 5, 2020

The Psychopathic Criminal Enterprise Called America -- November 05, 2020


 

The Psychopathic Criminal Enterprise Called America

By Larry Romanoff – November 05, 2020



 I provided in earlier articles some evidence of the fundamental criminality of American corporations, with only a brief introduction to the criminality of the US government and of Bernays' 'invisible people' who control it from behind the scenes. This latter subject is too large to be adequately dealt with here, but later articles in this series will be devoted in part to the crimes committed domestically and internationally by the US government and its agencies. These comprise many astonishing events that are genuine and well-documented but that have been totally erased from the history books and from American public consciousness, and therefore have disappeared from the awareness of the world. It is time to bring them back into the open. This is important because American multi-national corporations (MNCs) are reading from the script written for them by the US government and its puppet-masters. For the present, I will provide a few details to make a point about the close links between the two sectors.

 

 Several years ago, Jim Kouri reported an FBI study which stated:

 

"... character traits exhibited by serial killers or criminals may be observed in many within the political arena. They share the traits of psychopaths who are not sensitive to altruistic appeals, such as sympathy for their victims or remorse or guilt over their crimes. They possess the personality traits of lying, narcissism, selfishness, and vanity. These are the people to whom we have entrusted our fate. Is it any wonder that America is failing at home and world-wide?"



The important point is that those "within the political arena", namely American Presidents, Vice-Presidents, Secretaries of State, Defense Secretaries, White House staff, and many Senators and Congressmen display many or most of the traits of criminal psychopaths and mass murderers. They could have included a great many corporate executives in that statement, and indeed the corporate arena is a primary source of the psychopaths necessary to populate the White House and Congress, the Departments of State, Defense and Commerce. The government of the United States of America has always been a criminal enterprise, ruled most often by thugs and genocidal psychopathic killers. As outrageous as that sounds to a Western ear, it fits all the facts and happens to be the defensible truth. Americans will of course want to profess outrage, and attribute such accusations to a vicious "anti-American" bias, but the statements are based on fact. Evidence of US government atrocities is not difficult to find.



  

Consider Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, respectively George Bush's Secretary of Defense and Vice-President, two of the most savage and malignant humans that have ever cursed this earth. Rumsfeld was at one time the president of the Searle pharmaceutical company and Cheney the CEO of Halliburton oil well services. Where do you suppose these two pustulent stars of American political life acquired their talent as pathological killers? How do you imagine they were induced to conceive and build the largest network of torture facilities in the world's history? Do you suppose they joined the US government and were so corrupted by the experience they became criminally insane? You know that didn't happen. Rumsfeld and Cheney were psychopaths and mass killers long before they became kingpins of "the world's greatest democracy", and were prized by the government precisely because of these 'talents'. They weren't given high places in the US government in spite of their criminal tendencies, but because of those tendencies. From this one example of hundreds I could cite, you can begin to appreciate the sociopathic malignancy that permeates, and is shared by, both the American government corridors of power and those of the American MNCs.

 

 I would add to this an insight gained from long exposure to the corporate world, that sociopathic tendencies increase in direct relationship to the steps on the corporate ladder. That is to say, the higher a man (or woman) rises in corporate rank and responsibility, the more pronounced are their anti-social, psychopathic and sociopathic characteristics. This is so true that promotion to the higher levels becomes increasingly impossible without these tendencies. And this means that in very large part the senior executives of large corporations are fundamentally pathological criminals, arrogant sociopaths driven by greed. This may appear a shocking statement to many readers, but it is a defensible truth.

