Peter Klevius was the first (1992-94) to solve consciousness and to introduce existencecentrism, and the first (1992) to point out the mongoloid (cold adaptation) link between the Jinniushan fossil in China and Khoisan people in Africa.
* 'Mind' is here to be understood
as the latest state of the individual's (or humankind's) adaptation to
sensory input imprinted via the thalamus in a way that makes any new
input pattern obliged to hit (roughly/dynamically) the same original
association pattern. For this process to work no "qualia" is possible
other than as obscure concepts in language. In fact, to understand the
mind one has to separate it from language. Or more precisely, one has to
understand language as sensory input in general - compare Peter Klevius
stone example (1992) - but realize its capability of irrational
illusions. There's no table in the brain to support a toddler learning
to walk - s/he is just adapted to it as part of her/his surroundings.
Same with a sunset etc. The neuronal circuit is just a chaotic "film"
emulsion where different association patterns have become familiar to
the individual. And scanning the brain shows just that, i.e. a chaotic pattern unlike anyone else's, except for more general structures due to similar biology.
The main point of Peter Klevius concept
'existencecentrism' (1992) is that the only reality is the one inside
the mind, and that it's impossible to even talk/think about something
"outside" the mind because any such speculation is 100% determined/understood by
what is inside the mind.
A pile of house building material
has the potential for a variety of different houses. However, the more
the house is built the less possibility for variation. Same applies to
the mind, according to Peter Klevius (1981, 1992, 1994, 2004). This
means that the more the brain (mind) adapts to its limited
(existencecentrism) surrounding, the less room for other views. First
threshold for the growing young human (fetus, baby etc.) is the limit of
the senses. The second is the ackumulation of synaptic adaptations
which makes the individual naturally (walking etc.) and socially
(talking etc.) fluent, but further also limits access to alternative
understanding because of the mind “going native”*.
* "Going native" is a concept in social anthropology when a researcher “becomes” one with the culture under study.
Peter Klevius evolution formula from 1981 applied to the mind.
This
article appeared as a s.c. "under-liner" (under strecket) on the
editorial page and was back then paid Fmk 500 to the author.
The
understanding of what the senses bring is limited to what they have
brought before (P. Klevius 1992). This is in line with Peter Klevius
evolution formula (published 1981) where the basic element of existence is motion, and the causality of events
constitutes a complex of evolution and devolution (synaptic pruning).
Evolution can be said to be the consequence of the variables of
causality in where the complexity of older structures is reinforced
(compare s.c. counterfactual relation). This development stays in an
apparent opposition to thermodynamics which theoretically leads to what
is called "maximum entropy", i.e. the state where no additional pruning
is needed (compare e.g. walking and talking in general). Thus, one could
fatalistically say that evolution in fact only constitutes components
of causality on its way to uniformity, where the end point of evolution
is determined by its external frame of reference, and can be summed up
in the words of the philosopher Hegel: 'Pure being and nothingness are
identical' (P. Kotilainen* 1981).
* Kotilainen
(mother's maiden name) was the last of three names labelled on Peter
while still a child - the others being Lundberg (married to the mother)
and Lindroos (who kept the kidnapped child in secret for many years).
Ironically, the proper name Kinnmark (the bio father who admitted
fathering the child and promised to marry the mother but never did) was
never applied.
* UK not only cheats by playing WC football as several separate countries while playing track and field as one (Team GB).
It
seems that England benefits from referee bias. Moreover, England also
seems to be very lucky in which group they end up in international
tournaments etc. favorable decisions. Does it really benefit those who
want to be proud of their team?
Harry
Maguire's 2018 WC clumsy cheat must be one of the worst in football
history. After all, he dived inside the penalty area without no one even
close to touch him. And his plan seems to have been that he should have
got in contact with the defender. However, the defender elegantly
avoided him. Harry Maguire is also notorious for using his big frame to
aggressively push down players so to get headers - without referees
reacting. Why? Because he played for England.
Sam Wallace
(Telegraph Sport): There were knife-edge moments for England twice in
the latter stages when Honduran referee Saíd Martínez decided that
breakaway attacks from the African side did not end in fouls by English
players. Both involved the substitute Prince Kwabena Adu. On the first
occasion, Jordan Pickford jumped at him and Martínez decided that the
Ghana man had made the contact as he ran through. If it had been the
other way around, it would have been a red card for Pickford. Then
Martínez decided that Ezri Konsa did not foul Adu as he ran on goal in
the 79th minute, even though it looked very much like there had been
contact from the England defender. But it will not just have been those
decisions that upset Ghana manager Carlos Queiroz. Generally speaking
everything that might have been a split decision went England’s way and a
few more besides.
However, Peter Klevius wonders whether you* really understand how cheated you are by $-thief US totalitarian finance and media dictatorship and warmongering - and how it robs your country of access to Chinese high tech?
* Absolutely no offense because most people have valid excuses for "not seeing the forest for all the trees".
Alex Lo: A genocidal warmongering nation disguised as a democracy? From its inception to the present, the US rarely distinguishes between diplomacy and war. Today, it has ambassadors working in one-third of the world’s countries, but has special force operators active in three quarters of them
Peter Klevius: Yes, the pathological symbiosis between US and UK made both of them piracy states. However, the 1971 dollar theft planted the seed for a giant step on the rogue state ladder.
