Xi Jinping's speech at Davos boiled down to: The world has no choice but to do business with China, and if you want to do business with China, you need to stop criticizing our tyranny and questioning our lies about the

Xi's address to the World Economic Forum will serve as well as any other moment for historians to mark the beginning of the Authoritarian Era. He said nothing new, but he restated the narratives and demands of Chinese fascism from a post-pandemic position of aggressive strength.
For the first time, Xi spoke to a world that is beginning to accept the tenets of authoritarianism, thanks to the incredible political and economic damage from China's coronavirus. China's ideals have become as viral as Covid-19.
Thanks to the pandemic, the political elites of the world now universally see their citizens as dangerous mobs that must be tightly controlled for their own good. Most of them always thought that way, but now they can say it openly and act aggressively on their prejudices.
Xi clearly stated that China will not be contained, censured, or judged for its actions. He denounced Western ideals of human rights as "arrogance" and imperialism. After Covid and Biden's inauguration, he sees no nation with the strength or will to thwart China's ambitions.
But the more sinister undercurrent of Xi's speech was that Western nations are foolish to cling to their antiquated notions of human rights, including capitalism and political freedom. Chinese fascism is the logical alternative. The pandemic "proved" it.
Xi was asserting - not unreasonably - that fascism is the key to aggressively promoting national interests while thriving in the age of so-called "globalism." Only a fascist government can get away with spouting globalist cant while acting as ruthless nationalists.
In one passage of his speech, Xi - the absolute dictator-for-life of the world's most dangerous and aggressive power - denounced "bullying"... and then he filled the airspace around Taiwan with nuclear-capable bombers. It's breathtakingly shameless.
The point Xi made is that he, a fascist dictator, can burble garbage about climate change to globalist elites at their "world economic forum" while littering the Third World with dirty coal plants. He can threaten to attack his neighbors while cooing about "multilateralism."
But "free" nations can't do those things. Their governments get torn to shreds by domestic political opponents, activists, and politicized media both at home and abroad if they try - in other words, the obstacles authoritarian leaders don't have to worry about.
Xi's Davos address was a victory lap for authoritarianism as the heavyweight champion ideology of the globalist era, and he was speaking to an appreciative audience. After Covid, authoritarianism is THE hot product on the social, political, and economic marketplaces.
And now that he speaks from a position of unchallenged strength, Xi wants to force the world to compromise its principles by accepting Chinese oppression. There may be a few theatrical grumbles, but no more tariffs or sanctions. No more disagreements in PRINCIPLE.
What remaining nation or leader has both the strength and confidence to argue with the principles of Chinese fascism? If you're banning free speech, nationalizing your economy, and criminalizing political dissent, you're already walking Xi's path. He's just further ahead. /end

More from John Hayward

Excellent analysis! One of our biggest problems is that people think "democracy," all by itself, is a sufficient check on power. I frankly don't understand how anyone can still believe that, but of course they probably won't be taught otherwise in school.


The disturbing flip side of thinking democracy is a magic talisman against tyranny is the belief that democracy sanctifies power - the essence of majoritarianism. "They can't be dictators if we can vote them out of office!" is one of the most dangerous ideas in the world.

The restraints placed on power are MORE important than the process of choosing who gets to wield it. You would be more free under a tightly restrained hereditary monarch than in a "democracy" with totalitarian centralized power.

The human race learned, fairly recently, that elected government is the approach most likely to maximize liberty and human rights, but where on Earth did we get the notion that it's perfect and sufficient all by itself? The world is full of tyrannies that hold elections.

"Democracy" would be the worst of all worlds - tyranny by mob rule, with the oppressors claiming their every fancy was fully and completely sanctified because they won a vote, and why should we let a stubborn minority thwart The Will of the People?
Funny, before the election I recall lefties muttering the caravan must have been a Trump setup because it made the open borders crowd look so bad. Why would the pro-migrant crowd engineer a crisis that played into Trump's hands? THIS is why. THESE are the "optics" they wanted.


This media manipulation effort was inspired by the success of the "kids in cages" freakout, a 100% Stalinist propaganda drive that required people to forget about Obama putting migrant children in cells. It worked, so now they want pics of Trump "gassing children on the border."