 

Consider Steve Jobs, formerly of Apple. Put aside for a moment your Hello Kitty feelings for Steve the 'innovative designer of the iphone' and consider Steve 'the greedy sociopath'. There are not many of us lacking empathy for the 1.5 million young people at Foxconn being paid peanuts for assembling iphones and living in a concentration camp environment where they experienced so much pressure they were  committing suicide. That situation is a direct reflection of the personality and character of Steve Jobs, and it does you no good to delude yourself into believing otherwise. In my article on Nestlé’s baby milk marketing,  I observed that, for the executives at Nestlé, it wasn't their intention to kill babies but that they simply didn't care if the babies died. It was precisely the same with Steve Jobs; he didn't want those young people to kill themselves; he just didn't care. You or I in that position would order Foxconn to back off the pressure and pay the workers an appropriate salary, an attitude stemming from basic humanity. Steve Jobs, with $200 billion sitting in a cash pile, plus billions in his personal bank account, did no such thing. He certainly knew of the situation and unquestionably had the power to change it by a simple command to the owners of Foxconn and an agreement to pay higher costs for the manufacture of his products. Steve Jobs made a deliberate choice to not do that. So did Tim Cook.


The executives of Nike, KFC, McDonald's and many others, are the same. Those at Coca-Cola and Nestlé are worse. You have read of the pharma companies who are perhaps the worst of all. These latter are precisely as I described them above: fundamentally pathological criminals, arrogant sociopaths driven by greed. In the corridors of corporate power we will of course find some exceptions, but not many; most high-level corporate executives fit the psychopathic mold perfectly. They have no sympathy for their victims; they feel no guilt or remorse for their actions. They are morally bankrupt to the point where their only measure is money. This is why General Motors and Ford made decisions to not recall their automobiles but to let the customers die from faulty ignition switches and gas tanks; it was cheaper.

 


The general public typically sees things as disconnected events instead of part of an integrated plan, thanks in large part to the US media who steadfastly avoid presenting a context, with the result that we see only a local event instead of an integrated picture. Local news media inform us that P&G paid a fine for false advertising and fraudulent promotion, and we see this as a one-off event, perhaps an aberration and by no means their standard practice. But our perceptions are altered when we discover that Argentina stripped Procter & Gamble of its commercial registration for fraud, prohibiting P&G from operating in that country, and that EU regulators fined P & G $300 million for fixing prices. The media tell us Nike was charged with false advertising and we see this as an isolated event, but when we learn Nike is one of the four most-boycotted firms in the world, and the reasons, our perceptions change. We learn of Pepsi buying and killing several Chinese brands and attribute this to various shortcomings of Chinese origin and unfair behavior on the part of Pepsi. But when we learn that virtually all American (and some European) MNCs, including P&G, Coca-Cola, L'Oreal and others, have cooperated in buying and killing hundreds of treasured Chinese brands, we now see these events as an established and deliberate pattern to destroy all domestic competition, and we understand something we didn't understand before.

 

We learn of Apple violating warranties in China or of Coca-Cola's arrogance in dealing with its contaminated beverages, but when we learn these companies behave in similar fashion all around the world, we can form a better picture. We are shocked by GSK's recent astonishing bribery scandal in China, but again view it as a local phenomenon, an isolated event we tend to blame on China or Chinese culture. But when we learn that GSK was involved in the same fraudulent schemes in many countries simultaneously, the picture changes, and when we further learn that all American and European pharma companies conduct themselves in the same way in all countries, we can now see the pharma industry as it really is. We read of the US government attempting to bully China to commit economic suicide by appreciating the international value of the RMB and perhaps attribute this to misbehavior on China's part, but when we learn that the US has done the same to every nation that posed a threat to American trade supremacy, as Japan did, we can understand this in a context of American imperialism rather than shortcomings on the part of China. It is only when we assemble all the pieces that we can see the true picture of any government, corporation or event.


 The Chinese media and authorities accused Coca-Cola executives of arrogance in their dealing with the massive contamination problems in their beverages. Some thought the accusation might have been a bit strongly-worded, but when we learn that Coca-Cola executives threatened to sue the government of India if it didn't immediately stop reports that Coca-Cola products were flooded with pesticides, now we understand something we didn't know before. When a local government in Florida ran ads claiming the local tap water was "cheaper, purer and safer than bottled water", Nestlé immediately threatened to sue the government. When the UK government made public statements about Starbucks paying no tax, company executives demanded an immediate meeting with Prime Minister Cameron to instruct him to keep his mouth shut.