Some headlines re. UK's former colony, $-freeloader US desperate attacks on China, the world's oldest civilization. After all, the world's by far oldest pottery was made in China, as was the world's oldest millet and rice cultivation. Although Western definitions of a civilization are deliberately made to exclude China, antone who seriously dig into Chinese prehistory and history, will be convince that everything point to China being more advanced earler than Sumer - and probably also being the source of later development in the West.
Human Rights Watch (essentially a US government organ for anti-China propaganda): 'The Tiananmen Massacre was precipitated by the peaceful gathering in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square and other Chinese cities in April 1989 of students, workers, and others calling for free expression, democratic reform, and an end to corruption. On June 3-4, People’s Liberation Army soldiers opened fire upon and killed numerous protesters and bystanders in Beijing. Chinese authorities have long banned commemorations of the massacre on the mainland. No steps have been taken to provide information or compensation to the families of those who died or to prosecute those responsible for the killings.'
Peter Klevius: Not exactly! Compare text below which is based on early US sources before the US made history falsification.
Listen to Chai Ling, leader of the Tiananmen riots who wanted to provoke Chinese leadership "to shed blood" while she went to US.
Peter Klevius wrote:
Media's US led depiction of the 1989 Tiananmen "democracy"* riots in China is as far you can get from the truth.
* Even if some of the violent
rioters really believed that "democracy" would be better for China,
history now tells them how wrong they were. Moreover, just consider
dollar embezzler (1971-) US reaction if China had become even stronger
technologically, economically, politically and morally (if the latter is
even possible for a 1.4 billion country)? That wouldn't have extended
US stolen hegemony, right.
$-freeloader
US extreme anti-China cognitive, financial, militaristic warfare is
made possible with US 1971 stolen world dollar hegemony and is a crime
against humanity and most people are too busy/ignorant to understand the
danger of the cornered US - but instead fear China which offers best
consumer goods, infrastructure etc, without imposing its system as US
does!
Sadly, many haven't understood the enormity of US
financial fraud 1971. And US economists - and some stupid US puppets
called "allies" - just "explain" away how US as the only country in the
world can prosper and militarize the rest of the world despite constant
trade deficit. "We're just so good" is Bloomberg's and others answer!
When
US 1971 stole* the world dollar it could manipulate it as it wanted and
have the world pay for its trade deficit. However, China is now back
and challenges it with superior tech which makes consumers happy.
China's capitalist reform got severely hit 1988-89 because of US Feds
chock rate increase. That caused havoc in a still extremely vulnerable
China on its path out from Maoism.
*
1944 Bretton Woods "agreement" pegged the world dollar to US dollar
which was then pegged to gold under US Feds custodianship. 1971 US was
bankrupt and arbitrarily violated the gold connection but kept the
custody over the world dollar. Although it hit poor countries the most,
China was especially vulnerable because it was in an intensive
opening-up trade development following Deng Xiaoping's capitalist reform
policy.
Peter Klevius analysis
of the US controlled media massacre of the truth about the Tiananmen
square incident by neglecting cause and effect while producing
anti-China* smear.
* No, it's
not just CCP! Undemocratic Christian theocracy US uses Sinophobia as
synonymous with "democracy", well knowing that the absolute majority of
Chinese people don't share the US view on "democracy", although young
Chinese in the late 1980s realized the difference in living standard
between US and China after Deng Xiaoping opened up the China that Mao
had closed. So when US again manipulated the world dollar it hit hard
(up to 19% 1989 inflation from 7% 1987) on China's economy.
Peter
Klevius agrees with Klaus Schwab (WEF) who said "I respect China's
tremendous achievements … over the last forty years. China could act as a
role model for many countries, but in the end, each country should be
left to make its own decision regarding the system it wants to adopt. We
should be very careful in imposing systems
but the Chinese model is certainly a very attractive model for quite a
number of countries." Peter Klevius: Especially for US!
Wu'er Kaixi (aka Örkesh Dölet) Of Uyghur heritage from Xinjiang had a leading role during the 1989 protests.
Peter Klevius: What did he think about the old Uyghur jihad battle cry "kill the Han and the Hui"?
Summary
of Peter Klevius Tiananmen analysis: There were two distinct and
mutually exclusive groups of protesters who were not distinguishable by
their appearance.
The absolute
majority were peaceful protesters. However, the rest were intent for
violence, and their leaders even openly admitted that they wanted to
provoke PLA to also use violence "so the world could see it". But even
this wasn't enough. As critics of Chai Ling’s role in the movement
point to the infamous “last words” interview she gave to US
journalist Philip Cunningham on May 28, just days before the riots.
With the movement facing an uncertain future, a deeply pessimistic
and fearful Chai gave video testimony to Cunningham in which she
described her intention to leave the square, adding “I want to live”.
But, other students would have to stay until the square was “washed
with blood,” she said.
Much of the rioters brutality was the
result of Beijing’s decision on June 2 to send in unarmed soldiers to
clear the Square. The unarmed soldiers were set upon immediately by
rioters around the Square waiting for the chance to attack the soldiers.
Beijing’s armed battalions were sent in later.
US Embassy daily reports of what was happening at the time.
The US Embassy report for June 4 notes:
“the beating to death of a PLA soldier, who was in the first APC to
enter Tiananmen Square, in full view of the other waiting PLA soldiers,
appeared to have sparked the shooting that followed.”
So it was the rioters, not the government soldiers, that started the bloody confrontation.