There's a heavy air of Pallywood around the whole thing as well. If the Palestinians can stage huge theatrical performances of victimhood with the willing cooperation of Western media, why shouldn't the migrant caravan organizers expect the same?

It's business as usual for Anarchy, Inc. - the worldwide shredding of national sovereignty to increase the power of transnational organizations and left-wing ideology. Many in the media are true believers. Others just cannot resist the narrative of "change" and "social justice."

The product sold by Anarchy, Inc. is victimhood. It always boils down to the same formula: once the existing order can be painted as oppressors and children as their victims, chaos wins and order loses. Look at the lefties shrieking in unison about "Trump gassing children" today.

More from World

Good question: what proofs has BDA provided of his authenticity?

Let's go through some of them.


- BDA predicted the Saudis would assassinate Suleimani. They did.
- He said the dog that got Badghadi's arm deserved a Medal Of Honor. The next day the President posted a joke image showing him giving the dog a MoH.

- He said one of his ops in Syria would severely disrupt a CIA drug trafficking operation. This was proved true within a few days:
https://t.co/Hranupwcxj
- He sent gold to Brazil to help pay for an anti-trafficking operation there. That op became public soon afterwards.

- On May 31 this year, he predicted the President would be giving a speech the next day. June 1, the President gives a surprise address at the Rose Garden.
- He predicted the US would be making diplomatic moves on Greenland. True.

- He said the US would be pulling all troops out of Afghanistan. This was confirmed within the month.
- He claimed earthquakes would be hitting Iran's nuclear facilities in December. Yep.
- There were FOUR facilities hit, not the three made public. Also true.
A few thoughts on this sad development 👇👇

20 academics criticizing an paper is fine; good science, really

10000+ hate mail for studying schools in Sweden is insane

Anonymous docs/ prof (hiding in faceless accts) on twitter smearing researchers is insane
[thread] https://t.co/QYldLD3WO0


In April 2020, @jflier and I saw this coming

We saw increasingly heated and personal attacks against scientists merely for having a range of views on COVID19 (PS there is no playbook/ right ans)

Tying science to naked politics was also bad idea, we

Yet, repeatedly that is what happened. Twitter 'experts' displayed an absolute intolerance to other views

Folks who disagreed weren't just wrong, they were malicious actors spreading "disinformation"

Really? Someone worked for 25 years as faculty to suddenly spread lies?

Disinformation has been so misused that it has lost meaning.

I recently saw an ID doc & lab researcher in the UK be accused of spreading "disinformation"

hahah, get outta here, you are trying to say "i disagree" but your keyboard is broken

Personal attacks have become so bad that I have seen a lab researcher accuse a doctor of wanting to engage in inappropriate relationships with patients due to diverging views on vaccine messaging

Seriously? It was a low point even for twitter

You May Also Like

IMPORTANCE, ADVANTAGES AND CHARACTERISTICS OF BHAGWAT PURAN

It was Ved Vyas who edited the eighteen thousand shlokas of Bhagwat. This book destroys all your sins. It has twelve parts which are like kalpvraksh.

In the first skandh, the importance of Vedvyas


and characters of Pandavas are described by the dialogues between Suutji and Shaunakji. Then there is the story of Parikshit.
Next there is a Brahm Narad dialogue describing the avtaar of Bhagwan. Then the characteristics of Puraan are mentioned.

It also discusses the evolution of universe.(
https://t.co/2aK1AZSC79 )

Next is the portrayal of Vidur and his dialogue with Maitreyji. Then there is a mention of Creation of universe by Brahma and the preachings of Sankhya by Kapil Muni.


In the next section we find the portrayal of Sati, Dhruv, Pruthu, and the story of ancient King, Bahirshi.
In the next section we find the character of King Priyavrat and his sons, different types of loks in this universe, and description of Narak. ( https://t.co/gmDTkLktKS )


In the sixth part we find the portrayal of Ajaamil ( https://t.co/LdVSSNspa2 ), Daksh and the birth of Marudgans( https://t.co/tecNidVckj )

In the seventh section we find the story of Prahlad and the description of Varnashram dharma. This section is based on karma vaasna.