I worked for a Fortune 100 company and participated / assisted with the offshoring of labor, first to Singapore, then Mexico, then to China and then finally to Eastern Europe. It never made sense to many of us, but questioning the whole strategy was obviously not popular. It was always sold as "strategic, targeted cost savings and / or expanding global footprint for regional opportunities". However, when one understood the entire infrastructure to support the globalization, from IT networks, to logistics, EDI conversions, language, quality standards, localization laws, brokerage etc...it never added up. Then, the kicker, always sold as cost savings, but the prices of everything has risen continuously over the years. A decent F250 with all those cost savings components from around the globe now goes for $80K. Quite the savings.
Communism is withering and dying across the world. But that’s not what happens in China. No, not at all. Because just one month after the Tiananmen Square massacre, the president of the United States at the time, George H.W. Bush, sends his National Security advisor General Scowcroft, on a secret mission to China.
Now George H.W. Bush, prior to becoming president, had been the CIA director, but prior to that he had also been America’s special envoy to China. It’s true. And he’d always had big plans for China. He saw what was going on in the 1970s and he looked at it through the lens of business and realized, “Why knock over the Chinese Communist Party when you could make them make a deal?”
Because the United States and the Western system, the Western world, could have destroyed the CCP at that instant. They had no power. We could have cut off trade, we could have done everything that we did to Russia when they invaded Ukraine and China would’ve been finished, or at least the CCP would’ve been finished. They would’ve been done for.
But no, because what George H.W. Bush and his successor, Bill Clinton, did throughout the 1990s was to form a new deal with the CCP, a secret pact. The CCP would continue opening up and they’d be… they would continue to be the leaders of China and the West would support them the same way the West had supported the U.S.S.R. in its early days and helped to industrialize the nation.
The west would continue to industrialize China through their finances, through foreign direct investment, and in exchange, they would provide slave labor. In exchange, Western firms would be allowed to supply the capital, supply the intellectual property, but the goods that would be made would be made for slave wages and sent all around the world. This was the birth of a system that today we call globalism. Globalism was born from the bloody cobblestones of Tiananmen Square.
Correct. This was the revitalization of the pre-world war two alliance between the Axis Powers, led by the nazis, and their eastern counterparts, the communists. The "New World Order," nazis and commies working together to forever end democracy on a global scale.
Only fools see two sides of the same coin as two different coins.
I worked for a Fortune 100 company and participated / assisted with the offshoring of labor, first to Singapore, then Mexico, then to China and then finally to Eastern Europe. It never made sense to many of us, but questioning the whole strategy was obviously not popular. It was always sold as "strategic, targeted cost savings and / or expanding global footprint for regional opportunities". However, when one understood the entire infrastructure to support the globalization, from IT networks, to logistics, EDI conversions, language, quality standards, localization laws, brokerage etc...it never added up. Then, the kicker, always sold as cost savings, but the prices of everything has risen continuously over the years. A decent F250 with all those cost savings components from around the globe now goes for $80K. Quite the savings.
...compelling addendum...
Transcript:
Communism is withering and dying across the world. But that’s not what happens in China. No, not at all. Because just one month after the Tiananmen Square massacre, the president of the United States at the time, George H.W. Bush, sends his National Security advisor General Scowcroft, on a secret mission to China.
Now George H.W. Bush, prior to becoming president, had been the CIA director, but prior to that he had also been America’s special envoy to China. It’s true. And he’d always had big plans for China. He saw what was going on in the 1970s and he looked at it through the lens of business and realized, “Why knock over the Chinese Communist Party when you could make them make a deal?”
Because the United States and the Western system, the Western world, could have destroyed the CCP at that instant. They had no power. We could have cut off trade, we could have done everything that we did to Russia when they invaded Ukraine and China would’ve been finished, or at least the CCP would’ve been finished. They would’ve been done for.
But no, because what George H.W. Bush and his successor, Bill Clinton, did throughout the 1990s was to form a new deal with the CCP, a secret pact. The CCP would continue opening up and they’d be… they would continue to be the leaders of China and the West would support them the same way the West had supported the U.S.S.R. in its early days and helped to industrialize the nation.
The west would continue to industrialize China through their finances, through foreign direct investment, and in exchange, they would provide slave labor. In exchange, Western firms would be allowed to supply the capital, supply the intellectual property, but the goods that would be made would be made for slave wages and sent all around the world. This was the birth of a system that today we call globalism. Globalism was born from the bloody cobblestones of Tiananmen Square.
Correct. This was the revitalization of the pre-world war two alliance between the Axis Powers, led by the nazis, and their eastern counterparts, the communists. The "New World Order," nazis and commies working together to forever end democracy on a global scale.
Only fools see two sides of the same coin as two different coins.
...wonderful analogy....
..."things" have been weird for quite some time....
...only recently it is becoming obvious....