State Department chroniclers continue their unbiased summary of events:
“.. the initial moves against the students suggested to many that the
Chinese leadership was still, as of the morning of June 3, committed to a
relatively peaceful resolution to the crisis.”
From there we go to:
“fascinating eyewitness accounts of the disorganized and confused
retreat of PLA soldiers from the center of Beijing after their advance
on Tiananmen Square was halted by crowds of demonstrators on the morning
of June 3.’ ..the soldiers were ridiculed by Chinese citizens and
scolded by elderly women who called them “bad boys” and “a disgrace to
the PLA.”
On the day after, on June 4, however: “thousands of
civilian (rioters - not peaceful protesters) stood their ground or
swarmed around military vehicles. APCs were set on fire, and
demonstrators besieged troops with rocks, bottles, and Molotov
cocktails.”
Media reports confirmed this rioters violence.
According to the Wall Street Journal of June 4:
“As columns of tanks and tens of thousands soldiers approached
Tiananmen many troops were set on by angry mobs … [D]ozens of soldiers
were pulled from trucks, severely beaten and left for dead. At an
intersection west of the square, the body of a young soldier, who had
been beaten to death, was stripped naked and hung from the side of a
bus. Another soldier’s corpse was strung at an intersection east of the
square.”
Even ABC, later to one-sidedly dramatize cruelties by
government forces, describes how in front of the Australian embassy a
PLA solder was beaten to death, disembowelled and left with his penis
stuck in his mouth.
But those who condemn government violence at
Tiananmen need to explain the seeming hatred of the government among
protesters that triggered Tiananmen events .
Chai
Ling, like many other Tianamen rioters became Christian and welcomed in
US. Listen to her video to measure her bloodthirstiness - and
cowardice.
The "tank man" hoax*
*
The photographer used Peter Klevius favorite film camera (before F4)
Nikon Fe2. 10 years earlier Peter Klevius bought a Nikon Fe because of
its fast (for fill in flash) titanium shutter, which also handled better
in cold than Canon's slow and cold sensitive fabric shutter. Moreover,
whereas Canon A1 was useless with low battery (which was also really
expensive), Nikon Fe (and Fe2) could still do B and 1/90 mechanically.
Double exposure and good depth and field control also helped. However,
the best thing was the wonderful metering system with both manual and
auto relative to each other on the side of the viewer.
Although
the "tank man" photo is authentic, its usage is almost never. As Peter
Klevius has always said: Cameras never lie - pictures do. And in this
case it's the presentation against a background on an extremely
distorted Western presentation of the "Tiananmen massacre", that
completely eliminates the "hero" against the "evil CCP" mantra - at a
time when CCP had abandoned everything Maoist.
Peter
Klevius was first reluctant to even mention the "tank man" in the post
because he thought most people already understood the silliness in it.
However, a brief check revealed that BBC and other fake media still uses
it deeply tendentiously and polemically. According to Peter Klevius,
the incident clearly shows that PLA had strong orders to be careful with
non-violent people no matter what they did. Otherwise any army would
hav just taken the guy for interrogation - as any police would have
done in any other country. Moreover, his strange behavior can only be
described as either mad or just joking in front of the crowd. There was
nothing to "protest" against - or did he want them to park on a normally
busy street, or even worse, return to Tiananmen square?!
1)
5 June 1989 everyone in Beijing knew that PLA wouldn't hurt non-violent
civilians. Yes, that happened accidently in the chaotic battle the day
before with the rioters who deliberately started the violence (already 3
June) against unarmed PLA soldiers whom they burned alive and hanged
etc. That the PLA may have used excessive force is in line with any army
in a similar situation. Just listen to Chai Ling and understand how
deliberate the provocations from the rioters side were. Btw, also check
the Waco siege and similar incidents in US.
2) It didn't happen at Tiananmen square, and the tanks were not going against protesters but just the contrary, i.e. back home.
3) Little, or nothing is publicly known of the man's identity or that of the commander of the lead tank.
4)
An endless list of "theories" have been put forward. Shortly after the
incident, London newspaper Sunday Express named him as "Wang Weilin"
(王维林), a 19-year-old student who was later charged with "political
hooliganism" and "attempting to subvert members of the People's
Liberation Army." This claim has been rejected by internal Chinese
Communist Party documents, which reported that they could not find the
man, according to the Hong Kong-based Information Center for Human
Rights. One party member was quoted as saying: "We can't find him. We
got his name from journalists. We have checked through computers but
can't find him among the dead or among those in prison."
There
are several conflicting stories about what happened to him after the
"demonstration". In a speech to the President's Club in 1999, Bruce
Herschensohn, former deputy special assistant to US President Richard
Nixon, alleged that he was executed 14 days later; other sources alleged
he was executed by firing squad a few months after the Tiananmen Square
protests. In Red China Blues: My Long March from Mao to Now, Jan Wong
writes that she believes from her interactions with the government press
that they have "no idea who he was either" and that he is still alive
somewhere on the mainland. Another theory is that he escaped to Taiwan
and remains employed there as an archaeologist in the National Palace
Museum. This was first reported by the Yonhap news agency in South
Korea.
The Chinese government has made few
statements about the incident or the people involved. The government
denounced him as a "scoundrel" once on state television. In a 1990
interview with Barbara Walters, then-General Secretary of the Chinese
Communist Party Jiang Zemin was asked what became of the man. Jiang
first stated (through an interpreter), "I can't confirm whether this
young man you mentioned was arrested or not", and then replied in
English, "I think [that he was] never killed." The government also
argued that the incident evidenced the "humanity" of the country's
military.