When government authorities sent letters to all consumer products companies to attend an important meeting on China's warranty policies, Apple executives returned the letters unopened.

When we learn these facts and many more like them, we now have a better context for evaluating foreign companies in China. In an article on changing cultural values, I wrote that the Americans are on a search and destroy mission to over-write China's cultural heritage and replace it with American so-called 'values' as a prelude to effective colonisation and control of the government. Seen in isolation, that concern may appear highly exaggerated, but when we learn that the Americans have done precisely that in the Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia and many other nations, we then have the context to see a pattern and suddenly the concern is no longer an exaggeration.

 

The Lying Must Stop

 


 When Pfizer was forced to pay $2.3 billion to settle civil and criminal charges, the largest health care fraud settlement and the largest criminal fine of any kind ever, Amy Schulman, Pfizer’s general counsel, dissembled by saying Pfizer employees "spend their lives dedicated to bringing truly important medications to patients and physicians in an appropriate manner". When AstraZeneca pleaded guilty to felony charges in one of their massive health care frauds and was forced to pay hundreds of millions in fines, a spokesman said the company "adheres to high ethical standards in the pharmaceutical industry, and doesn't tolerate any illegal or unethical conduct." After Chinese police discovered evidence of 15 years of "massive and systemic bribery" and other crimes at GSK, company executives stated, "We have zero tolerance for unethical behavior", claiming further they had investigated their business in China and "found no evidence of bribery or corruption" - while paying billions of dollars in fines in the US and other countries for precisely the same crimes at the same time. When Nikon's D600 camera proved fatally defective, with all units being replaced in the West but replacement and repair being denied to customers in China, the company glibly stated that Nikon "provides Chinese customers with high quality, standardized global service". When a customer paid $20,000 for a defective and broken piece of LV luggage, the company refused to replace it, claiming "We offer all customers (worldwide) the same standardised service." Immediately prior to replacing 400,000 defective transmissions they knowingly imported into China, Volkswagen executives denied any defects in their cars, claiming any problems were the fault of the drivers. When Marriott Hotels were caught jamming customers' Wi-Fi hotspots to force them to pay outrageous prices for using the hotel's Wi-Fi network, Marriott executives claimed they weren't jamming anything but were protecting hotel guests from "rogue wireless hotspots and identity theft."

 

 After two people died of pesticide poisoning from its Minute Maid drinks, and others became seriously ill from mercury poisoning, Coca-Cola's senior managers insisted all their products were "completely safe to drink." After thousands of Coca-Cola drinkers in Europe suffered rupturing of their red blood cells from drinking contaminated beverages, a Coca-Cola executive stated, "It may make you feel sick, but it is not harmful.'' After American OSI and its Husi subsidiary were discovered to have been conducting the largest contaminated food operation in China's history, Husi's Yang Liqun told the media "Husi has a strict quality control system". When mothers complained their babies became "violently ill" after drinking Nestlé's baby milk, company executives stated there is "nothing wrong with our milk" and that all Nestlé products were "absolutely safe". Having its stores shut down after repeated discoveries of massive, organised consumer frauds, Wal-Mart placed signs on its stores that read, "operating with credibility and integrity and safeguarding the interests of the customers."


 With this now-common flood of outright lies automatically issued by the PR departments of all MNCs (but especially American), it seems to me the line has been crossed. When a government health department states that Coca-Cola is not safe to drink because it contains excessive levels of toxic pesticides, chlorine and other chemicals, that statement is definitive. When a Coca-Cola executive then flatly denies in the media that his drinks contain pesticides and further claims they are perfectly safe to drink, those statements constitute false advertising and criminal consumer fraud and should be treated accordingly. If those same statements were published in an advertisement, enormous fines would be levied for fraudulent advertising and criminal recklessness. It should be the same when those statements are made verbally to the media, especially considering they have far greater public reach and are more likely to be believed by the public than are TV commercials. Each time a multi-national corporation is caught in criminal activity, its executives turn to the media with its vast public exposure, and they lie. They are never held to account because the statement is attributed to the company, but those false statements were not made by a 'company' but by a real live person who should be identified and held to account. There is no justification for the anonymity granted to these corporate executives who are escaping punishment for outrageous acts of consumer fraud. The lying must stop.

