Chapter 14 History will unfortunately prove that Obama cannot save the United States

"American Stereotype" full of empty talk The editor of a website wanted me to review Obama's new book, We Believe in Change.He sent all the books, and I could only flip through them and write a review anyway.Fortunately, this book does not look thin, but in fact there are not many words, so it can be read quickly.This is, frankly, a blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. The first half of the book is Obama's policy strategy, and the second half is his eight campaign speeches.We always say that Chinese stereotypes are full of empty talk and have no content, but this book is not as good as ours. In addition to bragging, it is still bragging, and the substantive content is not even as good as the "mobilization report" we often use to make fun of it.In this book, he is full of completely unrealistic promises. He wants to give the common people this and that, but they are all slogans, and I can't see any feasibility.He even said that the United States will reduce its carbon emissions by 80% by 2050.Is this possible?Have!One is that human beings have run out of oil before that, and there is no carbon to be emitted; the other is that a nuclear war has started; it is also possible that the two came together.If the largest catastrophe in human history does not occur, it will be difficult for the United States to keep its carbon emissions from increasing by 2050.But did Obama tell the American people this?Had he thought about it himself?Of course, by 2050, Obama himself doesn't know where he is, so just blow it up now.But is this a responsible attitude?

I remember Xiaojun once called me and said: Those pro-American factions in China have been divided into two factions on the issue of Obama’s election. Those who are pro-American but have no blood connection with the United States, or People with less knowledge are cheering for Obama's victory, but those pro-Americans who have truly devoted their allegiance to the United States, are closely connected with the United States, and have more knowledge, are all worried about the United States because of Obama's election. .I think these Chinese people who are truly loyal to the United States still have some insight.

When Obama was elected president of the United States, the United States was indeed cheering. I also watched Chinese TV, and Chinese experts also cheered. They all believed that many problems in the United States could be solved easily.I really doubt it.To solve the problems in the United States today, you cannot just shout slogans. If you want to give something, you must find the source of the thing.The conservation of energy and the indestructibility of matter are the basic laws of physics, and no one can surpass them.So let's take a look, where is the source of Obama's promise of benefits to the American people, as well as his "green" vision?

In my opinion, the first source can only be a realistic request that the American people go through this difficult time and change their profligate lifestyle to a certain extent.Of course, this matter is difficult. It is easy to go from frugality to extravagance, but it is difficult to go from extravagance to frugality.But Obama could have used his high popularity to guide the American people in this direction.After all, even if the United States really reduces its carbon emissions by 80%, it will only reach China's current per capita carbon emission level. Since the Chinese can do it and are still alive, why can't the Americans?Changing, at least in part, the profligate way of life is the basis of all "change" in America.Without this foundation, all so-called "reforms" are empty talk.But Obama's policy strategy and speeches did not refer to such a direction at all, but made promises to live a more profligate life.That is to say, the "reform" that Obama yelled hoarsely there is just a hypocritical promise of "reform" in the sky, and many Americans believe in such a promise, which shows that they will not have much success .

The second source is robbing the rich and giving to the poor, that is, taking advantage of the rich in the United States and taking things from them, that is, implementing a left-wing economic policy.Obama meant it, and it made the left in America and abroad ecstatic.But after he came to power, will his left-wing economic policy promises be fulfilled?If he doesn't, he's failing the voters who hoped he'd be elected to office today.Although the president of the United States generally discounts the promises made during the election after being elected, there are still many problems if you don't count at all.How about cashing in?Raise taxes to penalize U.S. companies that move operations overseas?If this is the case, what about other companies simply not being American companies?There are many places in the world that are not prepared to implement left-leaning economic policies. If Obama does this, he is likely to drive companies away. Wouldn't that make the US economy worse?

Take the immediate matter as an example, if the three major American auto companies do not cut wages significantly, at least to the level of foreign-funded auto factories in the United States, such as Toyota, Nissan, and Honda, there is no way to save them.Even if it can be saved for a few months, it will only last for a year or a half, and it still cannot save forever.Therefore, to save the U.S. economy, a purely left-leaning economic policy is not feasible. Some places must be more left than they are now, and some places must be more right than they are now.Does Obama have the political wisdom to do it?Do you have the political capital to do it?I don't see any of these.