In a 2000 interview with Mike
Wallace, Jiang said, "He was never arrested." He then stated, "I don't
know where he is now." He also emphasized that the tank stopped and did
not run the young man over.
Cui
Guozheng, was an unarmed cook in the 348th Regiment of the 116th
Division. He was murdered by rioters because he did not stay close
enough with the other troops.
Peter Klevius started as an empty
origo/singularity whose existencecentrism (mind) now is the sum of his
experience with his surroundings and due synaptic adaptations, while
also constituting part of the surroundings of others. A canvas which
doesn't have a soul/self of its own but does reflect what it has
experienced and adapted to. However, the false impression of having a
"self", "free will" etc. rests on language, i.e. the use of the word 'I'
which animals and humans without language lack. As a human with
language you are in the same position as Peter Klevius, and together we
all (incl. non-language humans) make up the total existencecentrism of
humankind - and the key to a universal human with (negative) Human
Rights without irrational exceptions and impositions. So when Peter
Klevius talks/writes/acts, he does so against a background that includes
the latest synapses combinations in his brain as well as what his other
nerve signals bring to his thalamus from his body and other
surroundings.
Peter
Klevius (1981, 1992): The ultimate question ought to be: What is it
like to be a stone? There's no difference between human consciousness
polished through living, and the "consciousness" of a stone that has
been smoothly shaped in streaming water against other rocks, stones etc.
It started its "life" as a rugged piece of rock in a mountain and
adapted to its life in streaming water down hill, or perhaps as a piece
of rock falling on a beach and polished by waves.
* Peter Klevius: Clearly the biggest ever fraud because the Bretton Woods agreement essentially covered the whole world.
Peter Klevius asked US made AI: Isn't US embezzling on the world dollar after 1971 when it violated the Bretton Woods agreement?
Answer by US made AI: It was a response to economic pressures rather than outright embezzlement.
Peter
Klevius: Really! Which court would drop an embezzlement case because it
was caused by "economic pressures"?! US dollar theft 1971 followed an
accelerating "economic pressure" due to the Vietnam war, military race
and space race, which US paid by embexxling from the gold backed world
dollar.
Ron
Paul points to the $-elephant in the oval office that others pretend
not to see: “I can remember it precisely. One Sunday night (1971) I was
sitting in front of the television watching the news come in and oh, a
special news clip. And they put up President Nixon and all of a sudden,
boy, did my eyes open.”
In that televised address, Nixon
announced he had directed then-Treasury Secretary John Connally to
suspend the dollar’s convertibility into gold — a move that effectively
violated the Bretton Woods system.
Ron Paul: “And I said, ‘This is a big deal... It might be one of the biggest things that ever happened in monetary history’.”
The
$-theft marked a sharp turning point. Since 1971, the US dollar has
operated as a fiat currency, meaning it is not backed by anything else
than US authoritarian dictatorship. And because the Federal Reserve can
print money in unlimited quantities, Ron Paul thinks (like Peter Klevius
has warned for many years) that serious consequences now lie ahead.
Ron
Paul: “We’re approaching that time when bad stuff will really be
happening to us because you just can’t print money and lie to the people
forever. It’s all based on a lie and it’s fraud, it’s counterfeit
money.”
When US creates excessive amounts of dollar, its value
inevitably declines. $100 in 2025 had the same purchasing power as just
$12.58 did in 1971.
Peter Klevius: US 55 years of delayed
bankruptcy has built up a timebomb that makes US the most dangerous
country in the world. No matter who is the US president s/he faces the
same dilemma as Trump.
Jeffrey
Sachs: And then always in the background, one has to add, British
Russophobia, because Britain, to my mind, is madness. It is imperial
nostalgia to this moment. Even as Starmer goes down the drain, they put
Ukraine as a great national project because they’ve hated Russia since
1840.
Peter Klevius: The UK/US "special bond" rests on inherited pure evil
such as piracy, colonialism and war - between the two and the rest of
the world.
Jeffrey Sachs: New European
Military Bloc for War Against Russia. Germany is losing its industrial
base, but what Merz is doing is going to possibly provoke a disastrous
war, but leave Germany even farther behind economically. It’s completely
the wrong track.
Peter Klevius: When Western companies cannot
compete with Chinese technology, then they turn to military production
which is protected against competition from China by the US led "China
threat" mantra - while 100% unreliable US outdated militsry tech is
accepted.
In late 2021 Finland's PM Sanna Marin forced her party (SDP) to accept
ordering 64 F-35 (ready for tactical nukes) jets from US. In January
2022 she and president Sauli Niinistö (right wing Kokoomus) decided to
apply for NATO membership, which triggered Russia's February 2022
invasion*, which in turn triggered Sweden's NATO membership as well as
Finland's and Sweden's disastrous DCA treaty with US. And according to a
new report from the EU Commission, the purchase of the 64 F-35s is the
main reason Finland's economy is now faultering badly.