 

 We have the same problem with foreign journalists both inside China and outside the country. The coverage is invariably one-sided, often omitting crucial details that lead readers to very different and usually very incorrect conclusions. Articles are frequently outrageously dishonest, and too often riddled with outright lies. When GSK was fined and its executives convicted of systemic bribery and fraud, Western journalists referred only to "allegations" or "accusations", clearly implying that no proof existed. Andrew Browne of the WSJ wrote an article lamenting Google's demise in China, whining about the tragedy of domestic Chinese companies "dominating an Internet market of 400 million users", neglecting to note that Google, an American company 'dominates' the American market. We can reasonably ask why it is okay for an American search engine to dominate the American market but it is not okay for a Chinese search engine to dominate the Chinese market. Browne also whined about US makers of wind turbines and solar panels "being shut out of big renewable-energy projects" in China but neglected to mention that Chinese makers of wind turbines and solar panels have been completely shut out of the US market. In an article on Wal-Mart I discussed John Bussey's (again of the WSJ) unforgivably dishonest portrayal of Wal-Mart's activities in China. The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, CNN, the Financial Times, the Economist, the London Telegraph, Canada's National Post and so many more politically Right-Wing media perform in precisely the same way, skewing the context and eliminating essential details for the sole obvious purpose of slandering China.

 

 The Wall Street Journal is perhaps the worst of these in terms of frequency of biased and slanderous articles, but none of the Western media are trustworthy, and most of their journalists lie to an astonishing extent. In 2013, the WSJ ran an article that had by that time become a template followed at least hundreds and quite possibly thousands of times since. The article was titled, "China Uses Dairy Scare to Help Domestic Firms", so you can already see where this is going. Any foreign, but especially American, firm that is criticised in China for anything, is automatically a sacrificial lamb used by China to enhance the development or competitiveness of domestic Chinese firms. When GSK was charged with massive fraud and bribery, the Western media portrayed GSK as innocent and pure as the driven snow, being unjustly attacked solely to assist Chinese pharma companies. When VW was charged with fraudulently installing hundreds of thousands of defective transmissions in its cars, the media stated that China’s intent was to boost the market share of domestic brands by destroying Volkswagen. When Coca-Cola was forced to destroy a couple of hundred thousand cases of drinks contaminated with chlorine and pesticides, the Western media portrayed this as a cynical action to enhance local brands by irreparably damaging the American company. When Apple was criticised on China’s CCTV for its illegal and racist service and warranty policies, the Western media attributed this to the government giving Xiaomi “a bit of a market lift”. In another case, according to the WSJ, the foreign brands of baby milk products recalled and destroyed were not really contaminated with deadly bacteria but, even if they were, the recall was ordered only to raise the market share of domestic brands. And of course, the tens of millions of dollars paid by these same foreign companies for conspiracy and price-fixing were merely unfair allegations against innocent Western firms, even though they had already engaged in such illegal practices in many foreign countries.

 

Another similar template occurs when the Chinese public becomes outraged at the criminal behavior of an American MNC in China, as they were with Apple, Coca-Cola, and P&G among others. In these cases, according to Western journalists, the authorities took action against these firms not because of their criminal behavior but because the government was terrified that civil unrest might "challenge the legitimacy" of China's government. Given that 1.5 billion Chinese consider their government perfectly legitimate, the point is moot, but the impression deliberately implanted in the minds of Western readers is very different from the reality.