Now Obama's inaugural address has been delivered.In short, his inaugural speech stated that he wanted to take the "socialist road".He said: "Small government, big society" you should stop arguing, I should have a big government, I should have a big government; you should stop arguing about the free market, I should let the government intervene.This seems quite Roosevelt-like, but, as I have already said, the problems in the United States today are very different from those in Roosevelt’s era: the United States in Roosevelt’s era had extremely strong production capacity, and it was indeed a problem of overproduction and insufficient effective demand. The United States is already in debt, not because of insufficient effective demand, but because the country's production capacity simply cannot satisfy its own consumption desires.Using the same prescription to treat completely opposite diseases, I think there will be bigger problems.

I really don't see Obama doing a better job of saving America from the financial crisis.I have already said that there are profound reasons for the financial crisis in the United States. Generally speaking, it is old in all aspects, and Americans have become "children of the Eight Banners".The problem of the aging of American society makes the financial crisis in the United States today not as severe as that in 1929, but it is more difficult to solve than that time. It is the same for anyone, but Hillary and McCain are at least a little more stable and less bragging. The third source is foreigners.One is cheating, cheating foreigners of their money.After the financial casinos in the United States went to the gang, this matter became more and more difficult. Not only did everyone learn the lesson, but they also had no money to be cheated by it—maybe only the Chinese compradors who wanted to go to Wall Street to "buy the bottom" were still ready to take Chinese people take the initiative to be cheated by it.The second is to borrow from foreigners.But now, Europe's allies are hard to protect themselves, and they are also very tight on money, so they may not help them if they have money.Even Japan, the strongest and wealthiest ally of the United States, has continuously reduced its holdings of US treasury bonds.There is only one China that is often beaten by it and regarded as a potential enemy by it. It is still persistently increasing its national debt there, but the voice of opposition in China is increasing day by day, making anyone have deep feelings for the United States. , When you want to spend a lot of money to help it, you are also afraid.

The fourth source can only be robbery.The military power of the United States is super powerful, which is the only outstanding strength of the United States.I have a friend whose boss is American, and she left a message on my blog: "The American boss once told us that the U.S. fiscal deficit is difficult to solve, and the national debt is drowning. I said that Alaska has many natural resources, and the U.S. can use this To repay the mortgage. He said without hesitation, when the United States is so miserable that it can’t go on, at least we still have so many troops who can go out to grab money, why sell it?” It seems that this American is quite frank. To put it bluntly, the first thing they thought of during the economic crisis was to use the army to go out and grab money.I think this is a very representative view of Americans, but those reporters, professors, and politicians may not say it so bluntly.However, as I said before, the Americans' robbing Iraq has proven to be inefficient. If they want to rob a country that is much stronger than Iraq, they may not be able to make money.Didn't Obama want to withdraw troops from Iraq and concentrate his forces on the frontlines of Afghanistan and Pakistan, which are more threatening to China and Russia?However, creating or fueling tensions, inciting other countries to fight, and then selling arms to make money is indeed the United States' strengths.Therefore, tensions in the Middle East and the South Asian subcontinent should be expected.

Obama's 'change' in rock star style In short, the problems in the United States are not so easy to solve. No one in power can easily solve them, but Obama's rock star style of governance is even more unacceptable.I think his governance is inferior to that of Hillary Clinton, McCain, or even Bush Jr.Some people may say that the political system of the United States is good and can check and balance a president who has no experience and wisdom in governing, and even a president who is reckless. I agree with this statement to a considerable extent.But in this way, the so-called "reform" in the United States becomes nonsense.