*
Russia opposed NATO's offensive (nuke) enlargement into Ukraine, and
thought it would stop Finland's parliament from deciding for the NATO
menbership Marin and Niinistö had initiated. And therefore Russia also
in the Istanbul treaty proposal would have accepted Ukraine to keep
Dombas as an autonomous region inside Ukraine if Ukraine promised not to
join NATO (which nukes would have been the very opposite to Ukraine's
promised status as nuke free) and to stop attacking the overwhelminh
majority of Russian speakers there and give back their rights that
Ukraine's government had taken from them. However, UK PM Boris Johnson -
probably ordered by US - stopped this process and asked Zelensky to
contiunue the war with UK assistance.
Two Strands Driving Europe Toward Catastrophe, according to Jeffrey Sachs.
So
all of this is to say that I see two strands at work right now. Most of
Western Europe, not so much in this agenda. Eastern Europe, absolutely —
or much of Eastern Europe, the Baltics and Poland in particular,
pushing this anti Russophobic line. Germany, absurdly, tragically,
unaware, self-unaware, now even championing this idea.
So just to
add one coda to this. All of this is to say that at the best we have
the classic security dilemma that Europe is taking defensive steps that
are going to lead to war because they are really offensive in what
they’re doing. But what we see is a complete lack of political and
security imagination in Europe. What started as a misguided project for
Central Europe and for American hegemony has turned into an absolutely
profoundly dangerous European project for remilitarization that would be
the march to war.
* The most common definition of fascism is anti-communism, initiated by US "Red Scare" propaganda 1917 - two tears before Mussolini's anti-communist fascism popped up in Italy. Media fascism refers to the use of media and communication technologies to promote anti-communist ideologies, manipulate public opinion, and suppress dissent. It often involves propaganda that simplifies complex issues and demonizes perceived enemies. BBC ticks most of these boxes, while ultimately resting on UK's "special relationship" to US. BBC's media fascism rests on US led anti-communism, no matter what the word "communism" stands for, and neglecting the Maoists' persecution of Xi Jinping and his family, as well as the enormous difference between modern communist China and Maoist "Communism" USSR "communism", PolPot "Communism" etc.
Ironically the same fascist BBC happily uses to lump the democratically elected genocide supporting and war crimes committing US president together with Xi Jinping as "strongmen", despite Xi Jinping's meritocratic grassroot connection in every aspect is the very opposite to Trump*.
* Trump's, or any US president's for that matter, only grassroot connection rests on continuing US embezzlement of the 1971 stolen world dollar. The allure of the "Greater US" and the "Greater Israel" imperialism.
Peter Klevius wrote:
Why Peter Klevius and Xi Jinping are both anti-Maoists - and how now desperate $-embezzler US under false flag with impunity is a malign actor that has taken the freedom to act without consequences.
* The world's dilemma: A successful Chinese meritocracy with clean super tech vs a dirty (US as a country is the worst netto polluter - add to this its ~1,000 military basis worldwide which alone stand as the third biggest) and now desperate blackmailing/embargoing/sanctioning/threatening $-thief bully who does it to avoid bankruptcy by continuing its enormous and accelerating embezzlement which started with its $-theft 1971 (violation of Bretton Woods). US Fed is the lonely wolf guarding/printing all dollars in the world, but cares only about (part of) US. Trump now underlines Peter Klevius analysis by threatening other countries to keep supporting the otherwise dying $. And he does so by using the bullying tools US has developed with that very stolen gains from the world-$. However, US can only print $ to a tipping point, defined as when the pain from devaluation of the $ gets unbearable (do understand the difference between the price of a $. Moreover, Chinas accelerating R&D superiority will inevitably force other governments to oppose US and eventually let their people have what they demand, i.e. Chinese high tech, research cooperation etc. China's Maoism was a self-containemnt parenthesis caused by 1) Western efforts to colonize China (which began with the opium war) and 2) a violent, revolutionary Communism that Mao was taught in Paris, which was a far cry from traditional Chinese philosophy - to which Xi is pointing.
US containing of China means blocking other countries access to clean super high tech from China while simultaneously forcing them to buy outdated US militarism.
Watch how Xi Jinping was haunted by Maosim and later turned China into the opposite direction - while reinstalling the world's oldest philosophy.
$-thief US militarism against China of course resulted in China being forced to defend itself - and therefore producing the best modern high tech defense industry.
Will the resulting US self-containment end up like Cuba's US enforced containment*?
After all, China leads in every high tech sector already, and it's only US blackmailing/embargoing/sanctioning etc. that marginally and temporarily slows it. Unlike Cuba, China's high tech is too attractive to resist. More importantly, China's size, talent pool, and upward trajectory guarantees its continuing acceleration no matter what.
Containing China doesn't stop a 1.4 billion civilization to continue developing - and leaving the rest in the backwater.
Do realize that China, because of modern tech, is already similar (although more advanced) to most countries in daily life (just ask tourists), and that even a transition to Western style "democratic" ruling wouldn't change anything (incl US behavior)* because of the deep cultural basis of its meritocracy which is rooted in an ancient philosophical tradition that young (compared to China) infighting "monotheist" "multicultural" Western nations lack.
Since 1971 people in US have been lured that US economy is the best in the world. But it's not, it's the worst when seen by those outside US who have been forced to pay for it.
US 1971 $-theft (violation of Bretton Woods) causes now accelerating $-inflation at the pace of fiat-$ paid by less wealthy US people and the rest of the world. US is the only country able (because of the $-theft) to counterfeit itself out of deficit and debt because it alone dictates the world-$. However, paying US deficit with US fiat while lacking a normal healthy economy where debits and credits are balanced against trade and debt, US has to continue stealing the difference in an accelerating tempo.