 

Yet another template is the insulting disparagement of the Chinese media in reporting any negative stories about American firms or the US government, referring to every newspaper or TV station as "the mouthpiece of the Communist Party", tarring every Chinese news report with dirty political overtones that are never justified since Chinese media never engage in politically-biased op-ed pieces disguised as news, as is done in the Western media. In the US, when the NYT or WSJ report that General Motors has recalled yet another million defective automobiles, the story simply delivers the facts, without disparaging political commentary. But when the Chinese media report a recall of GM autos, the NYT and WSJ journalists claim the "mouthpiece of the communist party" is unfairly damaging an American brand solely to assist domestic manufacturers. And yet it is the NYT and WSJ that are in real terms the primary "mouthpieces" of the US State Department and of American criminal capitalism. It is disturbing that these Western media can recruit native Chinese to participate in these ideological frauds, people like Pi Xiaoqing in Beijing, who contribute to trashy articles about their own country. Maybe she would prefer to emigrate to the US where she could boost her own "tarnished image".

 


 The reporting by foreign journalists on China is so often sufficiently dishonest and slanderous as to qualify for criminal charges, almost none of the content able to withstand scrutiny. I have identified a few of these articles and exposed the lack of integrity of the journalists, but probably to no avail. Most of us would be humiliated to be reproached publicly and exposed for this kind of deliberate dishonorable conduct but these foreign journalists are neither ashamed nor embarrassed and instead appear proud of their cleverness. Certainly, they are insensible to disgrace. But perhaps there's little point in going on about it. Almost all the columnists writing for the Western media fit this mold and, from all the media articles I have monitored and read, my conclusion is that most every American journalist is congenitally unable to tell the truth. I have in preparation an entire Volume on the Western media, which will contain hundreds of examples of Western "media mouthpieces" deceiving their publics with an astonishing array of false and misleading stories. It will include a discussion of the reporters and columnists who wrote those stories, especially those in the Beijing Foreign Correspondent's Club, a veritable tsunami of mouthpieces whose only apparent credential would be a pass in Ideology 101. And in fact many quality foreign correspondents will confide that a prerequisite for such a position is a healthy dose of 'Anti-China' to make their articles morally acceptable to Western readers. One such journalist with a French network confided that "If you get too cozy working in China, they will rotate you out to cover other another region". The message is clear: if you are in China and writing about China, your assignment is largely unrelated to journalism and reporting news but primarily to find negative political slants that place China in a poor light. If you can't find a story, manufacture one.

 

 Lastly, many columnists in the Western media took note of what appeared to be Chinese citizens posting comments on Weibo or WeChat that were supportive of Apple or other American firms and critical or even condemnatory of CCTV, China's government authorities, and China itself. But the truth is that few if any of those posters were actually Chinese, the posts were most likely being made from CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, not Changsha or Shenzhen.

 

These people use what are called "sock puppets", software permitting creation of multiple fake people to populate the social media on the Internet. An unlimited number of virtual people can be created by only a few real individuals, giving these government agencies the power to create an illusion of public consensus. The software is extremely detailed, providing extensive backgrounds for these fictitious people, permitting a single human to assume the identities of as many fake people as desired, and make them appear to actually be in a certain physical place or even to be attending an actual event. They control the IP address, making it impossible to detect that a single person in one location is orchestrating all that activity. The program manual stated, "There is a variety of social media tricks we can use to add a level of realness to all fictitious personas". The contract requires "virtual private servers" located in and outside the US, to give false locational information, and also requires what it calls "traffic mixing", blending the persona controllers' internet usage with that of the general public in a manner that offers "excellent cover and powerful deniability". Many US government agencies have obtained and are using this "Persona management software" to manipulate public opinion on key issues in the US. Government agencies regularly flood the US social media with fake people making fake posts in support of government positions, and discrediting those who are critical of the US government. This is pro-government propaganda used to manage public perception and kill political activism. This is called "counter-messaging" and has been used for years, especially by the US military. The Pentagon has made no secret of its activities in promulgating "black propaganda" - which means knowingly spreading lies to mislead and misinform the public for the purpose of stifling political dissent. In its increasing fear of political activism, the US government has labeled the Internet as a "breeding ground for domestic terrorists", and appears to include in this category anyone who questions the government's version of events. The US government has also used these social media tools in smear campaigns against reporters and other high-profile individuals who criticise US government policy, to the extent of creating fake Facebook and Twitter accounts in their names, containing fake posts meant to be personally damaging, and have even created fake websites and Wikipedia pages purporting to belong to an individual, all for the purpose of discrediting "dissidents". This is regular practice in the United States of America, the "birthplace of all freedoms", the nesting ground of "free speech", and the one nation in the world that "treasures dissidents". And that mythical narrative is all rubbish. As you will read later, the US government is so terrified of domestic civil unrest that the Department of Homeland Security has built and staffed more than 800 internment camps, all empty and waiting for another 'Occupy Wall Street' protest - or the next American revolution.