Some people think that the election of a black president in the United States is an important change in American society. They think it means that racism in American society has been completely eliminated, and they think it is a sign that people of all ethnic groups in the world are moving towards a world of great harmony. important milestone. The New York Times said that Obama's election had swept away the "racial barrier" in the United States, and some Chinese scholars also said that Obama's election showed that the racial issue in the United States has been downplayed.I don't think so.First of all, the racial problem in the United States still cannot be solved, and there is a possibility of getting worse.If the racial issue was so easy to solve, there should be no distinction between whites and blacks in the United States now-they have lived together for hundreds of years, and they should have been mixed.But the fact is that the dividing line between whites and blacks still exists clearly.This time, if only whites vote, Obama still loses.Some people say that Obama has created the highest approval rate among white voters for the Democratic Party in recent decades. , if Obama was white, I think he would win among white voters as well.Again, look at the scene of McCain’s speech when he admitted defeat: almost all the people present were white, and when McCain congratulated Obama on his election, the audience booed.Bush Jr. gave a speech before stepping down, warning Republicans not to hate Obama too much. This just shows that the resentment against Obama within the Republican Party exceeds the previous general regime change.I think that some white people with strong racist ideas in the United States will become more "racist" because of this failure, and may turn more thoughts into actions.Of course, a considerable number of white people in the United States are immersed in the sense of moral superiority brought about by the election of a black president in their country. Recent polls in the United States also show that most people are willing to give Obama more time to achieve results.But I think that if the joy of Americans does not quickly catch up with the substantial benefits that Obama can bring to them, hope will soon turn into disappointment. At this time, will their instinctive racism come up again? From an international perspective, the international situation facing the United States has greatly complicated, and I doubt that Obama can do better.When Obama was elected, the cheers in Europe were stronger than those in the United States, expecting that the United States would abandon the unilateralism of the Bush Jr. era and blindly be tough.But if we give up unilateralism and tough policies, will the problems of the United States in the field of international relations be solved?There are several problems here.One is the Iraq issue.Is Obama going to fulfill his campaign promise to withdraw troops from Iraq within 16 months of taking office and focus on Afghanistan?Now many American people who support him are expecting him to fulfill his promise.But if he does this, what does it mean for the influence and control of the United States in the Middle East?It's hard to say right now.What can be said now is that Obama is going to concentrate his troops on the front line of Afghanistan and Pakistan to strengthen the containment of China and Russia, which may be a correct choice for the national interests of the United States.Another Russian issue, Russia's challenging attitude towards the United States is obvious.Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's State of the Union address delivered on the same day as Obama was elected strongly condemned the United States and clearly announced that Russia refused to disband the three regiments of the missile force because of the United States' deployment of anti-missile systems in Europe. The deployment of the "Iskander" missile system in the state has made it clear that it is a tough confrontation.Compared with the golden years after the Cold War, when the United States was the dominant power, Russia's confrontational stance has greatly complicated the international situation facing the United States today.No matter who is the president of the United States, this is a difficult problem. Can Obama do better?I suspect.And precisely because Obama is a black minority, if he does not handle international issues well, he will receive more criticism and suspicion than a white president. This time Obama's inauguration was attended by 2 million people, and the atmosphere was extremely warm.Undoubtedly, when its people are at a loss today, the United States needs a president like a rock star to mobilize everyone's emotions and make everyone temporarily forget the embarrassment in reality.The really good rock star Kelly on the scene mobilized everyone's emotions like a rocket soaring into the sky, but when the show broke up, everyone had to go home and face reality.I think that no matter how enthusiastically the American people support Obama, as long as he does not bring obvious benefits immediately, the support and national unity shown by the United States today will soon turn into suspicion, criticism and division. The higher the expectations, the greater the disappointment.In these difficult times, an immediate success for a minority president can quickly turn into a disadvantage, and he will not enjoy the understanding and trust that a president from a majority background can receive. Most of my previous judgments are from the perspective of the United States.I have no intention of "jinxing" the United States, I'm just expressing some of my doubts and reminding everyone that there are other possibilities besides optimism, not inevitability.I sincerely wish the American people success.From China's point of view, what we need is to be vigilant against the serious crisis in the United States, and choose war or instigate war in order to get rid of the crisis.Therefore, the article published by General Zhang Zhaoyin in the "Liberation Army Daily" on December 2, 2008 advocated that "we must abandon the concept of 'peacefully building an army, building a peaceful army' and firmly establish the idea of ​​​​preparing for war." Very correct and timely.