US Fed is the lonely wolf guarding/printing all dollars in the world, but cares only about (part of) US and not at all about the rest of the world which has been tricked (violation of Bretton Woods, the petro-dollar deal with Saudi islamofascism etc) to continue using the dollar. This evil game has now become truly poisonous because China's progress challenges US hegemony and therefore even the dollar. Do consider that US is your real authoritarian dictator - not China. Everything you do is not only spied on by US but can also (and already is) be weaponized by US at will. And US will is defined by whether you or your country confirm to it. Donald Trump recently admitted it by threatening that those who abandon the dollar will face sanctions/tariffs etc. This is a gangster state's "rules based order" that has already for long been directed against China, which has no need at all to do the same, quite the contrary because of its superior R&D.
US bullies countries to keep supporting the otherwise dying $. And it does so by using the bullying tools US has developed with that very stolen gains from the world-$. However, US can only print $ to a tipping point, defined as when the pain from devaluation of the $ gets unbearable for enough people. Moreover, Chinas accelerating R&D superiority will anyway inevitably force governments to let their people have what they demand, i.e. Chinese high tech and research cooperation etc.
Peter Klevius, who was kept in slave bondage without a family of his own during his childhood, now understands Xi Jinping, but was completely ignorant about politics while using any extra time for feeding his brain with science, philosophy and history. Xi, on the other hand, was 100% political due to Maoism that surrounded him and destroyed his family. Add to this that Peter Klevius lacks completely Xi's talent to get people listening to him. It may have to do with social position, i.e. although most people consider Peter Klevius tolerant and nice, they immediately stop listening when he says something they consider over his social grade.
Peter Klevius as a child also believed the lie that his mother had abandoned him when he had actually been kidnapped. So he took all the beatings and hard work and disgusting accomodation as a given, somehow blaming himself.
Western critical thinker Peter Klevius is closer to Chinese values - and he thinks most Westerners are if let out of the strangle grip of their anti-democratic leadership and racist/sexist "monotheisms".
Peter Klevius and Xi Jinping are twins; highly intelligent, humble*, down to earth, anti-Maoist football lovers (no dude, not stupid "American" handball).
Sadly, Western "democracies" under US 1971 stolen and now heavily inflated dollar dictatorship can never produce such grassroot meritocratic politicians as Xi Jinping, because the best are destroyed in the election process, and the rest are distorted by media and US lobbyists.
* Yes dude! Peter Klevius is far from wealthy, yet wouldn't change his way of living, clothing, moving around etc. if he was a billioner. Everyone who knows him can tell you that.
The pushing of his name and intellectual bragging is not Peter Klevius but a reflection of West's* distorted (by "monotheisms" and colonialist imperialism) through twisted discursive channels.
* Yes, nothing could be easier than cherry picking bad stuff from China. However, US $-embezzlement problem belongs to a completely different category.
Although true humility avoids pushing for limelight, Peter Klevius realm is the opposite, i.e. cut out from any light - hence explaining his reach for the light switch so to make sure his potential contributions to society aren't missed out. Moreover, Peter Klevius has for all of his adult life tried to be a good example for his children and others in his surroundings. A small but telling example is the fact that although Peter Klevius has lived in 22 different locations (of which only 5 his own), he has never had problems with neighbours (although as young he was so popular that some thought he had too amny guests - although none of them did anything wrong because they respected Peter Klevius), incl. some troublesome ones. I.e. a humility that safeguards against unnecessary conflicts. Peter Klevius has never showed/felt any ego/strive for power but rather cowardly avoided it. However, I can see how circumstances such as Xi's could have flushed me into similar directions. In fact, as a 23-year old Peter Klevius was asked by many friends (and their friends) to step on a perfect ladder of politics, but he cowardly refused.
Peter Klevius foundational humility is perhaps best seen in all his writings about basic (s.c. negative ) Human Rights, meaning that the only true approach to be a humane human is to adhere to the acceptance of every other human's equal rights where local laws may differ but ought to be guided by Human Rights - not "monotheist", fascist etc. segregational supremacism.
The "way" (Tao)
Early on due to necessity Peter Klevius realized that a cheap, used Japanese car in every aspect outperformed his neighbors' new same category Western ones - which fact made him aware of East Asian cultures. Peter Klevius has never been guilty of colliding with other cars, people, or animals (other than a few young birds on the windscreen) yet loved to drive like cracy on dark and slippery Nordic winter roads, or safely outperforming taxi drivers in the city with his old (but beautiful and cool) "rice cup". And when Peter Klevius worked for Finland's broadcasting company YLE he was offered a heavy, expensive Nagra tape recorder with short runtime and sensitive to movements, he saw on the shelf a Sony freestyle cassette recorder (Sony WM-D6 Professional) and realized it could do everything that the Nagra couldn't yet with high quality sound and two hours runtime compared to Nagra's less than 15 min. He also quickly realized the danger of Western TVs compared to Japanese (like Western cars, Japanese TVs extremely rarely failed or caught fire, and Sony had always the best picture). The last Sony (165" 4K 3D) 'bought a decade ago - so the next one will be a Chinese display. Same with watches. For a fraction of the cost of a Suisse watch Peter Klevius could buy a Japanese that in very asppect beat the Suisse one (compare Seiko, Citizen etc.). Same with cameras. A clumsy outdated Zeiss SLR could never compete with a Nikon that cost a fraction! So today Peter Klevius being able to carry the world's best watch (until he gets a Chinese one) which is a decade old satellite controlled atomic Citizen Ecodrive chrograph that never needs a battery or any other attention. Same with his many years old Nikon P1000, the world's by far best alround camera which costs a fraction of a professional camera - which anyway would be impossible as an allround because of weight and clumsiness. Etc. etc. And today Peter Klevius wouldn't even consider buying anything else than Chinese stuff - because the 12 times bigger and independent China has replaced US occupied and steered Japan as the world's techno leader whom no one can catch up with but should rather cooperate with.
