Skip to main content

OPEN LETTER to The House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party

The Honorable Mike Gallagher, WI Chair

 Dear Mr. Chairman:

You and the Select Committee are misinformed about the Nature and Intentions of the Chinese Communist Party.

They are not our Enemy. They are not an Evil Force. Indeed, according to The World Bank, in the last 30-40 years under the governance of the CCP “more than 800 million people have been lifted out of poverty.” ( https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/china/overview#1 )

That is the greatest Humanitarian Achievement since the invention of vaccines.

The number of people helped exceeds that of the Berlin Airlift and the Marshall Plan combined. (Re-Interpreting the Meaning of China for the USA https://interpretat.blogspot.com/2022/02/re-interpreting-meaning-of-china-for-usa.html )

Something that you, the Committee, and the American people don’t hear from the US media is that the Chinese people appreciate what the CCP has done for them. Several different pre-COVID social science studies show this appreciation.

 

One 2020 study of the new middle class showed that “trust in the national government reaches 97% and trust in local governments is at 79%.” Also, over 82% of “the Chinese middle class are proud of their state” and want to continue living in China. (See “Re-Interpreting,” above.)

 

A Harvard study of Chinese public opinion, reported in 2020, that, “95.5 percent of respondents were either ‘relatively satisfied’ or ‘highly satisfied’ with Beijing.” (See “Re-Interpreting,” above. The Harvard authors affirm that the Chinese responses were authentic, and not based on fear or propaganda.)

 

In contrast, a 2020 Gallup poll in the US found that only 38 percent of respondents were satisfied with the US federal government.

There are two symbols that summarize China’s foreign policy.

First is The Great Wall. It was designed to keep enemies out, but also to mark China’s boundaries. They have done almost nothing to extend their boundaries beyond the Great Wall. (In 1979 China had a brief skirmish with Viet Nam over the boundary line, but walked away from the fight. That was the last time the PLA engaged in armed conflict – 44 years ago.)

Second, the Old Silk Road. The only reason China has for going out beyond the Great Wall is to establish trade. In every one of the thousands of cases, China seeks business contracts through negotiation. It has never used force for trade advantages.

Wherefore, for these, and other reasons, the United States government should stop indulging the Arms Industry’s desire to make the American people fear and hate China and the CCP. We don’t need to increase military spending to prepare for an attack that they have no intentions of ever bringing. Bills punishing and provoking China are an injustice and a grave mistake.

Your Fellow Citizen,

William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.

Twitter:

@InterpretivePo1 

Mastodon:

https://sciences.social/@WilliamJKelleher

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How the “But For” Test for Causation in Law can be Adapted to Political Science

For social science, as for law, the concept of “causation” can  take on different forms. These forms of causation are “outside   the box” of the old Newtonian concept of causation. That is, a   one-on-one collision. For example, the “8 ball” in a pool game moved to the corner pocket because the cue ball struck it at the intended angle. The cue ball did that because Minnesota Fats hit the cue ball just right with his pool stick. This is a mechanistic model of causation. In that model, the list of causes prior to Minnesota Fats could go back endlessly; or at least to the Big Bang of 13.8 billion years ago, which, mechanistically, is thought to be the First Cause of everything. However, for the most part, social science, like law, envisions human behavior as conduct for which the actors are responsible. This need not be a “moral” responsibility, for which moral blame is attached. Instead, “causal responsibility” is simply a matter-of-fact, or practical, concept...
Post a Comment
Read more

RIP Prop 33 😭 What happened?

Why did Prop 33 lose in California? Here are three reasons, although there could be more:  1) Out of state billionaire real estate special interests, combined with in-state millionaire Landlord orgs, spent over $121,000,000 on telling scary falsehoods to Californians. Like, rent control will cause rents to go up, and affordable housing will disappear. They just needed to cause enough confusion about the meaning of Prop 33 to get the voters – even tenants! – to vote no.   2) As I explain in a vid on YouTube,* the California Legislative Analyst presented a biased and negative summary of Prop 33 in the Voter Guide. That was sent out to 22M Californians. For many voters, it was the one and only thing they would read about Prop 33. The law requires the Legislative Analyst to suggest the economic impact of a prop for both state and local gov – but only a negative view was given, and only for the state gov – “tens of millions” would be lost in tax revenues, it said. But renters w...
2 comments
Read more

Executive Immunity – Beyond the Hype

                                           The media and fund raising emailers are having a ball screaming “the sky is falling! The Trump Supreme Court has given Trump ‘absolute immunity’ for whatever he wants to do as President. He’ll kill us all!” But that’s far from true. The United States v Trump The case is known as US v Trump . In its opinion, the Supreme Court didn’t give Trump anything. In fact, the Court remanded the case to the District Court, and told the lawyers for both sides to start all over again. This time, they have to consider three important points. Before explaining these, lets see how the case got to the High Court. As you probably know, Trump was indicted by a Federal Grand Jury for several criminal charges alleging a conspiracy to change the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. (SCt's Opinion, page 2. All references to the Opinion.) In the...
Post a Comment
Read more