 

 I mention this because these 'sock puppets' are now in widespread use by the US military and intelligence agencies around the world as part of a massive program to actively manipulate and lead public opinion in many countries, usually with the intent of inciting civil unrest and revolution. Because of this, the use of Chinese social media by the Americans has increased exponentially in the past few years, where we now see accounts on Weibo and Weixin (Wechat) that purport to contain posts of Chinese nationals but which in many cases are clearly fake accounts operated by non-Chinese and are almost certainly American in origin. When China's CCTV network reveals problems with American products like Apple's iphones or P&G's SK-II cosmetics, we immediately see postings condemning either the network or the government for criticising anything American. When Apple was revealed to have been charging Chinese customers 50% of the purchase price for a repair of a defective iphone that was still under warranty, we saw posts staunchly defending the practice while claiming CCTV should spend their time worrying about housing prices rather the cost of repairing mobile phones. We don't need much wisdom to realise these posts are not genuine; Chinese owners of Apple products were widely incensed at the warranty policies, evidenced by Apple's sales immediately plunging by 35% and the company's products falling from first to sixth place in only a few months. And in any case, nobody praises a company for charging them a huge amount for warranty repairs that by law must be performed free of charge.

 

 McDonald's was one of the companies covered in CCTV's Consumer Day report, and once again did what most American companies do when under attack in China - they had sock puppets (fake people) posting defenses on Weibo and Weixin, and even began a movement called "I believe McDonald’s and not CCTV", and asking all online citizens to "use your voice to support McDonald’s". But they went too far and it became quite obvious the so-called 'support' was fabricated. The fake posts became so numerous and so obvious that McDonald's had to issue a public denial of their involvement in the scandal, though it was also apparent that the Internet postings had been organised by either McDonald's or the company's advertising agency and were in no way spontaneous. We saw the same with the scandals involving KFC's chemical chicken, the American sock puppets doing their best to protect American businesses, usually posting from the US under fake names, one of these calling himself (or herself) Chi Boxiong, posting on Weibo with the comment, "Speaking truthfully, KFC's quality is better than everywhere else."

 

 These 'sock puppet' posts are very often political, with almost no limit in their application. In September of 2016, a launch of one of China's observation satellites appeared to have suffered a malfunction, leaving the Americans extraordinarily curious as to the mechanics of that failure, if indeed it were a failure. But no information was published on the matter, upon which the Wall Street Journal immediately ran an article claiming that many "Chinese citizens" were "irked", "rankled", and resentful of that lack of information, claiming "the news spread steadily across Chinese social media", posts purporting to be made by Mainland Chinese, accusing the government and mass media of "blatant censorship and hypocrisy", lacking 'professionalism' and "propaganda departments" not being frank about failures. But once again, we need only use our heads to know the posts could not be genuine. China has had remarkable success with its satellite launches, but launch failures are a normal hazard for every country and are not especially rare. But this was not like sending a man to the moon or some other such event involving national pride and capturing the attention of a nation. Observation and communication satellites are regularly launched without publicity and are of interest only to those launching them, there being no sane people in any nation who would have motivation to be so angered as to accuse their government of censorship and hypocrisy for not bothering to provide detailed information on the technical causes of a simple failed satellite launch. It was the Americans who wanted to know what happened, and this was their way of needling China while attempting to mislead Chinese to believe their own citizens were turning against their government for its "official secrecy".