Peter Klevius would probably profile himself different in a Chinese milieu - if he could ever penetrate the cultural barrier the West has built against China.
Also, do understand that although no country can be a Utopia, no country should be allowed to be a global desperado as US sadly has become because of its 1971 dollar theft.
Rogue state US is now busy continuing its destructive undermining of other countries exemplified by its and its "allies" use of islamists in Syria and Nato (via EU) in Georgia.
And BBC continues to keep silent about US ban on aid to the more liberal faction of Taliban being the reason why the more extremist took over which meant harsher treatment of women and girls. Instead (otherwise sharia applauding) BBC "complains" about women's rights in Afghanistan and propagates for more US led interventions - and supporting islamists in Syria.
How US robs the world since it 1971 by violated the Bretton Woods
agreement and then started printing dollar costed by the rest of the
world. Relase US fiat bomb by clicking it.
As the ultimate bias assassin Peter Klevius focuses on notorious cases where the justice system favors its dislike of the accused rather than the evidence or lack thereof.
The Alex Murdock case also reveals the arbitrariness and often reliance of a single judge who conducts a civil crowd collected under the weird and outdated jury duty system still popular in US and UK*.
* A recent exaple is Andrew Malkinson who was imprisoned for 17 years for rape despite totally innocent and an other man's DNA found on the victim but neglected by the crown prosecutor. Malkinson could have been released after 6½ years but was not because he maintained his innocence.
Peter Klevius wrote:
Lynching is back in US! Alex Murdaugh avoided death penalty only because
the prosecutors knew they would not then have secured a conviction.
Alex Murdaugh was sentenced on empty
"circumstantial evidence" for life for the double murders of his wife
Maggie (who the same day on the phone had asked if he wanted 'foot
massage') and much loved son Paul (who the same day rode and joked
together with his dad).
Everything
in the big selling Alex Murdaugh case points to a deliberate judicial
witch hunt. They took all his assets so he couldn't even pay the bail
but was jailed for over a year before the trial - so he was hence
hindered from defending himself.
Peter Klevius thinks a similar
case but with a white judge and a black lawyer as the suspect, the
result may have been different.
Alex Murdaugh may have been
sloppier than most lawyers but chances are that his and his fellow
lawyers "Ponzi scheme" didn't differ that much from average ones which
are perhaps better wrapped. However, that's not murder. Moreover, as
exemplified in the housekeeper case below, someone might argue that
something is better than nothing, and that only the lawyer's hard won
expertice made it possible. These kind of transactions happens legally
on Wall street all the time.
After a one and a half year long
smear campaign while they kept him jailed for an alleged economic issue,
the trial took only a month!
The whole process since before the
murders in June 2021 was a long depinberate character destroying smear
campaign against an already heavily troubled human being who suffered
cocaine addiction and was even prepared to commit suicide to rescue his
other son's future.
The murder scene was (deliberately?)
completely destroyed by authorities, making DNA, blood, foot prints etc.
impossible to recover.
Although the murdered son Paul had got
serious threats against him because of a boat accident he had caused
years before where one passenger drowned, no effort was made to follow
this obvious lead which included Paul's stolen rifle which had been used
to shoot Maggie five times, while Paul was shot with a shotgun just
yards apart. The guns were never found. Moreover, the very same week but
some days before the murders, Paul Murdaugh was facing a hearing in a
lawsuit brought by the family of Mallory Beach who died in the 2019
crash in the Murdaugh family boat. Paul was allegedly drunk driving the
boat at the time and crashed it, throwing them all overboard.
However,
here one has to take into account the Murdaugh lawyer family's
notorious reputation of "always getting away with it", and that somebody
might have thought of taking the law in their own hands before a
possible acquittal.
There are no eyewitnesses. There is nothing on camera. There's no forensics tying him to the crime.
The
main circumstantial "evidence" in the murder case was that Alex didn't
tell the police that he had also been on the place some time before the
murder i.e. 8:44 (Alex voice in the background on the phone video of
some dogs), when according to the coroners estimate the death happened
between 9:00 and 9:30. Alex called Maggie 9:04 and the police around
10:00 after having come back and discovered the bodies. So as a lawyer
he certainly knew what most people know, i.e. that he would be the main
suspect. So he chose first not to mention it before the video turned up.
Two
semiautomatic guns (rifle and shotgun) were used, and from an angle
that didn't match the tall Alex at all. Moreover, why use two guns? And
the bodies were just yards from each other.
The muder weapons
were never found but the rifle cartridges seemed to match old ones
weathered ones found around the hunting plot, which fact could easily
be explained by the murderers using Paul's rifle witch had been stolen
long before.
Alex Murdaugh became the individual target for the
"privilieged" white Murdaugh family tree. Just compare how negatively
it's presented on Wikipedia, while other similar families are presented
in much more positive light.
SLED also "reopened" an
"investigation" into the "mysterious" 2018 death of housekeeper Gloria
Satterfield and "planned" to exhume her body - but never did. And why
should they because there was absolutely nothing "mysterious" at all -
but only served the witch hunt on Murdaugh. The media tried actively to
insinuate for the readers that she died from "violent impact" and mostly
"forgot" to mention that she was treated for weeks on a hospital and
told staff there that she just tripped by herself (possibly in contact
with dogs on the stairs). She later died from pneumonia - possibly
partly caused by injury on her lungs after the fall.
Murdaugh
represented the clients in wrongful death lawsuits before allegedly
pocketing part of the settlement money for himself in a Ponzi scheme
(much like U.S. itself) on top of legal fees. In fact, he himself
offered the idea to the Satterfields to sue him for wrongful death so
they could get some money - which they did - although he took most of it
for himself.
Shamefully, the only motive to the murders
prosecutors could come up with was that Mr Murdaugh’s alleged financial
crimes were key to proving his murder case, claiming that he killed
Maggie and Paul "to hide his other crimes and scandals which were
catching up with him". Rather the witch hunt - i.e. nothing like an
ordinary investigation based on assumption of innocence until proven
guilty.
Timeline
7
June 2021 – Maggie and Paul were shot dead at the family’s sprawling
estate in Islandton. Maggie was shot five times with an automatic rifle
and Paul was shot twice – once in the head and once in the chest – with a
shotgun. Murdaugh made a dramatic 911 call at 10.07pm claiming he had
returned home from visiting his elderly mother to find their bodies.
17
June 2021 – Murdaugh’s brothers Randy Murdaugh IV and John Marvin
Murdaugh appeared on Good Morning America insisting their brother was
not involved in the murders.
22 June 2021 – SLED announced that
it was reopening an investigation into Smith’s death, based on
information gathered during its investigation into Maggie and Paul’s
murders.
22 July 2021 – Investigators released the 911 call made
by Murdaugh on the night of the murders. In the call, he is heard
sobbing as he tells the dispatcher “it’s bad” and “my wife and child
have been shot badly”. Mr Murdaugh also tells the dispatcher that he
hasn’t seen anyone on the property.
3 September 2021 – Murdaugh
was confronted by the partners at his law firm PMPED after they
discovered he was allegedly misappropriating millions of dollars of
clients’ funds. He was forced to resign.
4 September 2021 –
Murdaugh was shot on the side of a road in Hampton County. He survived
and called 911, claiming he was ambushed in a drive-by shooting while he
was changing a tyre on his vehicle. He was treated at a hospital for a
“superficial gunshot wound to the head”.
5 September 2021 –
Murdaugh entered rehab, announcing he was struggling with a 20-year
opioid addiction and that he had resigned from his law firm PMPED.
13
September 2021 – Murdaugh confessed to police that he had orchestrated
his own shooting as part of a botched hitman plot. He said he paid
Curtis Smith, 62 – a former client, distant cousin and allegedly
Murdaugh’s drug dealer – to shoot and kill him in an assisted suicide
plot so that his surviving son Buster could get a $10m life insurance
windfall. The two men were arrested and charged but Mr Murdaugh was
allowed to be released on bond to return to rehab. SLED also opened an
investigation into allegations that Mr Murdaugh had been
misappropriating funds from his law firm.
15 September 2021 – SLED announced it was reopening an investigation into Satterfield’s 2018 death.
14
October 2021 – Murdaugh was released from rehab only to be dramatically
arrested on charges of stealing funds from Satterfield’s family. The
family had reached a wrongful death settlement with Mr Murdaugh but said
they didn’t receive a dime. They filed a lawsuit against Mr Murdaugh
claiming he pocketed the money.
19 November 2021 – Murdaugh was charged with almost 30 counts over the Satterfield wrongful death settlement.
3 June 2022 – SLED announced that it was planning to exhume Satterfield’s body.
12
July 2022 – The Murdaugh family was notified that Murdaugh would be
charged with Maggie and Paul’s murders. The same day, Mr Murdaugh was
disbarred from practicing law in South Carolina by the state’s Supreme
Court.
14 July 2022 – Murdaugh was charged with the murders of
Maggie and Paul – two counts of murder and two counts of possession of a
weapon during the commission of a violent crime.
20 July 2022 – Murdaugh appeared in court on the murder charges where he pleaded not guilty.
22
November 2022 – Russell Laffitte, former Palmetto State Bank CEO, was
convicted of financial fraud charges in connection to Murdaugh’s alleged
white collar fraud schemes.
23 January 2023 – Murdaugh’s murder
trial began in Colleton County Courthouse with jury selection. Opening
arguments began two days later. By this time, Murdaugh was also facing
more than 100 other criminal charges over the suicide hitman plot and
the alleged white collar fraud scheme where he is accused of stealing
more than $8m from clients. He is also facing several civil suits.
24
January 2023 – A judge approved the settlement agreement in the
wrongful death lawsuit brought against the Murdaugh family by the Beach
family.
23-24 February 2023 - Murdaugh takes the stand at his
murder trial and confesses to financial crimes and to lying about his
alibi but insists he did not kill his wife and son.
2 March 2023 - A jury convicted Murdaugh of the murders of Maggie and Paul.
3 March 2023 - Murdaugh is sentenced to life in prison.
