Pyongyang, June 27 (KCNA) — The Korean Central News Agency released an article “We Reject ‘American-first Principle’- Nazism in the 21st Century” on Monday to shed light on the criminal nature of “American-first principle” touted by the Trump group of the U.S.
Now while investigating Chinese gun laws I came across this paper written by Huan Zhu at the University of Kansas. This is what she had dug up form her research:
“After the establishment of the People’s Republic of China, there have been three special laws or regulations issued on control of firearms, which are Temporary Measures of Control of Firearms (1952), Measures of the People’s Republic of China for the Control of Firearms (1981), and Law of the People’s Republic of China on Gun Control (1996) (hereinafter referred to as Law on Gun Control).”
The key findings of the literature review with regard to international donor assistance and private funding for independent media are as follows:
The United States and Germany are the largest contributors of international media assistance (Myers & Juma, 2018); China is emerging as a large donor for media and communications infrastructure projects although it is less interested in freedom of the media (Myers & Juma, 2018);
THE West Philippine Sea “cognitive warfare” narrative has been playing since Sept. 2012 when then President Noynoy Aquino signed Administrative Order 29 “Naming the West Philippine Sea of the Republic of the Philippines, and for other purposes.”
…
This has already caused massive real economic damage to Filipinos, like the loss of 1.5-million Chinese tourist arrivals and $1.5-billion (P90-billion) tourism revenues for our six million tourism workers.
Even worse, it can give the US the basis for creating a false flag operation blaming China for a human disaster and precipitating a major conflict – which is clearly what the US warmongers intend as evidenced by the US military bases in the country.
More “Festivus” airing of the grievances: “But the absurdity doesn’t end there. The State Department also splurged $15,220 on an ‘influencers event’ and another $22,231 on a ‘USAID Social Media Influencers Campaign.”
Such programs continued unperturbed during the First Trump Administration, when a touching project meant to increase transgender visibility in Ukrainian Fashion Week was funded through USAID’s program to “Enhance Non-Governmental Actors and Grassroots Engagement” (ENGAGE) in Ukraine:
…
Don’t worry, homophobes and transphobes; as long as capitalism exists, there will always be a “non-governmental organization” that will be willing to exploit the LGBTQ+ community and “sex workers” for corporate interests.
A month after Donald Trump’s second inauguration and the geopolitical global upheaval that may be unprecedented, one thing is clear: The president is an American sovereigntist, not an isolationist. Once this is understood, Trump’s seemingly wild upturning of the geopolitical order actually makes sense.
Sovereigntists are illiberal internationalists. They came of age after World War I, preventing the US from joining the League of Nations (the predecessor of the United Nations). At the time, American sovereigntists regarded the league as a stalking horse for global governance, anti-colonial independence movements, black internationalists, left-wing political movements and liberal Christians.
Today’s sovereigntists aim to weaken non-Western international associations that seek a more democratic international order. They make common cause with similar forces; Giorgia Meloni of Italy and Hungary’s Viktor Orban, for example. Their aim is an illiberal international geopolitical order where domestic political systems resemble “competitive authoritarianism” – multi-party elections embedded in a rigged legal and political environment. Under this model, the media and the machinery of government are used to attack opponents and co-opt critics.
Trump wants the US, not China, to write the technical standards of the global economy. Control over these standards creates lock-in effects in finance, telecommunications, space, robotics, bioengineering, nanotechnologies, and advanced materials and manufacturing methods. That means full-spectrum rivalry with China. If economic control is not possible, the plan B goal is global economic separation from China.
Ms. Cat’s Chronicles 
You must be logged in to post a comment.