 

•The Ultimate Source


 

 A major result of American political and religious ideological programming is a marked intolerance, and in fact a contempt, for all other peoples and cultures, due entirely to their supremacist Christian racism, which is inherent in American ideology to a shocking degree. Americans are, and have always been, repugnantly and unapologetically racist. An Al-Jazeera article wrote that religion and racism are such completely natural features in the American landscape that to even notice them would be like noticing the air you breathe. Americans individually, their government leaders and their media, are so steeped in white colonial supremacy that they feature a daily barrage of negative commentary on China and other nations to mock, ridicule and condemn cultural attitudes or practices that conflict with their own political-religious narrative. It is their peculiarly twisted version of evangelical Christianity that produced the overwhelming conviction in Americans that they were special, closer to their Creator than any other living beings. As one author wrote,

 

"To understand Americans, we must first understand that they believe they are "good". Not good in the sense that they behave in accord with the abstract idea of good (which they in fact do not), but rather they are the embodiment of good - good incarnate. ... its effect in the American mind means that, by definition, whatever Americans do is "good", and that whenever Christian Americans choose to do something, however intrinsically evil, their actions are still morally righteous. Moreover, not only do Americans believe they are good, but anyone not adhering to their framework of religious, political or commercial ideas is either primitive or an aberration, and is not only 'wrong' but probably 'evil'."

 Of course they're crazy, but this is America. These pathologically-twisted religious convictions are so deeply-programmed into individual Americans that they could never be extracted, with evidence of their god-given moral superiority exhibiting itself in sometimes surprising places.

 

One American complained that as a geologist working for a Chinese company, his Chinese exploration manager told him that it was no business of his how many people died in the Cultural Revolution. His reaction was one of disbelief and offense, and of his being the victim of a great moral wrong. He said he felt "like a Judas Iscariot" - a despicable traitor to his God and his religion, for not forcing the issue with his manager. But if I question my American manager about how many people his government tortured to death in Guantanamo Bay, he would tell me to shut up, mind my own business, and do my work. But it's not like that for the Americans because, steeped in the supremacist racism of their twisted Christianity, they have not only a right but a holy obligation to challenge other nations on any wrongs real or imagined, saddling every individual American with a God-given mission to ensure that all individuals in all other countries confess their mistakes to him personally. After all, he's an American.

 

 It is this same morally-superior goodness that produces the flood of China-bashing articles by the US media and by American journalists resident in China. Their misrepresentations of the truth are necessary to do good. When they write their dishonest and misleading articles about China, they justify it because they are "good" and are punishing a sinner who is "not good". Sometimes, to do God's Holy work, it is necessary to tell vicious lies about people but, since I am good and I act only to do good, my god will approve. The foolish myth of American Exceptionalism stems from the same source: Americans, being good, have a natural mandate from their god to influence, control and determine the fate of the world. And if they choose to do this with the barrel of a gun, we already know that God and Guns are a natural and blessed combination. The countless millions of deaths, the hundreds of millions of innocents living in hellish misery from American involvement, are, by definition, the result of doing "good". The horrors, the racism, the misery and poverty, were all good things done by good people doing good. To see all this properly, we must only adopt the profound belief that Americans, and only Americans, are "good". God does not want his 'exceptional' children to compromise with sinful heathens. This may seem unfair, but who are we to question God's will? To summarise all of the above in one sentence, Americans have been destined by their god to either convert or kill anything that is different from them.

 

When you insert into this equation the pathological greed underlying the Western form of unrestrained capitalism, you now understand something about America.


*

Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. His writing has been translated into more than 20 languages and is available on more than 100 foreign-language websites around the world.  He can be contacted at: 2186604556@qq.com. 

Larry Romanoff is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new COVID-19 anthology ”When China Sneezes”.


Copyright © Larry Romanoff, Moon of Shanghai, 2020

 

+

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Larry Romanoff,

contributing author

to Cynthia McKinney's new COVID-19 anthology

'When China Sneezes'

When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis