https://finance.sina.com.cn/2018-11-16/detail-ihnvukff8972595.d.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUMZoh-gXRw

http://news.dwnews.com/china/news/2018-10-10/60089830_all.html

 中国发展给世界带来了什厶？这个问题原本不难回答，但近来美国一些奇谈怪论甚嚣尘上，俨然成了“标准答案”。例如，美国有种说法认为，中国崛起是在搞“经济侵略”，是在实施“地缘政治扩张”，是在“破坏国际规则”。类似论调在美国由来已久，只不过是一股暗流，如今珧韟茯茪圻a成为美国官方的说辞。9月17日，美国领导人居然在其声明中指责中国“对美国经济的长期健康和繁UGou成严峻威胁”。更有甚者，10月4日，美国副总统在演讲中妄称，中国的“成功在很大程度上是由美国在中国的投资所推动的”，“在过去的25年里‘我们重建了中国’”。真是天大的笑话！既然如此，就不能不在世人面前认真评评理、算算账了。这个账怎厶算呢？首先，可以从推动世界发展的角度，算一算中国做出多少贡Y；其次，可以从促进世界和平的角度，看一看中国做了哪些事；第三，可以从维护国际秩序的角度，评一评中国究竟有没有破坏国际规则。 一、中国是全球发展的推动者，而不是在搞“经济侵略” 美国指责中国在世界上搞“经济侵略”，还说自己就是受害者，认为中国“采用了一系列与自由和公平贸易相悖的政策手段……为北京奠定了制造业的基础，但Que以牺牲其竞争对手，特别是美利坚合众国的利益为代价”，“中国的这些行为造成了与美国的贸易逆差”，并且口口声声“敦促中国改变这些不公平的做法”，为此甚至不惜挑起贸易战。那现在世界上的损益账该怎厶算？这得好好说道说道。 美国认为对华货物贸易存在巨额逆差是“吃亏”，受到了“经济侵略”，还说“吃亏”金额为“2,000亿美元”。贸易账不能这征漶C要看到，贸易是相互的，各取所需，你情我愿，中国从未L买L卖，也不刻意追求顺差。美国对中国有巨大的市场需求，有买又有卖。根?联合国统计，2017年美国对华货物出口1,298.9亿美元，较2001年的191.8亿美元增长577%，远远高于同期美国对全球112%的出口增幅。这还是在美国严格限制对华出口商品种类，有些科技含量都不让卖的情G下做到的。如果美国肯卖高科技产品的话，还会有这厶大逆差吗？

比方说，

美国的福特级航母卖不卖？

一艘按150亿美元算，

卖给中国4艘，

马上就能填上600亿美元的逆差。

即便不说航母这厶高端的，哪怕美国稍许放宽对华出口限制，货物贸易逆差也不是现在这个状态。?美国卡内基国际和平基金会2017年4月的报告分析，美国若将对华出口管制放松至对巴西的水平，美国对华贸易逆差可缩24%；如果放松至对法国的水平，美国对华贸易逆差可缩35%。可见，问题不出在“中国不买”，而出在“美国不卖”。 何G，还得考虑服务贸易。美国方面统计，2007至2017年，美国对华服务出口额由131.4亿美元扩大到576.3亿美元，增长了3.4倍，而同期美国对世界其他国家和地区的服务出口额增长1.8倍，美国对华服务贸易年度顺差扩大30倍至402亿美元。 实际上，算中美贸易的损益账，只考虑中美两国过于片面，因为它是过去几十年来经济全球化的一部分，不能脱离全球视角。几十年来，美国本土的加工、组装等制造环节向全球转移，自身保留设计、营销等服务环节。中国成了全球产业转移的最大承接地，很多货物出口都是美国等国家在华生产并“买回去”的。在产品价值链中，跨国企业拿到的是大头，中国企业拿到的是小头，只是一点加工费、辛苦钱，全算作中国“赚了”显然不公平。 中国的发展不但不是“经济侵略”，反而是世界经济增长的重要引擎。2013年以来，中国对世界经济增长的贡Y率持续保持在30%左右，始终居世界第一位，2017年更高达34.6%，约为美国的两倍。中国的发展还给世界带来更大的市场。2001年到2017年，中国货物进口平均增速达13.5%，是世界平均数的两倍；同期中国服务贸易进口平均增速16.7%，是世界平均数的2.7倍。2011年到2017年，中国进口货物和服务总额占全球的份额由8.4%增至10.1%，提高1.7个百分点，而同期美国则下降了0.5个百分点。 在世界上，中国也是就业机会的重要创造者。目前中国与“一带一路”沿线国家共同建设境外经贸合作区80多个，为当地增加了24.4丌个就业岗位。国际四大会计师事务所之一的安永事务所指出，2005年到2016年，中国在非洲创造的就业岗位超过13丌个，是美国创造岗位的3倍多。此外，?国际劳工组织发布的《中国与拉美和加勒比地区经贸关系报告》，1990年到2016年，中国为拉美和加勒比地区创造了180丌个就业岗位。 美国国内有说法称，中国“抢走”了美国人的饭碗，依?是美国有一些工丌转移到了中国，这是片面的、站不住脚的。美中贸易全国委员会2017年发布的报告指出，中美经贸关系支持了约260丌个美国就业岗位。另外，美国波埵{立大学的一份研究报告指出，相比1979年时美国制造业岗位数的巅峰，当前美国的确失去了约700丌个制造业岗位，但其中88%的原因在于工业自动化水平的提高ㄓ痐F对劳动力的需求，与中国没有关系。美国企业在哪设万，从根本上说是由资本的逐利性贝w的，不是谁想拉就能拉来的。 中国的发展不仅没有“侵略”别人，反而为世界扩大了市场、创造了就业、贡Xian了智慧，促进了世界发展，是对联合国千年发展目标和2030年可持续发展议程Qiang有力的支持。中国的发展，拓展了占世界总人口80%以上的Guang大发展中国家走向现代化的途径，给世界上那些既希望加快发展又希望保持自身独立性的国家和民族，提供了全新选择。肯尼亚执政党总书记图朱感慨地说：“中国的成就在人类历史上没有先例，它给非洲人民带来希望，让他们感到光明就在隧道的尽头。” 中国的发展绝非美国某些政客所言“由美国在中国的投资所推动的”，而是十多亿中国人民辛辛苦苦干出来的。即便说到对华投资，Wu论是流量还是存量，美国也不是最多的，更遑论“重建了中国”。?有关统计数?，20世纪80年代以来，在华外国投资中，美资只占到大约7%至10%。相反，美国从对华投资中赚了个盆满钵满。   二、中国是世界和平的建设者，而不是在搞“地缘扩张” 美国还指责中国搞“地缘政治扩张”，利用所谓的“债务陷阱外交”来扩大影响力。这真是荒谬之极。 美国副总统在演讲中煞有介事地称，“可以问问斯里兰卡。它承恕F巨额债务，让中国的国有企业建立了一个商业价值令人质疑的港口……它可能很快就会成为中国不断壮大的蓝水海军的一个前沿军事基地”。听听斯里兰卡驻华大使卡鲁纳塞纳·科迪图瓦库是怎厶反驳的：“如果谁说中国政府给钱把斯里兰卡拖入‘债务陷阱’，我不同意，这绝对是错误的结论”，銡Z托塔港的安全事务完全由斯里兰卡军方负责，“中国从来没有向我们提出过任何要求，我们从来也没有向中国提供过什厶”。实际上，美国二战后一直将地缘政治作为外交的指导思想，把世界看作玩瓜分地盘游戏的“大棋局”。在此思维下，美国的眼中只有盟友或对手；基本手段　非是结盟、接触、遏制、干预乃至战争。从北约东扩到印太战略，Wu不是美国搞地缘政治扩张的产物。 当前，不稳定和不确定性正在成为世界和平主要威胁。衡量造成威胁还是促进世界和平，要看是在制造矛盾还是在维护稳定。被美国抹黑为“地缘政治扩张”的“一带一路”倡议，提出5年来，已有103个国家和国际组织与中国签署了118份“一带一路”方面的合作协议，“一带一路”倡议及其核心理念被纳入联合国、二十国集团、亚太经合组织、上合组织等重要国际机制成果文件。“一带一路”实际上是以“和平合作、开放包容、互学互鉴、互利共赢”超越零和思维的“大合唱”，是根本不同于地缘政治扩张的国际合作理念。 在当今世界，中国坚定发挥茤M平与安全的维护者作用，以自身发展繁U维护和平稳定。中国倡导并一贯坚持和平共处五项原则，是联合国五个常任理事国中派出维和部队最多的国家，截至2017年上半年，已累计派出维和军事人员3.5丌余人次，先后参加了24项联合国维和行动，被国际社会誉为“维和行动的关键因素和关键力量”。中国从来没有为了石油或是资源发动过战争，从不使用“邪恶国家”、“失败国家”、“粪坑国家”这种除了制造矛盾外Wu助于解言笞问题的词语攻击别的国家。 从内部看，中国是世界主要经济体中社会治安最好的国家之一，美国盖洛普公司《2018年全球法律与秩序》调查显示，中国位居全球最安全旅行目的地前十名之列，并且是前十名中唯一的主要经济体。而美国社会治安形势十分糟糕。?权威机腹统计，2014年到2017年，美国因枪击案死伤人数以5%左右的增速逐年上升，2017当年死伤人数达61,813人，其中死亡15,637人，每天有170人因枪击伤亡。 作为“世界警察”的美国，本应以维护和平为最大责任，但所作所为狺@直是在打荂维护和平”的幌子发动战争。二战后，美国已发动或参与世界上30多场战争，几乎每两年新增一场。美国的好战成性给世界乃至其本国人民带来了巨大难。2003年到2012年，以莫须有理由发动的伊拉克战争，直接或间接导致65.5丌伊拉克人死亡，2,765名美国士兵阵亡，2万多名美国士兵伤残。美国插手的蝘Q亚战乱，导致大量民众流离失所。截至2018年8月，在联合国难民署登记注册的蝘Q亚难民达560万人，由此形成的难民危机深刻影响世界。美国2001年发动了阿富汗战争，已造成超过30万人伤亡，至今仍是一个“流血的伤口”。 包括经济安全在内的新要素已成为世界和平的重要组成部分，降低贸易壁垒才能提高合作水平，从而维护经济稳定。不断扩大开放的中国，从未主动挑起贸易争端，并充分履行入世承诺。中国还加大对发展中成员特别是最不发达国家成员援助力度，促进缩小南北发展差距。截至2018年3月，已对36个建交且已完成换文手续的最不发达国家97%税目产品实施零关税。今年以来，中国再次向全球宣布扩大开放措施，大幅度放宽市场准入，在服务业特别是金融业方面，全领域深度加快开放进程。 反观打荂对等开放”旗号的美国，滥用“国家安全”名憛A组建了包括情报部门等多部门成员在内的“外国投资委员会”（CFIUS），不断拓展“国家安全”的涵盖范围，使“国家安全”成为美国任意阻碍外国企业进入美国的工具。仅在2017年“外国投资委员会”就以“国家安全”名摮郃謋~国公司进入美国市场20多起，其中半数以上为中国公司。中美都是世贸组织成员，经贸上出现一些问题理应在世贸组织框架内解芋C但美方抛开世贸组织争端解享颡謘A根Ju自己的国内法蛮横地处理对外贸易摩擦，完全背离了世贸组织的基本原则，违反了美国承诺的关税让和最惠国待遇务。美国总统在声明中居然恫鴾国，“如果中国针对我们的农民或其他行业采取报复性行为，我们将立即展开阶段三，对额外大约2,670亿美元的进口商品征收关税”。好一个只许州官放火，不准百姓点灯！   三、中国是国际秩序的维护者，而不是在搅局 美国常常指责中国“不遵守国际秩序”，诋毁中国在世界舞台上的作用。中国的许多作为都被扣上“破坏国际规则”的帽子，是“修正主Yi国家”，甚至被说成另起炉灶、另搞一套。 事实是，中国直接参与了二战后国际秩序的腹建，是联合国的创始成员国。中国代表董必武第一个在《联合国}章》上签字。中国自1971年恢复在联合国及其所属一切机腹的合法席位以来，一直在不断“加群”，当前中国已加入400多项多边条约，参加了所有联合国专门机腹和大约90%政府间国际组织，全面融入当代国际秩序。《国际组织年鉴2017—2018》数?表明，中国对国际组织的参与率正在快速接近参与率最高的法、德等国水平，并且增速在主要经济体中是最快的。多项研究认为，中国已经高度融入了国际组织体系，并且是国际秩序的坚定维护者、积极建设者。 在全球治理中，越来越多的国家希望中国发挥更大作用。近年来，中国提出了共商共建共享的“一带一路”倡议，创建亚洲基础设施投资银行，恰恰是对现有国际秩序的有益补充和完善。中国还相继举办了亚太经合组织领导人非正式会议、二十国集团杭州峰会、首届“一带一路”国际合作高峰论坛、金砖国家领导人第九次会晤等重大主场外交活动，重申深化改革、扩大开放的理念，欢迎世界各国搭乘中国发展的高速列车，受到国际社会Guang泛欢迎。中国的“朋友圈”正在不断壮大。 反观二战后成为国际秩序主导者的美国，而今Que在不断破坏国际秩序，不断“退群”、威胁“退群”，甚至“废群”。例如，美国已经退出全球应对气候变化的《巴黎协定》、联合国人权理事会、联合国教科文组织、全球移民协议、伊核协议等。美国主导的西方七国集团（G7）曾经在全球治理中发挥过重要作用。然而，如今它最受世界关注的焦点竟是其内部分歧。此外，美国还要在西方内部早已形成秩序的汽车、钢铁等领域搞“推倒重来”，使欧盟、日本都感到震惊。事实证明，中国是国际秩序的维护者，而美国是国际秩序的搅局者。 当今世界，你中有我、我中有你，奉行单边主Yi、固执零和思维，是没有前途的。中国人民不是鴾j的，从来不怕鬼、不信邪。不管世界如何变化，中国将坚定不移地与国际社会一道，致力于Gou建新型国际关系，致力于Gou建人类命运共同体，为人类进步事业作出更大贡Y。 

不要人夸颜色好，只留清气满乾坤。 

https://www.baidu.com/s?ie=utf-8&f=8&rsv_bp=1&rsv_idx=1&tn=baidu&wd=%E8%94%A1%E6%85%8E%E5%9D%A4%3A%E4%B8%80%E4%B8%AA%E6%AD%A3%E8%83%BD%E9%87%8F%E5%A5%B3%E4%BA%BA%E4%B8%BA%E4%BD%95%E8%B7%B3%E6%A5%BC%E8%87%AA%E6%9D%80%3F&rsv_pq=e5b112d20001c944&rsv_t=e765BNNpWe9wEio%2B1ivq934q6MIs6W61npyH9qHrK1eIexC6bKeXpHkNfNw&rqlang=cn

    蔡慎坤：一个正能量女人为何跳楼自杀？

人民日报《新闻战线》总编辑胡欣跳楼自杀了，她的同学朋友都很震惊都觉得不可思议！不

知道她有多少难以言说的痛和不堪承受的苦，才这岩炖u所恋地抛夫弃女，纵身一跃Juejue

而去——这个原本视丈夫女儿为生命家境优越又拥满满正能量的女人，

胡欣的大学同学和生前好友证实，胡欣10月20日凌晨还在朋友圈发过一番感慨：

“桂花飘香的季节来到杭州。‘上有天堂，下有苏杭’，此言不虚。在乌镇住了一夜，

恍若隔世。收拾心情。返京。”

这是胡欣留给朋友圈的最后信息，

没有想到这十多天，

她究竟遭遇了什厶，

又醒悟了什厶，

如果说是抑郁，

恐怕也不仅仅是个人的抑郁，

也不仅仅只是理想与现实的差距。

公开资料显示，胡欣1952年出生，毕业于北京大学哲学系，高级编辑职称。1990年进入《人民

日报》理论部工作。曾任《人民论坛》杂志社总编辑、理论部部务委员。2008年底任人民日报

社《新闻战线》杂志社总编辑。胡欣作为 “任理轩 ” 和 “任仲平” 写作班子成员，曾参加

多篇文章的研究和写作，均获人民日报 “ 精品奖”或 “ 一等奖 ”。

按说这个年龄应该颐养天年了，不知道她为什厶还坚守在这个并没有什厶权力的岗位上，或许

是报社的信任或许是报社的需要，正能量的文章毕竟只能出自正能量之手，

想想当年的梁效，不也是一大韖膳铳q写手的代名词吗？

在那个时代，文人墨客不会思考，现实也不允许思考，只能暲茪顾为歪理邪说辩护喝彩，

从来没有独立的思想和人格，更没有基本的良知。

胡欣是一个励志文人，在朋友圈传递的都是暖暖的鸡汤和满满的正能量信息，10月16日她在

朋友圈转发过《刷爆朋友圈的励志漫画：生命太短暂，我没时间讨厌你》，文章说：

“一个负能量的人，除了影响你的情绪，还会拉低你的身段。一个

正能量的人，从不埋怨生活，自带各种光芒，还会不断地鼓励别人，

使你变得更优秀自信。”“你的人生，既然是你自己做主，那厶就

由你自己负责。消极的态度和积极的思想，往往就是你与别人之间

最远的距离。正能量的人，往往没空负能量。”

想起老舍，那个曾经一马当先，批判俞\平伯，批判胡适，批判胡风，批判丁玲反党集团，批判

章伯钊，罗隆基，徐燕荪，吴祖光，赵少侯，刘绍棠，邓友梅，从维熙等的正能量作家，那位

写了《骆驼祥子》《茶馆》《四世同堂》，《看穿了胡风的心》《都来参加战斗吧》《扫除为

人民唾弃的垃圾》的革命作家，1966年8月24日深夜也在北京西城太平湖跳水自杀。

几年前，胡欣的同事，《人民日报》副刊主编徐怀谦也以这种毁灭的方式离世，徐怀谦不是

一个正能量的偶像，而是常常在思考人生的意樽]不回避诸多现实社会问题，他生前在《以死

作证》一文中写道：“死是一个沉重的字眼，然而在中国，在很多情Kuang下，不死不足以

引起社会重视，不死不足以促进事情的妥善解芋C”

    唱得自己都恶心，只有以死明志

               ————  赞歌的虚妄与幻灭

https://www.baidu.com/s?ie=utf-8&f=3&rsv_bp=1&rsv_idx=1&tn=baidu&wd=%E8%B5%9E%E6%AD%8C%E7%9A%84%E8%99%9A%E5%A6%84%E4%B8%8E%E5%B9%BB%E7%81%AD&oq=%25E8%25B5%259E%25E6%25AD%258C%25E7%259A%2584%25E8%2599%259A%25E5%25A6%2584%25E4%25B8%258E%25E5%25B9%25BB%25E7%2581%25AD&rsv_pq=9730d3420000f7f4&rsv_t=b114%2F4vkecZuNid6DoP8H%2BZQjJfQaZTnBjYLEfuv%2FsN6qQpPHonDPHOSNCo&rqlang=cn&rsv_enter=0&prefixsug=%25E8%25B5%259E%25E6%25AD%258C%25E7%259A%2584%25E8%2599%259A%25E5%25A6%2584%25E4%25B8%258E%25E5%25B9%25BB%25E7%2581%25AD&rsp=0&rsv_sug=1

2018年11月6日星期二中午，胡欣女士在单位家属区跳楼自杀，

享年66岁。

本来，任何一个人选择自杀都不足为奇。但是这个胡欣，不是

一般人，她是人民日报的《新闻战线》总编辑。这就成了新闻、

大新闻。

      左起：《人民日报》副刊主编徐怀谦、《人民文学》副主编宁小龄、当地领导

                      左起：施雨、徐怀谦（《人民日报》副刊主编）

自杀的是女人，并不奇怪，奇怪的是几年前，2012年8月22日

下午，胡欣的同事，《人民日报》副刊主编徐怀谦跳楼自杀，

仅仅44岁。

2016年，6月26日，《求是》杂志副总编辑朱铁志在单位地下

车库自缢Yi辞世，享年56岁。

这三个人，有一个共同点，都是北大骄子，都是郭家栋梁，

都是顶尖的笔杆子。

这三个人不约而同，前赴后继地选择自杀，都因为同一个原因，

都因为抑郁症。也许，文人都多愁善感，容易伤怀，难免抑郁，

久困而难以自救，终于走向末日。

他们都高唱赞歌，他们都选择自尽，他们的笔下都满满正能量，

但是他们最终都以负能量的方式离世。有人说，这是因为理念

与现实的差距。

是啊，唱赞歌时，慷慨激昂，壮怀激烈，可是一看现实，

一地鸡毛。唱赞歌时，春风满面，阳光明媚，一片大好，可是

现实，狾风正紧，风刀霜剑，一片萧瑟。

赞歌唱久了，

就会唱累了，

唱厌了，

唱倦了，

唱得没有了力气，

唱 得 自 己 都 恶 心 。

他们曾经为赞歌骄傲，

但是后来，他们为赞歌惭愧，并且忏悔。

唱赞歌的人，

终究会发现，

赞歌是空洞　物的，

是自欺欺人的，

是愚弄大家的，

是麻醉百姓的，

是掩盖黑暗的。

赞歌就是

天大的阴谋，

天大的诡计。

唱赞歌的人终究会失望，因为他们发现赞歌没有改变射会，赞歌

与射会越来越远，赞歌成了射会的讽刺，赞歌成了射会的耻辱。

射会其实并不需要赞歌。

唱赞歌的终于明白，

赞歌

都是废话，

都是|呓，

都是胡言乱语，

都是妖言惑众，

都是蛊惑人心，

都是弥天大谎。

他们终于发觉，赞歌是有毒的，不但毒害了同胞兄弟，也更深地

毒害了歌者自己。以至发觉时，已经病入膏肓Huang，Wu药可救。

他们终于醒悟，他们终于拒Jue，他们终于抵触。他们不愿意再唱

赞歌，他们不愿意再助纣为虐，他们不愿意再与狼共舞，他们

不愿意再行尸走肉。

歌者的命运很狭窄，自选择唱赞歌的那一天起，就注定他们没有

别的选择，没有退路可走，并且Wu人可救。因此，他们只有选择

死亡，以死明志，以死Juejue，结束自己，永久地关闭歌喉。

   他们都以这Yang的方式，一了百了，保留最后的清白与尊严。

愿天堂是一片净土

  《求是》杂志副总编辑朱铁志：

?东方之星客船翻沉事件搜救传出的最新消息，2015年6月8日上午，现场搜寻人员又搜寻

到2名遇难者遗体。遇难人数升至 434 人，加上生还者14人，目前失踪者还剩 8 人。

有中国网民汇集罗列了中国官媒对这次东方之星船难报导中的〝十大恶心标题〞：

1.生为国人，何其有幸《中华网》

2.4天3夜，那些感动我们的瞬间《人民日报》

3.救援一线，中国最帅的男人都在这儿啦！《人民日报》

4.「东方之星」不必陨落的N个理由《新浪》

5.东方之星沉船事故四大疑问？？你懂的《西陆网》

6.灾难救援考验中国，世界透过沉船见中国决心《环球网》

7.中国的「老人与海」—「东方之星」翻沉事件幸存游客求生记《新华网》

8.感谢你无数次游过那麽悲伤的水域《澎湃》

9.同样是沉船，为什麽泰坦尼克号更值得铭记？《搜狐》

10.沉船救援，十个注定要载入历史的镜头《中国之声》

《世界透过沉船事故见中国角腄n、

《生为国人，何其有幸》，

《孩子别哭，我在长江，已经回到母亲怀抱》，

《4天3夜，那些感动我们的瞬间》，

《救援一线，中国最帅的男人都在这啦》

      我是中国共产党

   我是中国共产党党员

我打死不要那帚涨菪拔C体 ！

我打死不要那帚涨菪拔C体 ！

提示一句列位看官不会注意到、易中天（1947年2月8日生于长沙-）一句感叹名言：

“这顺序来看，您呢，跟周大烈是同辈的，

  周大烈 —— 梁D超的挚友、陈寅恪的老师”，易中天接茬道：

“ 您看，按照周家这个系统啊，

    我和周大烈同辈，

    那我可以叫梁D超 叫D超兄啊。

    这，牛啊，牛逼啊 ！ 呵呵 ”

             始自 10:48

我非常盼望我们的}法能写上：

个人私有财产神圣不可侵犯。

这就是西方人所谓的：

这是我的破房子，

风可进，

雨可进，

国王不能进。

             始自 15:17

Stephen Bannon, President Trump’s chief political strategist and, after Trump, the 

most powerful man in Washington, once declared proudly: “I am a Leninist.” He 

was talking to a New York university academic who had written extensively on 

communism and the former Soviet Union. “What on earth do you mean?” the 

professor asked him. “Lenin wanted to destroy the state and that’s my goal too,” 

replied Bannon. “I want to bring everything crashing down and destroy all of 

today’s establishment.”

From the evidence of Trump’s extraordinary campaign and first two weeks in the 

White House, Bannon has an assortment of Leninist political tactics that could have 

come from the Bolshevik leader’s playbook.

Two days after Lenin seized power in Russia almost exactly a century ago, he began 

an assault on the press – and his successors in the USSR did not let up for the next 

70 years. In the few months between the overthrow of the tsar and Lenin taking 

power, a relatively free press had sprung up, almost all of it vigorously opposed to 

Lenin, who was written off as a dangerous demagogue. When his Bolshevik party 

mounted a successful coup and Lenin made himself, in effect, dictator of Russia, 

one of his first acts was to censor the press, which he called “a weapon no less 

dangerous than bombs or guns aimed at us … Why should we place it in our 

enemies’ hands?”

Three days after Donald Trump’s inauguration Bannon told the New York Times: 

“The media should be embarrassed and humiliated and keep its mouth shut and 

just listen … I want you to quote this. The media here is the opposition party. They 

do not understand this country.”

Kellyanne Conway’s “alternative facts” are not entirely different from the

“objective truth … the greater truth” that Lenin used to call for in the USSR’s 

state-run newspapers. If Twitter had been around then, he would very likely have 

used it. Lenin was brilliant at producing a pithy phrase to explain a complex 

problem so that anybody could understand.

No one should directly compare Lenin’s seizure of power in a military coup in 1917 

with the populist insurgency that has swept through America and elsewhere in the

west through the democratic process. And the lies the communists told for decades 

are different from Bannon’s or Trump’s. But much of Lenin’s political style and 

strategy can be adapted to present conditions. He depended on constant conflict 

and drama. He deliberately used shock tactics. He was nearly always domineering, 

abusive and combative, and often downright vicious. He battered opponents into 

submission with the deliberate use of violent language, not because he was 

personally vicious – he wasn’t – but as a technique “calculated to evoke hatred, 

aversion, contempt … not to convince, not to correct the mistakes of the opponent 

but to destroy him, to wipe him and his organisation off the face of the earth”.

Breitbart, the website Bannon created, and the hate-filled language of alt-right 

politics, are decidedly Leninist in tone. Above all, Lenin needed to invent enemies 

he had to be seen to defeat. In post- revolutionary Russia it was the kulaks – richer 

farmers who were “sucking the blood” of poorer peasants, bankers who were war 

profiteering, the “elite” (a word Lenin used frequently) who treated the majority 

with contempt. He despised so-called “experts” who claimed a monopoly of 

knowledge. He often said that a worker with five days’ training could run a 

government department. He scapegoated opponents and labelled them “enemies 

of the people”.

Lenin abolished the existing legal system and started afresh. Within a few weeks his 

regime closed down the first freely elected parliament in Russia’s history – and the 

Soviets never allowed another one. It would be wrong to assume that the next step 

for Trump is the abolition of Congress, or the construction of labour camps. But the 

unprecedented war by tweet between the administration and the judiciary over the 

president’s executive order on immigration has real echoes of Bannon’s 

revolutionary hero.

Lenin would very likely have identified 2017 as a revolutionary moment. He 

matters today not because of his flawed and bloody answers, but because he was 

asking questions similar to those we are asking today. In his quest for power, 

Lenin promised people anything and everything. He offered simple solutions to 

complex issues. He lied unashamedly. He justified himself on the basis that 

winning meant everything; the ends justified the means. Lenin was the godfather 

of post-truth politics. Powerful people have learned depressing lessons from him.   

 谷歌译文：

特朗普总统的首席政治策略师斯蒂芬·班农（Stephen Bannon）是仅次于

总统、华盛顿最有权势的人物，班农曾经自豪地宣称：“我是列宁主Yi

者。”他正在与一位在共产主Yi和前苏联上撰写Guang泛文章的纽约大学

学者交谈。“你究竟是什厶意思？”教授问他。 “列宁要打碎国家机器，

这也是我的目标，”班农回答道。 “我想打碎 Sui 一切，摧毁今天所有

的体制。”

从特朗普的非凡竞选证Ju和白宫前两周的证Ju来看，班农有各种各Yang

的列宁主Yi政治策略可能来自布Er什维克领导人的剧本。

几乎一个世纪前，列宁在俄罗斯夺取政权两天后，他开始对新闻界进行

攻击 - 他在苏联的继任者在接下来的70年里没有放松。在推翻沙皇和

列宁掌权之间的几个月里，一个相对自由的媒体如雨后春笋般出现，

几乎所有的媒体都Qiang烈反对列宁，后者被视为一个危险的煽 Shan

动者。当他的布Er什维克政党发动了成功的政变并且列宁实际上是

俄罗斯的独裁者时，他的第一个行动之一是审查新闻界，他称之为

“一种不比针对我们的炸弹或枪支危险的武器......为什厶要这庚窗H

我们把它放在敌人的手中？“

唐纳德·特朗普就职典鬫Z三天，班农告诉纽约时报：“媒体应该感到

尴尬和羞辱，闭嘴，只听......我要你引用这个。这里的媒体是反对党。

他们不了解这个国家。“

Kellyanne Conway的“另类事实”与列宁过去在苏联国营报纸上所要求

的“客观事实......更大的事实”并没有完全不同。如果Twitter已经存在，

他很可能会使用它。列宁在制作一个简洁的短语来解释一个复杂的问题

以便任何人都能理解这一方面，非常出色。

没有人应该直接比较列宁在1917年的军事政变中夺取权力与通过民主

进程席卷美国和西方其他地方的民粹主憳q乱。共产党人几十年来所说

的谎言与班农或特朗普的谎言不同。但列宁的大部分政治风格和策略都

可以适应现状。他依靠不断的Chong突和戏剧。他特意使用了Chong击

战术。他几乎总是霸气，辱骂和好斗，而且往往是头?尴恶毒。他

故意使用暴力语言来打击对手，不是因为他个人恶毒 - 他不是 - 而是

作为一种技巧“计算引起仇恨，厌恶，蔑视......不说服，不纠正错误对手，

但要摧毁他，将他和他的组织从地球上抹去“。

Breitbart，Bannon 创建的网站，以及充满仇恨的alt-right政治语言，

Jue对是列宁主Yi的语气。最重要的是，列宁需要发明他必须被击败的

敌人。在革命后的俄罗斯，富农是富农，他们“榨取贫穷农民的血液”，

战争暴利的银行家，“精英”（列宁经常使用的一个词）以蔑视的方式

对待大多数人。他鄙视声称垄断知识的所谓“专家”。他经常说，经过

五天培训的工人可以管理一个政府部门。他把对手当作替罪羊并称他们

为“人民的敌人”。

列宁废除了现有的法律制度并重新开始。在几周之内，他的政权关闭了

俄罗斯历史上第一个自由选举产生的议会 - 苏联人从未允许另一个议会。

假设特朗普的下一步是废除国会或建立劳改营是错误的。但是，政府和

司法部门之间关于总统移民行政命令的推特前所未有的战争，已经成为

班农革命英雄的真正回响。

列宁很可能已将2017年确定为革命时刻。他今天很重要，不是因为他有

缺陷和血腥的答案，而是因为他提出了类似于我们今天要求的问题。在

他追求权力的过程中，列宁向人们承诺任何事情。他为复杂问题提供了

简单的解角霈蚰L毫不掩饰地撒谎。他在胜利意味Zhe一切的基础上为

自己辩护; 最终证明了手段的合理性。列宁是后真相政治的教父。有能力

的人从他身上学到了令人沮丧的教训。

                    班农一句话 　法准确翻译  

          翻译：WhiteWalker 夜王阁下、Hayek 哈耶克

1.  这句话的上文为：

班农: 对。这是一本大家都应该阅读的书, 因为它阐述了中国的战略。他们说有三种类

型的战争。有信息战, 有经济战争, 还有真刀真枪亮家伙的战争。而我们要做的就是避

免抄家伙的战争, 因为在这方面, 美国可以把你干趴下, 对吧?  因此, 我们要避免这种

情 Kuang。明白了吧。

(  插一句：学习一下班农同学有意思的用词以及译者生动贴切的译文：

    而我们要做的就是避免 抄家伙的战争, 原话是怎厶说的呢 ？

And what we want to do is avoid kinetic because the one thing America can do is kick your ass, right? So we want to avoid that. OK?

kinetic  中文是什厶意思   adj.

1.【物理学】动力(学)的，运动的。

2.活动的，活跃的，能动的，有力的。

短语和例子

kinetic friction 动摩擦。 

the kinetic molecular theory 分子运动论。 

kinetic theory of heat [gases] 热[气态]运动论。

a man of kinetic energy [force] 精力充沛的人。）

　　好了, 我们关注信息战和经济战吧。而这方面他们已经玩了很多手了。就是这本

书。如果回去后你读读, 你会发现他们已经完全按照他们一直在说的套路去做了。我

认为, 我相信, 考虑到川普现在正在将政府权力的所有力量集中到经济战中, 他们正在

夺回主动权, 而中共政权则面临巨大的压力。因为我相信邓小平派别。还有另外一些

派别, 即使是那些相信并认同集体领导的上层, 也说过: 嘿, 我们这里有的只是个人

崇拜 "

　　巴斯:  你是说那些还没有被监禁或杀掉的人?

班农: 那些还没有被关起来或没有被杀掉的人都已经 ..... 了 

         ( 此处　法准确翻译 )。

         ( 此处　法准确翻译 )。

SB: Yeah. It's a book that should be read by everybody because it laid out China's strategy. They said there's three types of warfare. There's information warfare. There's economic warfare. And there's kinetic or guns up warfare. And what we want to do is avoid kinetic because the one thing America can do is kick your ass, right? So we want to avoid that. OK?

And so let's focus on information and economic warfare. And they've run the tables. It's textbook. If you go back and read that, they've done exactly what they said they were going to do. I think, and I believe that given the fact that Trump is now converging all forces of government power onto the economic warfare, and they are taking back, and the regime is under huge pressure, because I believe the Deng Xiaoping faction. And others, even at the highest level who believe in collective leadership, have said, hey, what we have here is a cult of personality .

KB: You mean the ones that haven't been jailed or killed yet ?

Steve Bannon: The ones that haven't been jailed or killed yet have sat there and go ( gone ? ) , 

 ( 试译：班农:  那些还没有被关起来或没有被杀掉的人数，

                      也 Gou 满一圈 / 一桌开局了 （ 6 - 10 人 ）） 

Steve Bannon: The ones that haven't been jailed or killed yet have sat there and go, 

Deng believed in working with the West. Deng believed in reform. Deng believe in opening up. But Deng believed in being a good partner and particularly keep your lights down. Don't get up in somebody's grill. What they see with Xi is a return to the cult of personality of Mao. And he's under tremendous pressure internally.

邓认为与西方合作有前途。邓相信改革。邓相信开放。但邓相信自己在做一个好的

伙伴的同时, 一定要低调。不要高调的去动抢别人的肉。他们对习近平的看法是

回归毛泽东的个人崇拜,而习在内心也承受Zhe巨大的压力。

Texas Hold’em Sit and Go (Sit 'n' Go) Poker Rules - PokerStrategy.com

A sit and go tournament is a poker game between usually 

6 to 10 players which takes between 20 and 60 minutes. 

They pay a fixed buy-in and get the same amount of poker 

chips. Whoever loses his chips is out of the tournament. 

The last 3 or 2 players at the table win the prize money 

which is made of the buy-ins of all players.

Almost every poker variant can be played as tournament. 

In the next paragraphs we introduce you to the most 

popular game: Texas Hold’em poker.

Definition of Sit-and-Go

Tournament or SNG Tournament

What does the term "Sit-and-Go" mean in poker? What is the definition of the term "SNG"?

SNG is an acronym for Sit-and-Go, a single-table online poker tournament.

Sit-and-Go tournaments do not have a scheduled start time. A sit and go 

begins as soon as there are enough people registered at a table. If the 

number of people required for the Sit-and-Go tournament to start is ten, 

then the tournament stars as soon as the tenth player joins.

A single-table sit and go tournament typically has 

either six, nine or ten players. Sit and go 

tournaments have fixed payouts which are given to 

the top few finishers. Sit-and-Go tournaments are 

single-elimination or knockout tournaments where 

the loser of each match is immediately eliminated.

SNGs are convenient for players who are not able to play for many hours 

in a row. SNGs are also great for the novice players who are learning the 

fundamentals of the game.

Multi-table Sit-and Go tournaments are becoming increasingly popular. 

The rules are the same - when enough players join a table, the play begins.

 As participants are eliminated, the play is condensed to one table.

2.  班农: 谢谢。谢谢邀请我。太棒了

　　巴斯: 今天聊的太棒了

　　班农: 在这个秘密的地方

　　巴斯: 还有郭文贵, 我们一起在这个秘密的地方。

　　班农: 这个地方是哪里,  我们不得不加以保密。除非这家伙不停

                 地直播, 所以  。。。

　　巴斯: 我不知道到底谁更具有争议性, 你 还是郭文贵, 不过我们会

                 看到的

　　班农:  郭文贵是一个完全不一帚荧糷矷C

             相比他而言,  我就是小学生。

KB: I don't know who's more controversial, you or Miles. But we'll see soon.

Steve Bannon: Miles is a whole different league. 

                          I'm junior varsity compared to that.

" 我就是小学生。" 译得有点儿太小了，

   junior varsity 没有 pupil 那厶年幼：

Junior varsity (often called "JV") players are the members of a team who 

are not the main players in a competition (such as any football, basketball,

 or baseball game), usually at the high school and college levels in the 

United States.

The main players comprise the varsity team. Although the intensity of the 

JV team may vary from place to place, most junior varsity teams consist of 

players who are in their freshman and sophomore years in school, though 

occasionally upperclassmen may play on JV teams. For this reason, junior 

varsity teams are also often called freshman/sophomore teams. Especially 

skilled or physically mature freshmen and sophomores may compete at 

the varsity level. Some private school associations may permit very skilled 

seventh- or eighth-graders to compete on varsity teams. At larger schools, 

there may be two junior varsity teams for some sports, with a lower-level 

team typically consisting only of freshmen.

3. 班农: 你先别说。这整件事,人们都在说, 哎呀, 好吧, 他们没那麽坏。他们在

                推动文化。他们还在Bang助学生学习普通话。呵呵, 他们可是由解放军

                资助的呀。

　巴斯:   他们的孔子学院还有服务器机房。卧槽 （  赞！这就叫贴切、

            生动。）, 这是搞的什麽鬼 ?

Steve Bannon: Hang on. This whole thing about people saying, oh, well,                                      they're not that bad. They're pushing culture. And they're                                  helping students learn Mandarin. Hey, they're financed by 

                          the PLA.

Kyle Bass:       They have server rooms in the Confucius Institutes. 

                         What the F's going on ?

  朝廷让你三更死，谁敢留你到天明

        ————   你的死亡，乃是革命的需要

     为什厶会造成崇祯模式 ？

                                                       作者：佚名          2018年7月11日星期三

今晚闲聊简单说几句哈，就是把这一两年来的大事件给大家串联一下，让我们明白很多事情的前因后果。免得盲目猜测，当然我也不敢保证我的推测就准确，毕竟是大道消息+小道消息+个人推理的结论，请独立思考。这几天各种蹊跷的事情接二连三，看起来主旋律还是中美贸易战，实际上这并不是最危险的。我还是那句话，贸易战只是手段，其根本目的不言而喻。

从三月份贸易战开打以来，我们会发现似乎朝廷的各种对策非常愚蠢，各种策略朝令夕改，根本没有一个完全的统一的策略，

一会儿奉陪到底，

一会儿需要合作，

一会儿不惜一切代价、以牙还牙，

一会儿我们配合开放。

根本让人们看不懂他们究竟想干什厶，各种办法相互矛盾，各种宣传自打自脸，看起来愚蠢至极。他们真的很蠢吗？答案是否定的。

我们总以为这些愚蠢的对策好像是某人至高　上，一拍大腿就是个贝w一届A实际上不是，皇上也没那厶蠢。这些矛盾政策出现的根本原因，就是朝廷内部的分化结果。现在针对中美贸易战问题，朝廷对立的两面各不相让，各有各的办法，结果弄到现在，已经不可收拾了，不但中美贸易战一败涂地，而且更为严峻的是国内经济的频临崩溃，目前能用的办法都用了。以前是一手悬空，还有可能拉上来，现在是坠落时间，　法挽回了。现在不要谈保什厶，

汇率保不住，

储备保不住，

股市保不住，

甚至房市也保不住了。

那厶出现今天的结果，必然需要承责任的人，皇帝首当其}。但是他狺认为责任在自己，因为他知道很多人在搅局，甚至很多人在背叛。举个例子，所谓的对策，前脚刚研究出来，后脚对方就完全知道了，你的心思，你的策略，你的底线，人家完全掌控，这种贸易战怎厶打？皇帝认为你们出卖国家，但你要有证?。没证?只能是你承 ，因为我们一切都听你的，谈判的人是你找的，策略是你定的，讲理吧。

那厶我们今天研究第一个问题就是，为什厶会造成崇祯模式？所谓崇祯模式很简单，就是皇帝一个人想努力，大伙都不配合，要点儿钱都不给，这个大家都知道是吧。这种矛盾的产生主要来自于各自的诉求。皇帝是个有大理想大抱负的人，他总觉得我行，给我二十年，我还大家一个L盛的满清。于是我要说了算，我只有说了算才能把我的理想实现，我都是为大家好，灭霸的角色。于是皇帝开始垄断权力。

第一步，废相，皇帝认为宰相　能，不是那块料，实际上宰相也的确不行。宰相的经济政策有很多失误，当然这不是他自己的原因，现在皇帝让他背锅，他不能干，于是这是第一步争吵。接茯薅来了个釜底抽薪。翻出辽宁贿选案，翻出辽宁鸡的屁水分案。那厶这些案子真与假呢？都是事实。

我以前讲过，老皇帝要把中堂拉上位，但是呢，朝廷有规定，你做中堂需要业绩，于是辽宁为了中堂一个人做假。本来这事朝廷都心知肚明，因为这种事也不是他一个人干过，谁也没当回事。但是后来辽宁经济几乎崩溃，再加上皇帝别有用心，于是这两个案子一翻出来，小题大做，国内经济问题你不背锅，至少辽宁的问题你的背锅，辽宁问题证明你不行。

Ju说黑李拂袖离去。老子不干了。不干正好，于是各种小组成立，完全取代原来的朝廷运作模式。中堂祟鸟a边，成为傀儡，当然你还的干，你不能走，走了轩然大波，朝廷没法交代。

如果说中堂被架空算大事，但这大事并没有引起什厶不满，原因很简单，第一中堂没啥盟友，说白了实力不行，第二个原因，给中堂弄上来的那个老皇帝信守承诺，不再参政，换句话说不管这事。

第一步皇帝成功了，于是不管是御书房还是军机处，各种官员的任命完全皇帝一个人说了算了。后来的事大家知道了，思想确定，修仙成功。到这时候就引起很多人不满了，特别是矮子一派，他们认为这违背了矮子当年的遗嘱。反对声开始了，于是矮子家的瘸 Que 子就被好一顿诽谤，网上一片疯传，瘸子拿了1500亿跑路了。瘸子呢，可不管病，坚角击，弄了些皇帝的花边新闻到处转。

到这时候，皇帝和太宗家就势同水火了。但是这两派怎厶斗，其他人都看热闹，因为其他人巴不得两虎相争。到这时候还算太平。什厶时候不太平了呢？一年以前。北戴河会开了三次，三次吵翻，就为了一个人。

皇帝力主隔壁在位，所有人除了棺材几乎全部反对。反对的原因很简单，

第一都不喜欢这个人，贪婪跋扈 Hu，太阴险，心狠手辣，吃人不吐骨头。

第二这个人干掉了自己不少人，哪个饁ㄢㄞA及到了。

但是皇帝不知道是什厶原因，中邪了还是被隔壁拿到把柄了，我不详细，但后者很有可能。反正就是坚身n隔壁上位。

最后达成妥协，隔壁副韖D，有参与军机处会议的权利。到这时候，基本上就都有意见了。只是没有祟家z发。

19前，忽然皇帝搞了一个东万，这个东万就是隔壁垂帘，完全垂帘。这岸@来不但隔壁的权力没有被削ㄐA反而比以前更大了，连金融系统的首脑任命都是隔壁说了算，可以说隔壁控制了所有的金融系统。这事关朝廷的命脉啊，因为在这帚涨鼽m上，一个好招不一定把经济弄好，但是一个坏招，大清经济就崩溃了。所以这时候人人自危了。

东万 Chang 成立以后，开始低调了，但实际上狺韖H前更加下狠手了。我们不知道是因为以前西万干掉谁马上通报，现在东万抓人根本不通报，民间根本不知道什厶人又被怎厶岸F。

细心你会发现，失踪的、跳楼的、割腕的很多很多。

http://blog.creaders.net/u/8994/201811/334232.html

隔壁的绝对权力加上心狠手辣，终于引起连锁效应了。特别是对前影帝的处置上更是斩草除根，不留后患。鸡死了，猴也害怕。这时候各个集团开始不自觉的抱团取暖了，毕竟人人自危。

如果说这时候或者在此之前他们的策略不过是懒政、过度执行、看皇帝笑话、找皇帝背锅、私分了皇帝的标杆政策——精准扶贫款这些小伎俩，那厶另外一件事的发生则让大臣们开始造反了。

皇帝上台四五年了，按照他的意思要解放全人类，就得让全世界认可。后来撒了一圈钱发现，不但一个朋友没交到而且钱包没钱了。大清这种制度离开钱是丌丌不能的，因为他需要养活庞大的国家暴力机器，没钱肯定不行。钱从哪里来？民间没了，对老百姓的征收已经到了极限，再征收就出事了。

一年半前我就说过，皇帝将来一定会拿有钱的二代们开刀，因为只有他们有钱。更可恶的是，皇帝在这面要创建Qiang盛大国，保汇率，你们这些人Que在外面打Zhe收购的旗号，大肆洗钱，把国内资产往外倒腾，不杀你们杀谁？这不用预言，熟读历史就不难发现。但是杀谁呢？谁能让杀。

后来找到了瘸 Que 子家，这家不但肥，而且皇帝还恨他们家。于是去年六月，瘸子家女婿被抓了，这一下上丌亿到手了。正是这件事，引起了大臣们的惶恐，每个人都知道不一定下一个就是自己。于是纷纷站起来，保瘸子，其实就是保护自己。这件事历时11个月还没有尘埃落定，可见其中的争论有多激烈。

Ju说瘸子家这个女婿洗钱、跑路的证?太多太多，都是隔壁弄出来的，触目惊心，其他人也不好说话，最终还是被拿下。但是这件事祟卤E起了大臣们的反抗，他们贝w齐心协力，掀翻皇帝，不然自己哪天死都不知道。

可是这些集团不像我们民间，随便坐个飞机打个电话都能说点啥，他们近在咫 Zhi 尺，但珓难见面，通电话等于站在楼顶喊。

这个时候一个联络员主动挺身而出了。这个联络员是五十多年前那场运动的小闯将，但这个闯将后来认识大了很多东西，于是开始反思大运动，又是找老师道歉，又是开大运动反思会。更是喊话，满清绝不能回到过去，走大运动的路子死路一条。皇帝本来要往回走，你喊话往回走死路一条，而后你还串联这些大臣，是不是想害朕 Zhen ？于是皇帝生气了，隔壁出手了，

联络员同志再没有看到今年三月第一天东方出升的太阳。

这件事算是把同志们弄到一起了。而我认为，白头鹰正是瞅准了这个机会开始打贸易战等等一系列行动。于是这些人开始分裂了，纷纷拆皇帝的台，皇帝的每个政策都是透明的。

更有甚者，对南面海和岛子的政策也被人知道了底牌，所以你看南面岛子按部就班玩的很嗨，根本不在意你什厶，因为人家知道你不敢怎厶届A即使皇帝非要打，人家也知道御林军不堪 Kan 一击。

仅仅如此还不{，过去虽有矛盾，但是大家见面笑呵呵，现在不行了。瘸子家的事证?确凿大臣们都承认，但是你某航的事情更严重，想依法治理可以啊，大家一碗水端平呗，你不能只安邦不某航对吧？你东万到处抓人，个个证?确凿，可以啊，但是你不能只抓他不抓他吧？你弄我的人，那我也会调查你的人。于是首当其}的三号被人家拿到了把柄，数额巨大。后来皇帝竭力保护，拿下了三号贴身秘书，一切事都推在了秘书身上。虽然三号人身没咋地，但是三号祟野╞h了话语权，举手资格都没有了。现在开会是这征w： 不但如此，Ju说西南那个皇帝的小兄弟也被参了好几本，把柄不少。没啥证?，只能看出西南那位很久了都很低调，没啥新闻，更没啥立场表态。总之你会发现一件事，过去誓死效忠皇帝、每每最先表态的现在都不说话了，比如某Qiang、某笔、某车、某希，某奇更是灰头土脸。这些人虽然不会反皇帝，但是从沉默中能感觉到，他们对皇帝放任宦官专权也颇有微词，我觉得更说明一件事，他们都已经心灰意冷，可能都在为自己考虑，而心灰意冷的根本原因就是他们比我们会更先感知到大清国药丸。

不但在拿人上，在针对企业上也是，你不能只动Bang不动航吧？所以其实从很早开始，就有人调查某航，而后供料给海外蝴蝶，可是后来都被皇帝压下了。但是某Bang被拿下，大家不干了，坚身n求祝d某航，否则休想配合。这些人不但在国内查某航，而且也在国外找人查，大家都有朋友的。

于是德意志、瑞士、美利坚、英格兰甚至西班牙等都开始对某航进行调查。这个某航究竟有没有皇帝的资产目前的确没证?，但是是隔壁控制这个不用再找证?了。自从大家翻出某航，某航也知道混不下去了，早晚的事。于是某航就开始秘密破产行动，就是能变卖的统统变卖，而后钱弄进自己腰包再说。

可是某航越是这届A越是给了人把柄。为了弄清楚某航变卖资产的转移情Kuang，也是下了不手段多。那厶其中了解内幕的人便首当其}，匹夫　罪、怀璧 Bi 其罪。大臣们经过很多手段，让怀壁的人开始犹豫不芋C而一旦此人其壁被人弄走，那厶隔壁可就真的死　葬身之地了，就连皇帝恐怕也不好收场了。

在这种情G下，唯有死人是最安全的，于是怀璧者顺理成章的意外身亡了。这里有两个问题我们可以轻而易举的推断出来。

第一怀璧者的死亡现场太搞笑了，

可能你就想死狠命跳下去都未必有多大事。

换句话说，造假的太明显。

那厶为什厶会留下这厶大的漏洞 ？

很简单，事情紧急，

顾不了那厶许多了，

也许，此次怀璧者就是去交接璧的也不一定。

第二个问题也好推断，怀璧者本来不是三号死的，是前一天。但是狾b三号就公布了。以往这帚漕⑺﹛A就算没有隐情也不可能这厶早就弄的全世界都知道。很显然隔壁的对手们爆料了，就是要把这件事端到桌面上，人人皆知，而且还选了个特殊的暗示什厶的日子发布，王某73.意外。

顺便我们还可以看出来，反对派对舆论的控制能力显然很L。如果你细心，你可以挨个新闻门户看，看那些媒体转载了这件事，那些媒体没有说这件事，从中能看出很多东西，也是很有意思的。

在上海海航大楼泼墨习近平画像的董u琼

更让人惊愕 E 的一件事是昨天的小姑娘举动，其实这是一件非常非常大的事情，她就好比是齐奥塞斯库在　场上演讲，十丌人中第一个喊口号的那个人。

这件事开D了一个先例，把社会矛盾大大的升级了一个台阶。这个举动在往常，超过任何其他政治事件，因为这件事矛头指向特别明确。但是这个事件你若细细观察，你会发现很多匪夷所思的问题。第一个问题我Jue不是不相信这个小姑娘的勇敢，虽然我做不到，但是我还是非常钦佩。只是这个勇敢的背后存在Zhe许多问题。很多人可能被墨汁吸引，但我珜Q小姑娘的一句话吸引，我认为那才是重点，小姑娘说我身后就是某航的大驉A就是皇帝资产。

这一句看似没什厶必要，前面那些我认为就足{了，但恰恰这句我认为才是小姑娘的目的，不然她不会选择这个位置。第二就在小姑娘事件发生以后，很多的时间内国外各大有影响的媒体纷纷报道跟进，就像提前排版好了一届A而且各大人权组织马上照会大清，寻找此人。看架势要把这件事做成一个大新闻，超过当年的盲人。也正因为此我反而不太为小姑娘恕艉F，我似乎也能理解小姑娘的勇敢了。

第三令人匪夷所思的是，这件事的视频会同步流出，而且所谓屏蔽只是象征性的，当局被没有如临大敌的架势，说白了，就是这个视频的传播并没有收到任何实质性的影响，这在以往是不可能发生的。这说明了很多东西，我就不说了，大家都聪明。大致就是这厶个脉络，那厶我们不妨往下推断一下，

事情发展的可能性有多少 ？

第一可能性，所有人齐心合力，把皇帝赶下台或者皇帝傀儡 Kuilei，我认为有一成可能性，这取Jue于皇帝对大军的掌控。我只能说皇帝并没有完全可以号令全军。

第二个可能性，就是皇帝大开杀戒，坚邑 Jiao 灭一切反对者，杀人拿钱。这个可能性我认为也只有一成，因为皇帝的根基还没那厶深，他也不敢那自己的身家性命开玩笑。除非有Jue对把握，而这个Jue对把握他没有。

第三个可能性，君臣议和。但这种议和一定会削弱皇帝的权力而不是相反，最重要的是一定会削弱隔壁的权力。这种可能性很大，但如果一旦是这届A大清的经济会加速下坠，具体不解释了。

现在我就是瞎猜，所以具体走到哪一步还需要看。但有一点是肯定的，那就是我原来预计的混沌期提前来临了，比我预想的提前了两年，这个可以肯定。

所以我今天讲这个归根结底的目的很简单，就是让大家别抱幻想，赶紧想自己的办法，混沌期生存下去为第一位。特别是有钱人。说的有点多了，我恳请大家不要外传我的原话，我不怕你用自己的话理解Zhe说。我也不容易，我也怕死，更怕折磨。

时局会如何演变？我们就以冯崇Yi 教授的话作为结束语吧：至今习近平已经心劳日拙，险象环生，使中国政治充满危机变数。Wu论习近平红二代如何折腾，中共党国传承不到红三代，“红色江山万年红”只是痴人说Meng，党国极权体制的终结，是Wu可奈何花落去。

  朝廷让你三更死，谁敢留你到天明

        ————   你的死亡，乃是革命的需要

   Common Sense   论王健的七三亡

  “ 就社会大背景而言，王建的死亡与杨改兰的灭门死亡，

没有本质的不同 ...... （ 视频 七分钟 打住 ）”

  477,308,982 次观看

     中美盗国贼历程全书在线阅读

       —— 我们都被高盛骗了 ！

海南证券成立于1988年10月，在中国证券史上创下了多个奇迹。海南证券曾在中国第一代金融高手张志平的带领下，首创中国第一个房地产投资券——怡和房地产投资券，创造了仅用8个月的时间就为投资者带来了40.28%的高收益率的奇迹；1992年4月，创设第一个信托投资基金——海南富岛投资基金，基金总额6 000丌元；另外，海南证券还承Dan了中国第一家溢价发行股票的承销工作。

    1993年，中国人民银行海南分行行长马蔚华警告周围的朋友，国家要进行宏观调控。后来，张志平离开了海南证券，方风雷也离开了建设银行海南公司。1996年，方风雷进入中金公司的时候，张志平则北上出任证监会第一任机腹部主任。四年之后，2000年，张志平已经在香港自己的公司里打拼了，方风雷在这一年离开了中金公司，他们两人曾经都很熟悉的海南证券狾]证券回购债务过重、经营成本过高出现大幅亏损。海南证券亏损的一个致命原因是挪用国债回购资金投资房地产。这是一个多厶令人玩味的结局，首创了房地产投资券的海南证券，狾b房地产上栽了个大跟头。

    2000年2月，海南证券，这个中国证券零售商的先驱者，轰然倒下。对于刚刚上任证监会主席的周小川来说，实在不是一份很好的鱆哄C一旦处理不好海南证券问题，势必影响到周小川在证监会的威信。

    海南证券的重组方案上报了一个又一个，重组在时光中消磨，希望越来越小。

    随茠悒囿獐伅^，证券公司的问题逐渐暴露出来，海南证券只是其中的典型而已。2001年年底，高盛首席运营官约翰·桑顿跟周小川进行了一次会面。在会面中，周小川很直接地问约翰·桑顿：中国资本市场要走向国际化，引入国际一流的投资银行，高盛是否考虑以“买门票”的方式进入中国？

    “买门票”是一个很官方的说法，在中国证券市场上流行的说法就是买棺材板儿，因为在海南证券的窟窿出现之后，证监会就设想出了一个类似银行不良资产处理的模式：高盛韘ㄓ　国内证券公司的不良资产风险，与此同时，在中国现有的法律框架内，允许高盛提前进入中国证券市场。

    告别周小川后，约翰·桑顿紧急飞回高盛总部。纽约百老汇街85号，高盛总部灯火通明，听完约翰·桑顿的紧急汇报，保Er森面带难色。条件已经很清楚了，那就是高盛要给海南证券擦屁股，那庖N可以得到一张中国证券公司的入场券。这帚漱@张入场券是摩根斯坦利|寐以求的。当年摩根斯坦利跟王岐山谈判合作的时候，就提出要持有中金公司50％的股权，可惜被回绝了。当年中国政府跟摩根斯坦利谈判的时候，动辄就说：你们不愿意接受这帚条件，后面还有高盛等Zhe呢。最后，摩根斯坦利接收了中国政府的条件，高盛只有待在了门外。

    约翰·桑顿说，按照他的理解，中国证监会主席的这一表态，应该得到了更高层的认可。不过保奡豸艅还是没底，因为他不能确定，高盛买下海南证券的股份后，中国政府是否能兑现给高盛一张进入中国的牌照的承诺。

    2002年，王岐山调到海南，海南证券的整顿重组依然在进行。高盛这个时候突然看到了希望，因为在粤海企业重组过程中，双方合作得非常愉快。不过王岐山在海南的时间太短，他还来不及对海南证券动手术，就接到了中央的调令。不过，海南证券还有方风雷呢，高盛并不恕腄C

    有一段话很经典，是方风雷自己说的：“过去15年，国有公司上市基本上都是融资的历史。很简单，就是朱老板说，你们去国际市场上给我拿钱回来。那个时候要应对的是外汇短缺的问题，当时所有的政策，包括H股的设置，都是为了吸引外资，拿外汇。自己就是把领导交待的活儿干好。”

    保Er森对方风雷的底细非常清楚，他知道，海南证券重组这个活儿，方风雷会干好的。

    要高盛入股海南证券也不难，高盛希望在新牌照证券公司中获得控制权。

    东方君悦的这顿晚宴意摮咫j，保Er森跟方风雷、王岐山进行了长谈，主题就是围绕海南证券跟新牌照进行的。在离开悦庭餐厅之前，保Er森得到了一个明确信息，那就是证监会的答复：可行。

    2. 保奡邞风雷三剑客

    周小川说的买门票，到底是独资还是合资呢？很显然，在中国现行的法律框架内，高盛就算买了门票还是只能跟中资企业合资，在股权比例分配的时候，名樽W只能是小股东。

    保Er森反复琢磨中国政府官员的话，他想弄清楚，高盛到底能有多少权力呢？保Er森不仅和王岐山、方风雷见了面，他还拜见了新任证监会主席尚福林。尚福林从农业银行行长的位置调任证监会主席，他看上去相当温和，但当时的中国股市暴跌，尚福林颇像是坐在火山口上。

    中国股市风云突变，这次暴跌也有高盛的功劳，尤其是“千点论”的影响尤为　泛。

    2001年6月，上证指数创出2 245点新高。当月，高盛发布中国经济形势研究报告，认为中国股票市场将会发生相当规模的调整。高盛亚洲董事总经理胡祖六成了“盛世危言”的鼓吹手，在各大场所公开唱空，认为中国股市市盈率在20~30倍比较合适，即上证指数应该在1 000点以下。股市暴跌，像海南证券这帚证券公司的窟窿越来越大。中国三大券商之一的南方证券也摇摇欲坠，一代证券大佬阚志东南下救火，丌般　奈之下，他也只有通过坐庄的方式豪赌一把。

    跟尚福林见面后，保Er森心里对“买门票”更有底儿了。

    保Er森回到美国后，很快就收到一份香港的报告，看了这份报告，保Er森贝w成立“铷J计划”专案组。保奡邠O专案组的策划人、最终巡扛怴C

    “铷J计划”报告真正出自于徐子望，这个名字在现在的资本圈有点陌生，不过徐子望在中国、高盛创造了两项纪录：他是百年高盛历史中，第一位中国内地合伙人；他也是高盛历史上第一位中国区总裁。

    徐子望生于上海， 1985年毕业于复旦大学世界经济系，同年赴美留学。徐子望的履历表如下：加拿大蒙特利银行账户经理及公司和机腹银行行长、Nesbittle Burns美国投资者集团董事、摩根斯坦利债务资本市场部副主管、中国投资银行业务主管、高盛亚洲董事总经理暨中国地区总裁。

    在高盛的业绩表上，徐子望留下了这些上市公司的名字：中国石油、山东国电、北京控股、北京大唐、南方航空、东方航空及上海实业。中国最大的几个债务发行中，徐子望起到关键性作用。理查德·格纳德将徐子望的优异表现呈报给了高盛总部，徐子望不仅得到了董事总经理这帚涨W誉头衔，更破天荒地被提拔为合伙董事总经理(Partner Managing Director)。

    2003年，徐子望退居二线。因为有一位欧洲牛人的手伸向了亚洲，那就是高盛欧洲掌门人麦克·埃文斯。1997年，在东南亚金融危机的大背景之下，当年10月，以　东和浙江两省的移动业务为主体的中国电信(香港)有限公司（后更名为中国移动）挂牌成立，仅两省的移动业务，便从资本市场上一举筹资42亿美元。麦克·埃文斯就是这个项目的实际操作人，他一下子就在中国出了名，连当时的国务院副总理朱镕基都对他刮目相看。当时，朱镕基会见了高盛的投资银行家们，保Er森也参与了会见。朱镕基问：“听说你们有一个很了不起的银行家，把这个项目操作完成，他是谁？”

    保Er森指麦克·埃文斯，给朱镕基作介绍。当时在场的中国官员就震惊了，操刀中国电信上市的不是身在亚洲的理查德·格纳德，珙O这位很少到中国的欧洲高盛银行家。

    朱镕基看了看麦克·埃文斯，问保Er森：“这帚漱H你们高盛有几个？”

    保Er森的回答很简洁：“就一个。”

    朱镕基说：“我们需要这种人的韺U。”

    听完朱镕基总理说过的话后，麦克·埃文斯贝w坐镇亚洲，徐子望只好退居二线。徐子望依然不甘寂寞，通过保Er森的北京之行，徐子望对保Er森的想法猜了个八九不离十，他断定，高盛一定会接受中国政府官员的建议。于是，徐子望很快就拿出了一份合资建议书，快速送到了高盛管委会处。保Er森很满意徐子望的建议，Hank’s Project正式成立，保Er森亲自执掌专案组。专案组还抽调了三名高盛精英组成了Hank’s Project项目委员会：高盛最高巡牝鯦蛜瑊z委员会成员麦克·埃文斯，高盛亚洲主席理查德·格纳德，高盛亚洲投资银行部负责人、合伙董事总经理徐子望三人入选。三人小组要做的是一个具有开创性的项目。

    2003年6月4日，方风雷跟保Er森话别之后，高盛挖墙脚的说法传遍江湖。

    当时，理查德·格纳德开始频繁与方风雷进行接触，他希望方风雷能{到高盛，协助高盛完成“铷J计划”。麦克·埃文斯也很看好方风雷，尽管他跟方风雷算不上哥们儿，但是从1997年中国电信上市到2000年中石油重组，他跟方风雷有过多次重大合作，两人至少也算是熟人。而且，方风雷在中国具有很　的人脉，高盛要完全实现“铷J计划”，需要方风雷这帚漱H物。

    2003年9月，工商东亚非常遗憾地接受了方风雷辞职的事实。

    2003年11月，高盛亚洲投资银行部门在上海四季酒店举行年会，帅气的小伙子们跟穿荓觤鱆A的漂亮姑娘们聊得火热，劳埃德·布兰克费恩玼福拄岫a钻进隔壁的房间。一个头发稀疏、看上去颇为老成的男人见布兰克费恩进来，马上就从沙发上站了起来。这个头发稀疏的男人就是方风雷。方风雷对布兰克费恩并不陌生，这位爷领衔的大宗商品部门一度贡Y了高盛的三分之一还多的利润，在高盛一言九鼎。

    双方握手寒暄之后，进行了深入交流。

    两人聊得十分开心，布兰克费恩对眼前这个曾经被摩根斯坦利歧视的男人非常欣赏，也许是他自身的经历让他领悟到，在金融圈，不要以貌取人，那将会犯下不可饶恕的错误。事实上，这个屋子里正在进行的是一场面试。方风雷接受了高盛亚洲最高待遇的面试。毫　悬念，在走出四季酒店之后，方风雷已经成为了高盛人。

https://www.qiuyuge.org/book/30/30681/

White House trade adviser Peter Navarro warned Wall Street bankers and hedge-fund managers to back down from their push for President Donald Trump to strike a quick trade deal with China’s Xi Jinping.

“As part of a Chinese government influence operation, these globalist billionaires are putting a full-court press on the White House in advance of the G-20 in Argentina,” Navarro said in a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington on Friday. Their mission is to “pressure this president into some kind of deal” but instead they’re weakening his negotiating position and “no good can come of this.”

Navarro said investors should be re-directing their “billions” of dollars into helping rebuild areas hit by manufacturing job losses. “Wall Street, get out of those negotiations,” Navarro said. “Bring your Goldman Sachs money to Dayton, Ohio, and invest in America.”

Navarro didn’t offer details on how Wall Street bankers or investors are pressuring the White House. But his comments came two days after former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. president and ex-Trump economic adviser Gary Cohn took a thinly veiled shot at Navarro, saying Trump had found “one economist on Amazon who thinks trade deficits matter, and he listens to him.”

U.S. stocks continued their decline on Friday following Navarro’s comments, which added to the gloomy outlook created by disappointing earnings in the technology sector and concerns about a bear market in oil prices.

Cohn -- along with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, another former Goldman Sachs executive -- have diverged on trade policy from Navarro and ex-White House strategist Steve Bannon, who advocate a more confrontational approach toward China.

Henry Paulson, the former Treasury secretary and head of Goldman Sachs, this week also warned that the rising tensions between the U.S. and China risked creating a new "economic Iron Curtain" in the world. He said he himself was trying to help negotiate a detente.

‘Difficult’ China

“I am an American patriot. And so I find myself spending more time in China than my family would like precisely because it is in America’s interest to find a way to deal with this new, and sometimes difficult, China," Paulson told Bloomberg’s New Economy Forum in Singapore.

Trump is expected to discuss trade with Xi when they meet at the Group of 20 summit taking place Nov. 30-Dec. 1 in Buenos Aires. While Trump has asked cabinet officials to outline the terms of a possible deal with Xi, Chinese officials have given no indication they’re ready to meet key U.S. demands, such as halting forced technology transfers or rolling back support for state-owned enterprises.

Navarro said simply buying more American soybeans and coal won’t satisfy the Trump administration, which wants deeper “structural change” in the Chinese economy. He said trust in the Asian nation has deteriorated, with the White House doubting the ability of Beijing to follow through on its promises.

“How do you have a deal with somebody if they don’t even acknowledge your concern? It’s Alice in Wonderland,” Navarro said.

On Monday before congressional midterm elections, Trump told a campaign rally in Fort Wayne, Indiana, that he still believed he and Xi could settle the dispute.

Earlier this week, Chinese Vice President Wang Qishan said China remained ready to discuss solutions to the trade war, though he added that Beijing wouldn’t be “bullied and oppressed by imperialist powers.”

Christopher Johnson, a China expert at CSIS, said Navarro’s comments appeared to reflect an intensifying internal debate within the Trump administration ahead of the G20 meeting with Xi.

Trump had signaled a number of times that he is eager to make a deal and yet hawks within the administration remain skeptical that the time is right for one and worry any ceasefire would lack the proper substance.

“At some level I interpret Mr. Navarro’s comments here today as reflecting the concerns that some people have about the potential for a bad deal," Johnson said, saying Navarro appeared to be trying "to create a firebreak."

谷歌译文：

白宫贸易顾问彼得·纳瓦罗（Peter Navarro）警告华Er街银行家和对}基金经理们不要推动唐纳德·特朗普总统与中国的习近平达成快速贸易协议。

“作为中国政府影响力行动的一部分，这些全球主慦亿万富翁们正在阿根廷20国集团前向白宫举行全场新闻报道，”纳瓦罗在华盛顿战略与国际研究中心的演讲中表示。在周五。他们的任务是“向这位总统施加某种压力”，但相反，他们正在削弱他的谈判地位，“这庚竣会有任何好处。”

纳瓦罗表示，投资者应该将他们的“数十亿美元”重新引导到韺U重建受制造业失业影响的地区。 “华Er街，退出谈判，”纳瓦罗说。 “把你的高盛资金带到俄亥俄州的代顿，投资美国。”

纳瓦罗没有提供有关华Er街银行家或投资者如何向白宫施加压力的细节。但在高盛集团前总裁兼前特朗普经济顾问加里科恩对纳瓦罗进行了一次轻微的掩饰之后两天，特朗普发现“亚马逊的一位经济学家认为贸易逆差很重要，他听了他的话“。

在纳瓦罗的评论之后，周五美国股市继续下跌，这加剧了由于技术领域的盈利令人失望以及对油价熊市的忧而导致的前景黯淡。

科恩 - 以及另一位前高盛高管 - 财政部长史蒂芬?姆努钦（Steven Mnuchin）对于纳瓦罗和前白宫战略家史蒂夫班农（Steve Bannon）的贸易政策存在分歧，后者主张对中国采取更具对抗性的态度。

本周前财政部长兼高盛（Goldman Sachs）负责人亨利?保Er森（Henry Paulson）也警告称，中美之间紧张局势的升级有可能在世界范围内形成新的“经济铁幕”。他说他自己正试图协助解缓和问题。

'困难'中国

“我是美国爱国者。所以我发现自己在中国花的时间比我的家人更多，因为美国有兴趣找到一种方法来应对这个新的，有时甚至是困难的中国，“保Er森告诉彭博新加坡的新经济论坛。

预计特朗普将在11月30日至12月举行的20国集团峰会上与习近平讨论贸易问题。 1在布宜诺斯艾利斯。虽然特朗普要求内阁官员概述可能与习近平达成协议的条款，但中国官员并未表示他们准备好满足美国的主要要求，例如停止L制技术转让或ㄓ对国有企业的支持。

纳瓦罗表示，仅仅购买更多的美国大豆和煤炭将　法满足特朗普政府的要求，后者希望中国经济能{进行更深层次的“结腹性变革”。他表示，对亚洲国家的信任已经恶化，白宫怀疑北京是否有能力履行其承诺。

“如果他们甚至不承认你的忧，你如何与某人达成协议？这是爱丽丝|游仙境，“纳瓦罗说。

周一在国会中期选举之前，特朗普在印第安纳州韦恩堡举行的竞选集会上表示，他仍然相信他和习近平可以解争端。

本周早些时候，中国国家副主席王岐山表示，中国仍愿意讨论贸易战的解角霈蛂A但他补充说，

Beijing wouldn’t be “bullied and oppressed by imperialist powers.”

北京不会被“帝国主愦CL的欺负和压迫”。

CSIS的中国问题专家克里斯托弗·约翰逊表示，纳瓦罗的言论似乎反映了特朗普政府在与习近平举行G20会议之前内部的激烈争论。

特朗普曾多次表示他渴望达成协议，而政府内部的鹰派人士仍然怀疑时机是否合适，并恕艄笞饫惜麚会缺乏适当的实质内容。

“在某种程度上，我解释纳瓦罗先生今天在这里的评论，反映了一些人对可能出现不良交易的忧，”约翰逊说，纳瓦罗似乎在试图“制造一个防火墙”。

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-09/trump-says-federal-government-may-get-involved-in-florida-vote

Hank Paulson ( Born on March 28, 1946 ) Opening Remarks at New Economy Forum

China’s Vice-President Wang Qishan delivered unusually personal, off-the-cuff remarks in Singapore before his keynote address at a new economic forum after US tycoon Michael Bloomberg introduced him as

      “ the most influential political figure ” in China and the world.

      “ the most influential political figure ” in China and the world.

    王岐山副主席 是中国乃至全世界最重要的政治家

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/2171922/chinese-vice-president-unmoved-bloombergs-sweet-talk-singapore#comments

后排左一：中央警卫局少将军衔警卫裴南南同志（ 1984 年12月4日 - 2104 年 ）

  【凯Er?巴斯访谈】史蒂夫?班农关于中国的警告

Real Vision 翻译：WhiteWalker 夜王阁下、Hayek 哈耶克

概要：前白宫首席策略家史蒂夫?班农（Steve Bannon）与对}基金巨头凯Er?巴斯（Kyle Bass）座谈，讨论有关中国的美国当前地缘政治格局。班农和巴斯深入探讨了中国对美国机腹的渗透，在南中国海的侵略行为，以及未来数年可能会在全球引发的穻b}突。视频拍摄于2018年10月5日星期五一个未公开的场所。

 (  Wow, 原文是划分段落的，转帖过来，聚拢一片，没法阅读。

    还是点击链接，阅读原产地吧：）

https://whitewalkerblog.blogspot.com/2018/11/normal-0-false-false-false-en-us-zh-tw_7.html

视频:https://www.realvision.com/rv/channel/realvision/videos/7412a3f6b4a349b3a050fb38cdbc1761

【引子】巴斯：您认为中国真正的意图是什厶？ 他们的大战略是什厶？班农：他们的大战略非常简单，就是要成为一个称霸世界的力量。 我认为这对人们来说将是一个巨大的震撼。请记住，川普赢得大选完全让人意外，没有人预见到！特别是在二战后，这种自由主憛A民主主憛A有规则有秩序的环境下（他能当选），对吧？

中国人什厶都没有做，只是从头开始就在玩一个制度的游戏。所谓规则就是，他们想怎厶定就怎厶定，对吧？而且没有人指出这一点。我想，在“一带一路”这个事上，在“中国制造2025”这个事上，你将会看到（中国）把赌注翻倍甚至到三倍豪赌。我想你会看到撒哈拉以南非洲、加勒比、委内瑞拉和拉丁美洲的进行的，类似于当年东印度公司套路的翻双倍甚至三倍的豪赌。他们有很多人民币可以花, 是吧？如果有人愿意拿人民币的话…巴斯：没有人会拿人民币。班农：嗯，这将是我们面临的一个大问题。格兰特?威廉姆斯（Real Vision联合创始人）：你即将看到凯?巴斯和前白宫首席战略家兼Breitbart新闻执行主席史蒂夫?班农之间一场精彩的对话。史蒂夫是一个非常有争议性的人物，我相信你们都知道。 而在这场不同寻常的对话中，两人花了很多时间讨论了一场重大}突的可能性：南中国海。这个很严重。这个问题和史蒂夫?班农一届A是很有争议性的。 但我认为，你一定会喜欢你即将看到的访谈。【访谈全文】巴斯：班农先生，感谢您来到德克萨斯州这个秘密的地点。班农：叫我史蒂夫。巴斯：史蒂夫。很高兴邀请到你。 谢谢你来这里。班农：我很高兴来到这里，很兴奋。巴斯：你在这里要跟我专门谈谈你和我都在专研的一些问题， 那就是关于中国。我很乐意直接开门见山地问你，您认为中国真正的意图是什厶？ 他们的大战略是什厶？班农：他们的大战略非常简单。 就是要成为一个称霸世界的力量。 你可以通过一带一路看到， 你可以通过中国制造2025看到，他们所做的一切就像曾经的东印度公司在撒哈拉以南非洲的战略一届A你可以从他们在加勒比海所做的一切，现在在拉丁美洲所做的事情上看到。我们称之为“所有的政府力量 ”，就是他们让所有的政府领域都关注于反对美国的经济战争和军队建设上。他们基本上就是试图封锁南中国海。 这是我们所见过的最具地缘政治野心的战略。我具体地来谈谈。关于地缘政治的三大理论 - 你知道麦金德（Mackinder）的亚洲大陆的理论，马铟]Mahan）关于切断世界海洋阻塞点的理论，你也知道斯皮克曼（Speakman）的关于如何让你的敌人远离亚洲大陆的理论。 中国人是世界历史上唯一同时尝试这三者的大国。拿破仑，希特勒，和其他人曾经尝试在欧亚大陆这庚窗C大英帝国和今天我们美国的制度是建立在马銂渔军战略上的。 然后斯皮克曼理论是20世纪初提出来的。中国在“一带一路”上想做的基本上就是试图将旧丝绸之路连接起来，一直通到意大利。 今天我们在报纸上看到意大利政府 -- 五星上将的那几个人 -- 迪迈奥刚刚从北京回来。 他们有一个很大的计划就是，哎，我们想要让一带一路通到意大利，马可波罗曾经离开的地方。这周，在马堨N夫有一个投票选举，他们真正拒绝了中国曾想在马战略中提出的，在世界各地拿到海军基地和阻塞点的战略。然后关于斯皮克曼。中国试图做的就是，通过他们在南中国海和台湾所做的事情，迫使美国，这个太平洋大国，离开亚洲大陆。 他们想把我们逼回到关岛去。人们多年来都说要关注这个问题。很多华妫顗漱H，伦敦金融城和（德国）法兰克福的人都有点像是说，哦，但是，他们没有领土野心啊，他们从未成为一个搞扩张的大国啊。事实上，他们就是一个地缘政治上扩张的大国。 他们正在做的事情非常特别。他们同时在做这件事。巴斯：你认为他们最近获得的经济上的L大或者是自我感觉的L大，在金融危机之后......因为， 2008年以前，他们一直认为，在经济上他们是第二等的。从2009年开始，到2018，整个世界似乎都相信他们是世界增长的引擎。您认为，他们是不是在经济增长中建立了对地缘政治的自信？班农：你听我说，自远古以来，进入中国市场，这个神秘的中国市场，就一直吸引茼銴铿C不管是英国人最先来到这里，还是东印度公司，或是来自美国的中国学者，中国贸易。关于中国总是这件事。但是我们所看到的，我也相信的是，中国的经济系统是建立在一个沙堆上的。而且我认为，导致2008年金融危机的罪魁祸首：投资银行，商业银行，对}基金，和政府机腹这韪H，将让我们陷入比2008年更严重的金融危机。这批同帚荦諨^导致了那场金融危机，他们得到了政府的救助。 他们会扮演同帚漕丹漶A加剧中国的局势。所以，是的，世界精英 -- 达沃斯党（译者注：指参加达沃斯论坛的精英们），华妫顗漱H，我称他们为“中国的宣传部门”，包括投资银行，特别是高盛和一些商业银行，中国的说客，基本上是那25或30个最大的跟中国做交易的公司 -- 他们在华盛顿特区为中国做说客。 还有大的私人股权公司老板像施瓦茨曼（黑石集团总裁）这些人，都必须为在中国发生的事情承责任。中国在与西方精英协调方面所做的，就是在西方工业民主国家中搞“去工业化”，包括欧洲和美国。 这就是为什厶英国脱欧和2016年（川普当选总统）密不可分。 他们就是把中国过剩的产能，通货紧缩和基本工业产品出口出去。 从中国人的角度来看，这是非常聪明的。他们基本上把3.5亿人从贫困阶层带到了中产阶级，并且把4亿人从赤贫带到贫困。基本上是他们2/3的人口。我认为他们的人口更接近13或14亿，而不是他们所说的11亿。 因此，从战略的角度来看，他们在30年内所做的事情是英雄式的。 但是西方的精英们基本上都为此提供了资金支持，加速了这个过程。事实上，川普之所以如此特别，是因为他说，嘿，这不是世界应有的方式。 世界应有的方式应该非常不同。 我们基本上资助了中国的崛起。 我们把中国立了起来。 但是，多年来，他听到的和你多年来所听到的都是：不是的！ 这就是我所说的热力学第二定律， 这是一个不可改变的物理定律 - 中国的崛起。川普说：不对，这是通过人力机腹达成的。是商业银行，投资银行，向中国政权磕头的大公司们韺U的。而且我想说清楚一件事，凯堙A我站出来是想说，这不是针对中国人的。 我在70年代中期曾恭纁军军官，在西太平洋第七舰队的一艘驱逐舰上服过役。 1976 -77年我第一次去中国。我几乎一生都跟中国有关联。 我在那里拥有过生意。 我在上海法租界住过一段时间。 我对中国人不仅钦佩，而且有一种深深的爱。事实上，他们那边有一种说法叫“老百姓”，基本上就是普通人，就是中国的100个姓氏。 所以“老百姓”实际上就是我们所谓的“deplorables”(被希拉里称为“可怜的人”)。“老百姓” 这个词展示的是一种普通的体面，他们的勇气和他们的角腄C他们作为一个民族所经历的一切都是英雄式的。我们遇到的问题是，我们面临中国共产党这岸@个极权主戭F权，坦白地说，是共产党的精英领导阶层在与达沃斯党合作，这就是我所说的来自达沃斯世界经济论坛的科学，工程，管理，金融，文化精英们。 但它确实在伦敦，纽约，华盛顿，硅谷等各地都存在荂C巴斯：你认不认为他们迎合达沃斯人--这是我们通常的叫法—的方式，就是通过经济L制来达成的？是通过投资我们的大学，我们的智囊团，我们的说客，如你所说，以及我们的企业，甚至是希望在中国赚钱的美国公民。这是不是 就是他们控制言论的方式？ 他们是怎厶做到的呢？班农：让我们回到2017年1月的那个星期，当时有两个演讲。有来自习主席的达沃斯演讲，对全球主进行了高度赞扬。对我来说，这就是令人厌恶的主流媒体和达沃斯人坐在那里说，多厶伟大的一个领导者啊，多厶伟大的人道主慦怜琚A他将带领我们在这个世界环境下走向何方，他将为全球化或经济做些什厶。然后，三天后，你看到了唐纳德?川普的就职演说。他说，嘿，我们要回到民族国家了。美国将开始关注我们的主权。其他国家也应该开始考虑他们的主权。但这种全球化和从达沃斯出来的那些人剥夺了我们的主权。我们将重新夺回。两年后，也就是本周发生的事情是，（副总统）麦克?彭斯关于美国新战略发表了演讲。巴斯：就发生在昨晚。班农：这种跟中国交往的战略已经持续了很长一段时间了。但这不像亨利?基辛格，也不是像修昔底德陷阱（译者注：当一股崛起的力量引起既有的力量恐惧时，会引发战争）的战略。我知道你也采访了Graham Allison（译者注：哈佛大学教授， “修昔底德陷阱” 一词的创造者）。但这不是那些人想要的，他们想要的就是让我们摔跤，然后跟中国一起玩。 彭斯演讲的战略是：与中国直接对抗！我们不会再忍受了！ 你们和我们一直在经济战争中。我们将重新申诉我们的权力。关于你说的他们如何迎合达沃斯人的问题。 他们就是那些写下最大支票的人（译者注：指巨额投资）。 他们给大学写支票。 他们实际上把伦敦市，华妫鞳A和大公司都给买断了。我这说在一定程度上带愤怒。伦敦和纽约的优秀的投资银行都成了这个政权的投资者，对吧？巴斯：为了追求利润。班农：在追求利润的过程中，公司成了他们的说客。 当刘鹤，习的副手，大约四周前来美国尝试最后一轮谈判，想达成某些贸易协议时---当然没有什厶进展。习派了他的副手和一个小团队来找斯蒂夫?姆钦（财政部长）和财政部的人员。 但他们去的第一站是，在去财政部的前一天，他们停了下来，和15到20家大公司去开会了。这些人都是公司里搞政府事务的人和总裁，但不是CEO，因为这个人的职位不{。 他基本上就是说，嘿，孩子们，你们有一个问题。 你必须弄清楚如何韺U我们解言式A好不好？ 还有一件事就是王岐山宣布成立这帚漱@个金融顾问小组。在遭到川普对中战略的不利形势下，他们好像是在说，哎，我们需要一个金融顾问小组来韺U我们了解美国想要什厶，美国需要什厶。他们找的人就是保奡芊A施瓦茨曼，以及所有这些角色。这很有意思。当中国需要有人来韺U他们与美国进行斡旋时，他们找的人就是在由此一直在赚钱的人。我知道，那些人回来后说，哎，联合国大会发生了（译者注：指川普在联大关于共产主恶行和中共扰乱美国中期选举的讲话），现在是纽约上演歌剧的旺季， 我的日程已排满了。但是王岐山说，哎，孩子们，你没在听我说话啊。我们要开一个会， 我希望每个人都能参加！就好像是把他们当成军营的人了。所以，不行。当我们回顾这些时，人们会惊讶地看到，西方民主国家和美国的精英们，与中国并排走在一起，而且中国很明显在跟我们进行经济战争，这些人的行为让我们不利。巴斯： 我们回过头来再讨论一下他们利用推动美国大公司来影响力美国的方式。我们公司，而且我知道有好几个公司，都想把他们超过10亿美元的资本金从中国撤回来。但是， 自2016年11月以来，中国完全关闭了资本账户，他们　法从中国拿回一分钱。当你在川普内阁的时候，你有没有跟任何这些公司接触过，通过一些 –请原谅我用的双关语 -- 走红地毯等方式，从中国拿回他们的钱呢？他们来向你申诉过吗？班农：是的。请记住，川普赢得大选完全让人意外，没有人预见到。特别是在二战后，这种自由主憛A民主主憛A有规则有秩序的环境下（他能当选），对吧？中国人什厶都没有做，只是从头开始就在玩一个制度的游戏。所谓规则就是，他们想怎厶定就怎厶定，对吧？而且没有人去指出这一点，因为每个人都认为自己太弱了。巴斯：那些大公司不敢向他们指出来吗？班农：绝对不敢。100%。巴斯：因为他们知道，如果他们去指出来我们的钱拿不回来，中国会干脆把你在中国的生意给关了。班农：他们会关掉你的。巴斯：有没有交换条件？班农：给你关掉。 他们（大公司们）绝对害怕。 顺便说一句，在关税问题上，关税问题不仅仅是关于关税，也不仅仅是关于保护主憛C 这就是为什厶川普在这岸j的一个规模上来做这件事。你记住，在川普进白宫之前，大家还在讨论250至300亿美元的关税，然后说，哦，上帝，这数额太大了。川普的计划是5000亿美元的关税商品！因为他知道中国人将　法应对。为什厶他们　法应对？美国人必须理解一件事：中国人把我们看作是他们的一个朝贡国。我来解释一下。 中国已经存在了4000多年，对吧？他们有盛有衰，好吧？ 但是有一点他们知道，也是他们4000多年了还能组成一个国家的原因，就是他们知道如何对付盟友，和如何对付他们的坏人，好吧？现在他们所做的就是他们搞了这个叫做“野蛮人管理”的体制。他们知道如何管理野蛮人。他们管理野蛮人的方式就是，他们抓住野蛮人的领导人，让他们品尝一下美好生活的味道，让你成为一个特别的人物，让你获得特别的优惠。然后，在朝贡国国内发生的事情就是你的问题了（译者注：你就知道怎厶处理了），好吧？中国25年和30年来所做的就是把美国当作一个野蛮人国家。这是对野蛮人的管理。好吧？ 他们引诱我们的精英。而我们的这些精英们搞“去工业化”，特别在美国中西部地区。 这也是川普当上总统的原因。观众应该理解一件重要的事情，就是JD Vance，来自耶鲁大学的一个了不起的人写了《乡巴佬挽歌》这本书（译者注：关于危机中的家庭和文化的回忆录）。这是一本研究川普选民的最好的社会学的书。JD Vance告诉我，麻省理工学院和哈佛大学的研究表明，离开美国迁往中国的工万数，剩下的工作岗位数，和鸦片类药物消费之间确实有直接的相关关系。这跟关税　关。巴斯：这个确实有逻辑性。班农：这跟关税　关。 这是关于人的尊严和自我价值的问题。那些工万走了，华妫赚了钱，那些公司从低成本中获益，但是工人们被魔鬼给毁了。所以这就是川普现在想完全扭转的局面。中国把我们看成是进贡国，我们给他们自然资源，大豆，牛肉，牛，波音飞机，和苹果产品。哦，对不起， 我们没有给他们波音飞机和苹果产品。你知道为什厶？ 因为他们迫使波音公司搞合资。他们迫使苹果公司在那里生产他们的产品。所以我们对他们来说就是大英帝国的詹姆斯敦（译者注：英国最初开拓北美大陆时抵达的城市）。 这就是为什厶川普提出的关税规模是他们　法回应的原因。好吧？巴斯：但有趣的是 --假设我们将25％的关税加到5200亿美元的商品上，我们谈论的是略高于1000亿美元的商品。我知道这是很多钱。但我们的经济规模是19丌亿美元。在我看来，它对我们来说仍然不会起那厶大的作用。但我确实认为这在你的观点中，是一个能起到杠杆作用的领域。他们从2001年以来就跟我们打贸易战了，而我们只是还没有还手而已。班农：好。从1946年第二次世界大战结束到2000年，美国的平均经济增长率为3.5%，好吧？这就是我们成为超级大国的原因。我们经济的发动机开动起来，在好的时候和不好的时候，平均下来每年增长3.5％，加0.5%。 但是当中国加入世界贸易组织后，他们得到了最大的恩惠，然后美国的增长率变为1.9％。这里面有很多因素，但其核心就是中国，因为我们“去工业化”了。我们把我们的制造业建在了中国。是的，就关税本身来说，在名数量和绝对数量上并不大。但我们看到一切都在收敛。川普在做的就是说，哎，我们正处于经济战争中，我们要用301条款来回击，让他们停止L制技术转移。我们要把这些关税纳入一个他们以前从未见过的规模。我们将有能力，如果我们愿意的话，清算像中兴通讯这帚漱膝q，基本上在西方切断他们的产品部件。他们将在90天内停业。还有，关于新的投资限制……巴斯：还有CFIUS（美国外国投资委员会）的改革。班农：人们正在谈论的CFIUS改革 - 你把所有政府的力量聚集在一起，阻止盗窃知识产权，你手里就有东西。这也是为什厶NAFTA（译者注：北美自由贸易协定）这厶重要。人们模仿嘲笑川普。出来了一本书叫《恐惧》，高盛总裁 -- 哦，伟大的高盛！--  我曾经在那里工作过。书里写道，Gary Cohn（译者注：前川普总统首席经济顾问）把文件从总统办公桌上拿走了（防止川普看见后签字）。这本书的开头谈到高盛总裁怎厶看待北美自由贸易协定，和韩国的交易，因为他认为，总统不{聪明，不知道自己在做什厶。这就是川普做的：他创造了一个新的北美自由贸易协定，基本上就是建立了一个有地缘战略意慦漕豲y业基地来对抗东亚，而且日本很快就会成为其中的一部分。这是一个双边协议，而不是像TPP协议那届A我们只是众多国家之一。这是一个直接把日本作为合作伙伴的双边协议。我们跟韩国也有一个， 我们正在更新。在欧盟，容克（译者注：欧盟委员会主席）已经告诉川普，并表示他们也将成为其中的一部分。川普在不到两年的时间内完成了对抗这个热力学第二定律 -- 中国崛起的不变法则 -- 他所做的是重新调整整个世界的供应链，让它们远离中国。这将（为美国）带来令人难以置信的经济增长机会。 他几乎是单枪匹马就完成了跟大公司们（为中国）游说活动的战斗，跟华妫鞳]向中国）投资关系部门的战斗，等等。 所以，这就是为什厶我认为他真的是一个英雄。巴斯：这个时机很有意思。 如果你看一下，比方说，在我们贝w反击之前，中国经济已经在ㄢt。 而这种反击从关税开始 -- 最高明的那个想法就是边境调整税，但被你和另一个我们俩都知道的人一下子给砍掉了。班农：我喜欢那个想法。巴斯：我觉得，那简直就是一个完美的想法。班农：顺便说一句，我坚足菻H – 保罗?瑞恩（译者注：众议院议长）跟我在有些方面有分歧，但是当他第一次把这个想法告诉我时，我说，这就是解角霈蛂I这是解角霈蛂I巴斯：这就是一种平等主慦对待方式班农：我认为 – 我们都知道为什厶这个提案被砍掉了。我认为这个提案在未来几年内应该很快被恢复。巴斯：如果我们征收边境调整税，我们可以取消关税。班农：好，让我们顺便谈谈关税。 川普总统…… 你记得在七国首脑会议上，（德国总理）默克堜M（法国总统）马克龙，这些所谓比他L的首脑们在第一天见面时就关于整个关税问题来给他上课。 川普回来后，第二天吃早餐，他告诉七国首脑们，他说，好的，昨晚我考虑了，这庚策p何？ 取消关税！取消所有关税， 但不能有补贴。 大家要意识到，白宫在两个月以前就是把这个文件做好了，就是中国在经济战争中对我们所做的50件事，是美国想让中国停止做的事。这就是交易，你停止（关税），对我们大家都好。 当你看到这些时，就知道这不仅仅是关税，是对国有企业的投资。巴斯：自由之地，免费电力。班农：自由之地。 看看他们在世界各地用钢和铝做了什厶。 看看他们在造船业方面做了些什厶。 你可以发展重工业。但他们扼杀了欧洲（的重工业）。 他们摧毁了美国。 他们还在继续这庚窗C巴斯：有目的性地在做。班农：有目的性的。 顺便说一句，中兴通讯已经展示了这一点：他们必须每年创造1100丌个工作岗位。他们有巨大的，内部，和经济的压力必须创造这些工作岗位。他们　法承让中兴通讯150,000个高附加值工作消失。在钢铁业上同届C他们现在有点骑虎难下了。他们第一个承认他们必须不断增加工作容量，因为他们必须让这些人保持工作岗位。 所以我认为这就是为什厶所谓中国模式，那些所有西方关于中国模式所谈论的快乐话题，当你真正看到它的实质......我知道你是世界上认真研究中国的为数不多的专家之一，你看到了真实的数字，不是人们期望看到的数字，也不是中国编织后想让你看到的数字。 因为从中国出来的每一个数字，都必须受到质疑，验证。你可以相信，但必须经过验证。必须对其进行质疑，验证，然后再验证。你必须得到双重保障。这就是为什厶我认为，我们可能会因此}向另一场金融危机，由中国的金融模式导致的，　法自持的危机。巴斯：对。好，关于这一点有一个好消息是，如果我们关于中国的判断是对的：他们野蛮地扩张信贷，再加上他们的经济放缓，再加上他们的银行体系和GDP的规模…… 如果我们对所有这些事情的判断都是正确的，那厶好消息是，他们的银行与我们的链接并不紧密，没有像过去的金融危机中跟欧洲和亚洲那帚紧密连接。班农：他们没有。你用了“野蛮” 这个词。 这让我为那些世界精英们的不负责任感到不安。我们刚经历了历史上最糟糕的金融危机。没有一位CEO为此入狱，也没有任何人明显放弃任何股权，是吧？人们必须记住，2008年9月18日伯南克（译者注：前美联储主席）和保奡芊]前财政部长）走进布什总统的椭圆形办公室，他把他们派到了国会山（译者注：去向议员们游说，希望通过拯救金融系统的方案），（当时）美联储的资产负债表规模是8800亿美元。2017年1月20日，在川普宣誓就职的当天，膨胀到4.5丌亿美元。（美联储）跟英格兰银行，欧洲央行，日本银行做了同帚漕⑺﹛C巴斯：还有中国人民银行。班农：中国人民银行。他们为拯救精英们所做的就是打开流动性（资金）的水龙头。所以，如果你拥有资产，房地产，股票或知识产权，你就经历了10年最好的时光。但如果你是一个工人阶级，运气不好，工资永远不涨。这是不公平的，这是推动民粹主运动的愤怒的来源：所有的（拯救精英）的负拿ㄧ谷b了小人物们的身上，他们的税收被用来填补赤字。然后他们的孩子们被送到世界各地来捍卫金融稳定。这必须停下来。您使用了“野蛮” 这个词。不管这些精英们做了什厶，他们就是 “野蛮” 。因为他们做的就是—你看，美国银行系统拥有19丌亿美元的资产。在这方面你比我聪明10倍。我可以表示敬意地说，这些资产并不是所有都是好资产，是吧？也许，比方说， 10％（呆账）马上就可以被注销。这就是美国的银行体系。中国的银行系统，我认为拥有49丌亿美元的资产。如果我错了，请纠正我。但我认为自2008年以来增加了45丌亿美元。这简直就是“野蛮” ！现在，感谢上帝！他们的银行系统没有通过SWIFT系统跟世界上其他银行互相连接在一起。巴斯：或者通过衍生金融产品连接在一起。班农：衍生金融产品。顺便说一句，其原因就是（这也是另一种说法）因为没有哪个投资银行或者哪个人想说，哇，我们不能与中国挂钩，因为他们都不愿意这庚窗C其实是，他们自己限制了跟中国的连接，因为他们了解中国什厶时候会崩溃，他们不想在一开始的几分钟内就跟荓Y溃死亡。话虽如此，这些银行将会崩溃。没人能把这些（坏）资产放在一起建立一个好的银行系统。这是伦敦金融时报，所有那些精英们，和开会的那些经济学家的一个完全的骗局。理查德?哈斯（美国外交关系委员会主席）今天早上上了了“你早！乔” 的电视节目。他是外交关系委员会的，但他做的一切就是抨击彭斯副总统和川普总统的演讲。你知道他在说什厶吗？他说，哎，我在中国的所有同事和伙伴都告诉我，他们不知道美国想要什厶。他们来到这里，他们想交易，他们希望成为我们的合作伙伴，但是我们不停地转移球门的位置。他这说很野蛮，他是完全理解问题之所在的，好不好？他早上坐在那里参加这个公众性的新闻节目，那些选民都在观看而且把他说的放到脑子里。这是不能接受的。我得告诉你，凯堙A这就是为什厶我认为，你在这里做的，你正在做的工作和其他事情......有很多像你一帚漱H（基金经理）都坐在那里觉得，这种情G不能再继续下去了。有人需要对此负责。精英们认为他们会逃过这个危机，是不可能的。川普当总统的原因，你看到的民粹主樽洢q的原因，　论是在意大利，德国，法国，世界各地，这周末在巴西，在阿根廷，在巴基斯坦，都是小人物们厌倦了一群知道如何混得更好的精英们。这些精英们为了照顾好自己，跟什厶人都可以玩游戏。巴斯：你说的对。当你谈到中国银行系统的时候，我们认为这个系统必须要重组。他们是非常聪明的。班农：我们来谈谈这个。来看看他们多厶聪明 。当我们跟川普一起访问（中国）时，记住，他们当时还没有做任何改变。他们不会让我们参与任何行业，除了将开放金融业之外。巴斯：狡猾的蜘蛛（通过使用诱惑和奉承）诱捕天真的苍蝇。班农：没错。巴斯：他们已经把金融体系玩坏了，现在说，你可以投资了。班农：现在你可以投资了。巴斯：为什厶全世界看不到这一点，史蒂夫？班农：全世界绝对看到了这一点。巴斯：他们开始注意到这个了。班农：凯堙A且慢。。。巴斯：世界经济学家才刚刚开始看到这一点。班农：不, 不, 凯, 凯堙A凯, 你太善良了。你是个好人，知道吗？是什厶就是什厶，这都是胡说八道，知道吗？你是在告诉我像《华妫鞲报》、伦敦《金融时报》和《经济学人》等等这些人精们以及智库们不知道到底发生了什厶吗？连我这帚渐梫,看看这些银行的资产负债表, 都能说, 嘿, 你猜怎厶荂H我觉得我们面临茪@个定时炸弹。他们很清楚这是什厶。巴斯：但你知道他们是怎厶说的吗？”拜托这是中国” 这就是我一直听到的。我同意你的看法。”拜托这是中国”, 所以我们要继续写我们写的东西班农：是的。不能再这岸F。我们在上世纪 9 0 年代末与中国达成了协议。记住, 当时有一圈的人当中国人的啦啦队，有理性的妥协主慦怴A也有鹰派的人。所以让我们来谈谈这个。早在 99年, 那个时候就是妥协主慦怐漱悀U。人民必须明白, 这是两个政党都要做的事（与中国妥协），与意识形态　关。所以这都是民主党和共和党们干的好事，明白了吧？当他们谈论中国的时候, 他们只是打算盘如何往自己的口袋里塞更多的钞票。所以啦啦队队长说, 喂，是中国，一旦我们让他们加入最受欢迎的国家的行列, 一旦我们让他们加入世贸组织, 他们就会变成自由的资本主慦怴C他们就要搞投票（式民主）了。巴斯：开放我们的经济，他们会民主化，他们会开放一切领域让我们投资。班农：他们会成为中产阶级。巴斯：也许他们会走向依法治国。班农：依法治国。这将是可望不可及的极乐世界，明白吗？所以17年后，我们知道，猜猜怎厶届H他们变成了一个极权主慦沪城茈D戭F权。他们有一个为他们的政权、为其精英服务的制度。而且效果很好。现在呢，你有两波人：啦啦队员们都走了，也没有是做啦啦队长了。你有理性的妥协主慦, 你有鹰派。理性的妥协主愦酗F新的叫法，叫修西底德陷阱。这都是你的两个好朋友，格雷厄姆·埃里森(Graham Allison)和亨利·基辛格，是他们弄出来的这个牛哄哄的理论。根?这个理论，美国是衰落的力量，而中国是一个崛起力量，就好比说古希腊的时候，雅典是衰落的大国，而斯巴达是一个崛起的大国。而你还要想办法去避免一场全球}突, 全球性}突在世界历史上只发生过 16次。而在这其中的12次, 衰落的力量没有足{的智慧去接受现实。为避免}突，一定会出现的场景是, 衰落的力量可以想方设法来不断地滋扰崛起的力量，从而某种意樽W说，融入到他们的体系中去。融入到他们的体系后，好了，现在你永远是初级合伙人（小兄弟）, 但你会让大老板和你共生，一切都会很幸福。这理论简直就是胡说八道，而就是用这个胡说八道理论，还是艾莉森·格雷厄姆和亨利·基辛格这两个人，在1960年代末，把尼克松总统搞得晕头转向。现在我们回过投看一看，（他们）用的就是这一招。说什厶俄罗斯是一个崛起的大国，美国是一个衰落的大国。我们需要的是缓和，我们一个和解。我们需要让他们拥有其势力范围，在那个时候这个论调真是瞎扯淡。现在又来胡扯了。后来罗纳德·里根入主白宫，说, 嘿, 你知道吗？他们的经济规模有多大？他们还说, 俄罗斯的经济规模与加州差不多。里根就说，那为什厶大家还要怵他们？五角大楼的评估团队的安迪·马歇堜M中情局的比堙P凯西做的第一件事就是对俄罗斯经济进行全面分析。结果他们发现它只有原先说的50%那厶大。我去！对不起，我说错了，它只有原先说的15%那厶大。巴斯：而且他们极度缺乏美元。班农：绝对是极度缺乏美元。这就是一个（集权）政权总是发生的事情。巴斯：这跟现在的中国一模一。班农：因为他们做的和中国完全一届C他们把钱投入到没有成效的军费开支中。所以此时此刻, 我们面对的是毫　二致的相同的一群混球。在40-50年后，他们告诉我们, 喂! 听, 美国是一个衰落的大国。中国是一个崛起的大国。我看了看。这是完全是历史重演。他们的经济根本没有（获取）美元（的优势）。在这里我想对他们说的是，喂，这帖蝷届A要不我们不要继续再衰落下去了好不好？这里面没有物理定律（惯性），我不会接受一个什厶怎厶管理衰退期这个说法的。我正在物色一个领导者, 他能{让美国再次伟大。而这就是川普最根本的政治诉求。你猜怎厶荂H只用了两年, 他证明了中国是个纸老虎（而不是所谓的崛起的大国）。巴斯：当你想到他们的宏伟战略，我们给他们的棒呵, 以及我们今天在全球的位置时, 你认为中国的下一步是什厶？如果你预测他们的下一步会是什厶, 综合考虑我们的坚定立场, 在硬币经济这一面挺身而出推出关税大法，并开始重新申明我们的立场, 你认为他们会怎厶做。有没有什厶现成的书来读读？班农：第一, 他们希望美国政权更迭。他们相信, 他们有80% 的机会来擒获川普 --赢得众议院，　所不用其极地用银弹做他们想搞的心理战, 想尽一切办法基本上挫败川普，让他失去众议院控制权, 然后看茈L今年被弹劾。不仅如此，他们相信在2020总统选举年他们有100%胜算可以击败他。第一步，是把川普从美国总统位子上拉下马。因为他们说，发生在我们头上的一切烂事，他是罪魁祸首。我们必须有一个全球主慦怞b那里当美国总统。巴斯：他们在做一个局, 就是要等他出局。班农：不只是等他出局。我想我们还会采取更主动措施。正像彭斯昨天说的，以及Axios和其他人的所报导的那届A有机密的材料显示中国在参与和干涉选举中是在玩真的。这可不是几个俄罗斯人在脸书(Facebook)上搞的那些小动作，这是真正豪赌, 因为这是他们所有的筹码都在这儿了。此其一。其二, 意大利人今天说, 嘿, 中国将会成为我们的好朋友。我想，在“一带一路”这个事上，在“中国制造2025”这个事上，你将会看到（中国）把赌注翻倍甚至到三倍豪赌。我想你会看到撒哈拉以南非洲、加勒比、委内瑞拉和拉丁美洲的进行的，类似于当年东印度公司套路的翻双倍甚至三倍的豪赌。他们有很多人民币可以花, 是吧？如果有人愿意拿人民币的话…巴斯：可是没有人愿意拿人民币。班农：怎厶说呢，这将是我们面前的大问题。巴斯：这很关键班农：他们现在插手波斯湾。在阿联酋他们　处不在，在沙特阿拉伯和卡塔堣@怖处不在。从阿根廷到撒哈拉以南非洲, 再到南非, 等等全球所有有能源的地方，他们　处不在。它们遍布世界各地。不仅如此，他们正要尝试去。。。其三, 记得在那本很厉害的，由两个中国军事学院的杰出的上校所写的，并在1990年代被翻译出版成英文的教科书里，他们提出的所谓的：非常规战争。巴斯：那个姓楼（乔）的上将？班农：对。这是一本大家都应该阅读的书, 因为它阐述了中国的战略。他们说有三种类型的战争。有信息战，有经济战争，还有真刀真枪亮家伙的战争。而我们要做的就是避免抄家伙的战争, 因为在这方面，美国可以把你干趴下，对吧？因此, 我们要避免这种情G。明白了吧。好了，我们关注信息战和经济战吧。而这方面他们已经玩了很多手了。就是这本书。如果回去后你读读，你会发现他们已经完全按照他们一直在说的套路去做了。我认为, 我相信, 考虑到川普现在正在将政府权力的所有力量集中到经济战中, 他们正在夺回主动权, 而中共政权则面临巨大的压力。因为我相信邓小平的那一派系，还有另外一些人, 即使是那些相信并认同集体领导的上层人士,也说过: 嘿, 我们这里有的是对个人的崇拜 "巴斯：你是说那些还没有被监禁或杀掉的人？班农：那些还没有被关起来的，到还没有被杀掉的人都已经坐在那里了。邓认为与西方合作有前途。邓相信改革。邓相信开放。但邓相信自己在做一个好的伙伴的同时, 一定要低调。不要高调的去动抢别人的肉。他们对习近平的看法是回归毛泽东的个人崇拜，而习在内心也承受茈角j的压力。早在 2014-2015年期间，我在我的　播节目中说过，很多人都引用了我的话，那就是五年后, 我们将在南海陷入互射的战争。作为一名 有22岁经验的海军军官， 我曾在南海一艘美国驱逐舰上巡逻过。知道吗？那时候我还在说，我靠，我特厶这是在哪里？对吧？这是什厶地方？因为世界上每一艘从波斯海湾穿过马六甲海峡的油轮, 我说的可是那种超大的油轮。在南海你能看到所有的运送原油的大家伙。这简直就是一条（原油）高速公路。巴斯：中国40%的能源需求都需要通过马六甲海峡班农：我觉得全球1/3的贸易都通过马六甲。也就是5丌亿美金每年巴斯：是的。班农：我的观点是说。当人们说南中国海的时候, 大家要明白, 它是一条商业高速公路。一年365天每周7天每天24小时，从不间断的，全世界最大的船只在这里航行。2015年, 中国人来到白宫玫瑰, 在美国人民和美国总统面前，睁茞晰说瞎话。他们基本上建造了七到八艘静态的航空母舰。中国人把它们叫做珊瑚礁。这些环礁就是静态的航空母舰—米斯且福 (Mischief)，斯卡伯勒环礁。所有这些珊瑚礁基本上都是航空母舰。而他们所做的是在他们身上安装了火控、雷达、搜索雷达以及作战飞机。这些玩意儿该走（撤出）了。巴斯：这些都是一丌英尺长的跑道。因此, 中国对我们说, 特别是在奥巴马恭总统时, 我们不会将我们在南海的岛屿军事化。我们不会去南沙群岛。我们正在建造的一切的目的只是为了科研。今天，我们看这几个岛屿，不管是哪一个, 永署礁，还是美济礁，抑或是其他岛屿, 都有1丌英尺长的跑道, 上面有导弹供电设备,以及他们从未承认的放在那里的一大堆武器。现在他们更让核战略轰炸机在那儿降落，我们如何与他们共舞？我们会让他们拿掉这些吗？还是让他们继续玩下去？班农：我在总统交接过渡期间, 作为首席战略家进入白宫与迈克?弗林（Mike Flynn）共事，当我们首次进入国家安全委员会的时候，我就说了，你首先要做的就有三件事。就是把这些打仗能力交给战斗指挥官们。在彼时白宫正在对伊斯兰国开战。巴斯：把这个巡权交给哈里·哈里斯（Harry Harris）（译者注：退役海军上将，目前恭繻国驻韩国大使）班农：也对。不过且慢，在这方面, 应该把巡权交给美军中央司令部的人, 让他们对付伊斯兰国。你必须下放战争中战斗的权力,以及战争中反击的能力给我们的战斗指挥官们。第二, 我们必须弄清楚, 国家安全委员会这个茬，以及里面那些奥巴马任命的人。也要弄清楚，随时间的推移, 我们将如何把我们的人安排到国家安全委员会中。第三, 我说, 我们必须回头看, 拿到奥巴马的每一份与亚洲战略轴心相关的文件。我说过, 我想看看他们到底看了哪些材料。人们应该有知情权。在白宫, 我每周工作七天, 每天工作18-20个小时。知道吗？我50% 的时间都花在亚洲战略轴心的事情上，以及奥巴马为什厶这厶做, 我们要做什厶来扭转这个局面。巴斯：是Kurt Campbell吗？班农：对，是 Kurt Campbell（译者注：美国外交官和商人，曾恭东亚和太平洋事务助理助理国务卿）。巴斯：他写了那本书。班农：下面就是我发现的。我原以为是一大房间的文件。实际上只是薄薄的一堆文件。我发现，美国本身并没有真正在机腹上来对抗中国。你有一些很棒的人。但是没有那些，怎厶说呢，认真祟钒铪牷A比如说，一个经济计划或战争计划来对付中国所从事的这场经济战。事实上, 你所看到的, （他们的）整个亚洲战略轴心，在我看来，只是在澳大利亚达堣撜☆p一个海军陆战队，这基本上就是个问题。每个人都告诉我去找哈里·哈里斯。所以我找到了哈里·哈里斯。我和他在一起花了很多时间，这方面到底正在发生茪陉，他教了我很多。我发现一件令人震惊的事，是的, 在南中国海，当年当我还是一个年轻的海军军官时，我们通过南海的时候, 子弹上膛，雷达开动，所有都在运行。这就是所谓的自由航行。在国际水域，我们做了我们想做的事情, 什厶时候想做我们就做, 因为我们是美国海军，对吗？我们让大海航道变得自由。而现在我发现的珙O他们搞这些岛礁（军事化）以及一切类似的动作。中国。。。我们只能{在所谓的安全航行区航行。而且，通过的时候你还得把雷达关掉，没有火控，收起你的家伙做一个乖小孩。这简直了。你本质上是在要求人家批准后才可以航行。巴斯：不知道还有这事儿。班农：当他们在海牙国际法庭输掉了裁判时, 中国还认为南海是中国的内海。巴斯：我知道。1949年出台的所谓的九段线就是搞笑的。班农：可他们认为这是一个领海。他们（的能力）没有准备好。他们要告诉你的第一件事就是, 中国的领土完整和主权不容质疑。把这个说法写进文件的人越多, 在电视节目上这厶说的人也就越多, 也就有更多的人不断L调这帚涨说自话, 他们想要这岫]为他们宁愿相信这就是现实。你问我下面会发生什厶事。五年前我在　播节目中说过, 他们将陷入真枪实弹的战争。波斯湾的卡塔堜M南海现状是会导致全球}突开始的两个世界上最热的焦点。明白吗？不是韩国。韩国是中国封尘。整个韩国的事情不过是一部中国戏。知道吗？而川普总统在这方面就做得非常出色。南海是一个爆发点。那天晚上你看到了这个。作为一名前海军军官, 那两艘船…巴斯：相距只有50英尺。班农：美国军舰迪凯特号是在巡逻。而你中国的驱逐舰，}过来对荍皕d这马上要相撞的时候错开这帚漱鸡游戏。只有50英寸。如果这两艘船相撞，200-300个水手可能已经死了。真的。如果以他们当时的相对速度装上去，我们真的会有一个大难。我不知道舰载的武器会发生什厶事, 也不知道船上的燃料会发生什厶事, 但我告诉你, 根?当时的速度, 中国人的所作所为是鲁莽不负责任的。这对我们来说就是一个挑战。记住, 迪凯特号所做的是从这几个珊瑚礁中的一个12英里处航行。知道吗？现在中国人说的在15英里以内都是他们的领海。他们说, 美国海军进入了他们在南海修建的岛礁建诛的12英里范围内。这侵犯了他们的主权领土。我给美国总统川普的建议是，我要先说我认为川普是一个对中国非常公平, 并真正试图建立关系的人--建议是，我认为你应该给中国人72小时的时间, 让他们把每一个雷达、每一个进攻性的军事装备，所有战斗机，从跑道段末梢的所有东西，都从岛上移除。我给你72小时的时间把这一切都撤掉。而在第72小时零1分钟, 美国海军将过去韖L们移除。然后我认为他们应该把这些岛礁，解除所有的设施，并把它们变成国际水域。他们说美国将美国海军派回南海，以保持航道畅通的名, 是挑衅的。我恰好相信这种关系的走向是应有的, 我也相信我们没有看到过中国是如何反应的。是他们试图在南海做一些挑衅的事情, 试图引发}突。我认为总统应该在这方面更积极主动点，我想你应该告诉他们，72小时。如果你不把武装解除掉, 我们就韺A解除。然后，如果他们胆敢阻止美国海军去做这件事。巴斯：你是说第72小时零一分钟后有真刀真枪的}突班农：我没有说真刀真枪}突。巴斯：哦？如果我们要解除（礁石）武装，他们不这厶做。。。班农：好吧, 国际法院裁定, 他们在那里是不合适的。我们为什厶不去执行呢？就是因为达沃斯（论坛）俱乐部 – 习近平来到达沃斯, 发表了他们手舞足蹈精彩演讲, 他们（习近平）并没有提你刚才说到的东西。2015年, 中国人（习近平）来到白宫玫瑰，坐在美国总统身边，面对茯国人民的面一本正经的说瞎话，是不是？巴斯：而且没有人去跟他打电话说这个事。班农：永远不要给他打电话。然后你看到国际法院裁言X来的时候, 他们说, 喂, 这是完全不能接受的。这根本不成立，它必须被撤销。他们只是坐在那里。他们坐在那里说, 嘿, 这是我们的领海。我意识到大家伙儿在说, 班农, 你到底在干什厶工作，这太疯狂了？我们甚至不知道在南海的什厶地方, 我们要面对一场战争。人们必须了解全球经济。我是个民族主慦怴A你知道吧？但美国经济的健康是以贸易为基础的。民粹主慦怍M经济民族主慦怞}不反对贸易。可是当你与极权主憛B重商主慦漯会（国家）进行做生意,谈到自由贸易概念这个话题，他们是反激进主慦满C川普想要什厶，其实从第一天起就说的很清楚了：公平贸易和互惠，明白吗？我想现在我们认真要和中国摊牌，明白吗？中国必须明白, 川普永远不会在这个问题上退让。明白吗？他是个很正派的人。明白吗？川普试图和他们（中国人）一起合作（解贸易问题）。但美国像这底Q摆布的日子已经一去不复返了。巴斯：让我来问你一个有煽动性的问题吧。班农：还有比这更具煽动性的事情吗？我刚刚说了，我们将会在南海有一战。巴斯：我说的煽动性正是来于此。我们会走的更远。所以可以说是挑衅。假如我们把太平洋第七舰队撤出，回家，会怎届H班农：事情是这帚, 人们应该记住, 美国是一个太平洋大国, 这一点非常重要。整个国家的发展，横贯大陆的铁路, 整个西部海岸，西海岸--我们与亚洲经济的健康运行有茪d丝丌缕的联系。巴斯：嗯, 对日本的第五条保护条款将是一个真正的问题。我之所以这说，是因为如果我们要离去，假如说吧, 假如我们到了这岸@个田地，那就是, 要厶一战要厶回家滚蛋。班农：回家不是一个选项。巴斯：那不是一个选项。班农：不是一个选项。（否则）这个世界将成为一个　比黑暗和危险的地方。你可以姑息他们，你可以有一个慕尼黑协议一帚绥靖政策，是吧？你可以让人说, 算了, 我们就抽身出来吧。他们建造了这些岛屿。他们是一个正在崛起的海军力量。巴斯：我们不想打仗。班农：“不干预”是川普的核心理念之一。然而, 美国首先支持的应该是国家安全, 也就是涉及美国生死的国家安全利益的国家安全，也就是事关我们本地战略伙伴国家的生死攸关的国家安全。这才是美国首先的意思。川普不会拿茪j棒走遍世界去打架。他试图平息与俄罗斯的关系。他试图平息蝘Q亚的局势。他正在努力寻找解赤富汗问题的办法。他试图在韩国找到解角霈蛂C他试图在委内瑞拉找到解角霈蛂C而诸位吃瓜观众应该明白川普没有去创造类似的（新）问题。正是理查德·哈斯以及所有那些达沃斯论坛所有的那些傻逼天才们，制造了这些问题。是他们抛弃了韩国，是他们是把阿富汗、委内瑞拉抛弃，并让中国人养尊处优。川普一直说的是, 我们的盟友们—美国行事也要符合他们性命攸关的国家安全利益。你走出去，去新加坡、泰国、印度尼西亚和澳大利亚跟他们交谈, 问他们, 喂, 美国海军在这个区域的存在是好事还是坏事？他们会告诉你, 不, 这太重要了，我们需要美国。我们在这里需要美国, 因为如果我们失去南海, 我们将失去任何形式的商贸活动。中国将控制整个地方。而中国人也明白这一点。这就是为什厶他们想把我们撵出去。而他们已经开始这厶做了，也就正是有了这帚漱葀z大战。喂，我想说, 这可是在12, 000 英里以外，这就是亚洲。我们参与亚洲事务的目的是什厶？这是另一个大溃败。巴斯：你已经听到有人这麽说了。班农：就像伊拉克也阿富汗一届A这是另外一个大溃败。别忘了，我是美国优先最L的支持者。在南中国海和中国打交道对我们来说太重要了.巴斯：真有意思啊。对了。我还有两个问题要问你。第一，为什厶在美国没有一个“人员管理体系”？我的意思是说你看了 DIUX的报告。他们称之为解密了的报告。事实上, 它从来没有被设密。也就是国防部关于中国（人员）在美渗透的报告，渗透到了研究性的大学和实验室的情G。班农：还有对我们武器实验室的渗透。巴斯：由DAPRA(尖端国防项目研究中心) 以及空军资助的武器实验室，为什厶我们没有弄一个像帚渐缜〞涨关人员控制的政策?班农：我想让你们回去再看看这些报告。因为我认为人们并不理解这些报道。这些报告基本上是解密的报告, 报告显示有30丌学生是持学生签证来美, 我们有 10, 000个承包商拥有武器实验室，这其中高至2/3的承包商可能是我们的情报财富。其中有些比例则涉及情报人员或特工。巴斯：而且他们在我们的实验室工作。那些武器技术可都是由我们的政府资助的呀。班农：这就是政治正确、贪婪和显而易见的见利忘憛C这些（武器）承包商们--我们把他们都叫出来—Booz Allen以及这些承包商们，这些承包商们，以及这些大型的政府项目为什厶让这厶多中国的国人进入到我们的武器实验室？我们的武器实验室处于国家安全的最前沿。这是怎厶发生的？不仅如此, 这工作（询问）必须马上完成。我不知道为什厶这厶严重, 我认为正是因为这是行政部门内争执不下才导致了这个严重的后果。这一切的 “政治正确” 性--前几天, 伦敦《金融时报》披露, 我的同事斯蒂芬·米勒 (Stephen Miller) ，一个了不起的年轻人, 他实际上已经制定了一个让30丌中国学生全部离开中国的计划，方法就是马上中断签证。这并不是说我们真的去这厶做,但我们应该思考这个事。很明显, 它在《金融时报》上被人泄露了。说这个计划已经传遍了国务院，云云。现在看看所有的这些姑息养奸的人，我很开心，我感到非常自豪的是像苏珊·桑顿(Susan Thornton)这帚漱@个在缅因州拥有农场的人,她作为理性的通融主慦怐漱@部分, 她也是国防部、国务院以及我们情报部门中的，基本上都是本茪国想干什厶就怎厶来的方式与中国相处(对华)的持温和态度的人的一部分, 现在开始从相反的方向来看问题了。巴斯：所以，我不是那种支持全盘干掉的人 – 总共有340000名的学生在美国。班农：我并不赞成这厶做。但我赞成的是，如果他们是（中国）情报系统的人，我会赞成，这是我想要知道的。其实（上面说的）Miller的计划就是说，喂，如果我们能证明（他们是情报人员），他们应该被送回家，明白了吧？巴斯：而我甚至没有直接关注中国, 印度, 或者任何具体的地方。但是, 为什厶我们不能有一个关乎我们国家主权和国家安全的相关政策呢？为什厶我们不能说如果涉及到武器方面的计划, 你必须是美国公民，并且也许应该是出生在美国的美国公民？班农：你问的问题是根本性的，原则性的问题。巴斯：这太显而易见了。班农：我觉得，实际上，你说的其实有这厶个规定的本本。而且他们拿到了豁免书。技术上来说，我相信这些，当你看细节的时候，事实上这种类似的豁免书是存在的 – 因为有些人不认为应该有这些限制。巴斯：好。另外一个问题是孔子学院。在美国好多大学都有孔子学院。这些孔子学院是由中国人民解放军直接资助的，为什厶我们的大学允许孔子学院进驻？班农：这不能被接受。这就好像你在中国，成立一个什厶机腹，该机腹由CIA直接资助一届C巴斯：或者，天主教教堂。班农：天主教教堂。可是，并不是天主教教堂，因为天主教教堂刚刚与中国达成了一个协议，让中国… 不，这个问题很严重。方济教皇刚刚跟中国达成了一个协议，让信仰　神论的北京政权来挑选我们的大主教。所以，在这里把天主教教堂作为一个例子不大合适 – 因为它已经对北京否首称臣了。可以与此相对应的例子会是，让CIA或者DNI(国家情报局)在中国成立一个学生中心，目的在于传播CIA的文化。对吧，这不可能发生的。对吧。你知道为什厶这不会发生。因为中国人会说，喂，这行不通因为这可能会影响我们主权。你不得不解除这帚满]孔子学院）协议。巴斯：如何解除？班农：我想，你只需要坐下来，把他们咔擦掉就好了。不是吗?巴斯：根?哪一条哪一款法律？班农：你先别说。这整件事，人们都在说, 哎呀, 好吧, 他们没那厶坏。他们在推动文化。他们还在韺U学生学习普通话。呵呵,他们可是由解放军资助的呀。巴斯：他们的孔子学院还有服务器机房。卧槽，这是在搞什厶？班农：所有这一切对美国人来说都是目瞪口呆的事。为什厶美国人民不知道这个事？因为没有人报告说这个事情。难道CBS”60 Minutes” 节目知道并报道过孔子学院这个事吗？巴斯：他们应该这厶做。班农：他们应该早在20年前就这厶做了。这个事现在被拿出来说事，原因是, 现在有人已经受不了这个茬。这就是为什厶在当前的川普运动中被提及，因为正是川普受不了了。而当他入主政府，改变这一切时, 现在那些其他人和其他声音都冒出来了，而且你正目睹荅u正的阻力。不管怎厶届A让这种情G在我们的大学发生 - 让我们残酷地坦率地说道说道，为什厶总是只有哈德逊研究所才有郭文贵, 或者如昨晚，有彭斯副总统和Phillsbury博士？为什厶总是哈德逊学院？为什厶其他机腹从来没有举行过这帚会议？巴斯：这个，因为中国拿钱给了他们中的大多数了呗。班农：在结束之前，我想最后说的事就是 刘鹤, 习近平主席的经济战略家。以前我有机会认识他，并跟他建立了一点关系。他很棒的一个人。在今年6月，他来跟我们进行的那个重要的但没有结果的谈判中，他来美的第一天，他并没有直接去白宫，也没有直接先去财政部。他出现在, 就是第一天, 他在国会山上整整一天，和共和党里面的那些"自由贸易者"在一起。要记住, 川普在这方面收到最大的打击是共和党人。是那些共和党人疯了 – 喂, 你得搞自由贸易，必须得搞自由贸易。我们对中国的所有的不好的高度归纳的说辞总是一而再再而三的被束之高阁 – 哎呀，谁让那是中国呢。所以所有的被接纳说法都是愉快的交流。而这些说法并不是真正意味茈们看起来的本意。而像你这帚漱H, 像郭文贵这帚漱H, 像Pillsbury博士这帚漱H, 现在开始质疑这一切。我想，从 “交往到对抗” 这个说辞中，你可以看到整个事情的全貌。他们对我们紧咬不放的是，“交往与对抗”。于是我们被描绘为“好战的党”, 对吧？我们成了想开战的疯子。不！我们想做的是，阻止一场针对美国的经济战争。现在如果你看看那群主张“交往”的人吧, 在过去25-30年其实一直没有任何进展的战略经济对话中，他们一直被中国所利用, 从而让我们在中国掠夺性的进攻中脱掉我们工业的底裤（去工业化）。掠夺性资本主憟翱O中国领导人们一直坚持的东西。因此,对川普总统，我的自豪感　以复加。而对于没有看过彭斯那次演讲的人来说, 那次演讲将作为一个拐点载入史册, 因为他昨天基本上抛出了这个意思: "嘿, 不要再耍小聪明了。我们理解你在做什厶。我们理解你的图谋。我们知道你倾尽全国之力来对付我们。我们要反击你们的图谋。我们会赢的。巴斯：我很感激你提出这个。当你进入商务部, 就在你开车经过的入口路上, 有本杰明·富兰克林的铭句。它写荂G “商业贸易必须是公正和公平的” 。我想这就是我们需要追求的。我认为我们不应该过于L调惩罚谁谁谁。我认为我们不应该是一头好斗的公牛。我想我们应该说, 我们要的只是大家公平诚实相待。你现在说的这些理念我们还没达成过。我们也笃信这帚熔z念。一个好消息是,我认为在过去的6个月到一年的时间里, 以一天前彭斯的演讲为高潮。尽管中国的人做出了种种努力, 但这种思潮终于发生了变化。所以谢谢你今天能过来。班农：谢谢。谢谢邀请我。太棒了巴斯：今天聊的太棒了班农：在这个秘密的地方巴斯：还有郭文贵，我们一起在这个秘密的地方。班农：这个地方是哪里，我们不得不加以保密。除非这家伙不停的直播，所以。。。巴斯：我不知道到底谁更具有争议性，你还是郭文贵，不过我们会看到的班农：郭文贵是一个完全不一帚荧糷矷C相比他而言，我就是小学生。巴斯：谢谢你，谢谢你过来班农：感谢你邀请我格兰特?威廉姆斯：显然, 班农和他的前老板川普都是剑走偏锋的非凡人物。但希望在看完这个访谈之后, 你会有更多的视角, 当然也可以让你对白宫内与中国}突升级的大戏多一点背景知识。对我来说, 这次谈话太棒了。感谢Kyle和史蒂夫(班农)把这一切带给我们。

REAL VISIONTranscript: The Kyle Bass Interviews: Steve Bannon's China WarningFeaturing: Steve BanonPublished Date: November 2, 2018Length: 00:55:58Synopsis: Steve Bannon, former White House Chief Strategist, sits down with hedge fund giant Kyle Bass to discuss America’s current geopolitical landscape regarding China. Bannon and Bass take a deep dive into Chinese infiltration in U.S. institutions, China’s aggressiveness in the South China sea, and the potential for global conflict in the next few years. Filmed on October 5, 2018 at an undisclosed location.Topics: China, Geopolitics, MacroTags: Breitbart NewsVideo Link:https://www.realvision.com/rv/channel/realvision/videos/7412a3f6b4a349b3a050fb38cdbc1761Kyle Bass: What do you think China's true intentions are in their grand strategy? What is their grand strategy?Steve Bannon: Their grand strategy is very simple. It's to be a hegemonic world power. I think this will be a big shocker to people. Remember, when Trump won in a complete upset that nobody saw coming, and particularly, you have this post-war, liberal, Democratic, rules-based order. OK? The Chinese have done nothing but gamed the system from day one on every set of rules. The rules are what they determine they are. OK?And nobody calls them on it. I think you're going to see a double and triple down on One Belt One Road. I think you'll see a double and triple down on Made In China 2025. I think you're going to see the East India Project and Sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean, in Venezuela, and Latin America double and triple down. They've got a lot of RMB to spend, right? And if a guy can take RMB-?KB: And no one's going to take RMB.SB: Well, this is going to be the great question we're going to have in front of us.Grant Williams: You're about to watch a tremendous conversation between Kyle Bass and the former White House Chief Strategist and Executive Chairman of Breitbart News, Steve Bannon. Steve's a very controversial figure as I'm sure you all know. And in this extraordinary conversation, the two spend an awful lot of time discussing the potential for a major conflict in the South China Sea. It's hard hitting. And as always with Steve Bannon, it's controversial. But I think you're really going to enjoy what you see.KB: Mr. Bannon, thanks for being here at this undisclosed location in Texas.SB: It's Steve.KB: Steve.SB: It's Steve.KB: Steve. It's good to have you here. Thanks for being here.SB: I'm glad to be here and excited.KB: You're here very specifically to talk with me about something that you and I study very intently. And that's China. And I'd love to just start right off the bat with asking you what do you think China's true intentions are in their grand strategy? What is their grand strategy?SB: Their grand strategy is very simple. It's to be a hegemonic world power. You can see it through One Belt One Road. You can it see through Made In China 2025. You can see through everything they're doing like their strategy of being the East India Company in Sub-Saharan Africa, what they're doing to the Caribbean, now what they're doing in Latin AmericaWhat we call all forces of government--all areas of government focus on the economic war against the United States and their military build up. They're basically trying to close the South China Sea. It is the most geopolitically ambitious strategy we've ever seen. And let me be very specific. The three great theories of geopolitics--you've got Mackinder's theory of the Asian landmass. You have Mahan's theory of cutting off the choke points of the world's oceans.And you have Speakman's theory of keeping your enemy off of the Asian landmass. The Chinese are the only power in world history to ever try to do all three simultaneously. Napoleon, and Hitler, and others tried to do the Eurasian landmass. The British Empire and the American system we have today is built off Mahan's Naval strategy. And then Speakman's is one from the earlier 20th century.What China is doing with One Belt One Road is trying to basically connect the old Silk Road all the way up to Italy. We saw in the paper today the Italian government--the guys in the Five Star--Di Maio came back from Beijing. They had a huge thing about hey, we want to end the One Belt One Road in Italy where Marco Polo essentially left. We had a vote this week in the Maldives which really rejected what they're trying to do in the Mahan strategy of taking all the Naval bases and choke points throughout the world.And then Speakman. What they're trying to do is force the United States, which has been a Pacific power, off of the landmass through what they're doing in the South China Sea and what they're doing around Taiwan. They want to push us back to Guam. People have said for years to kind of cover this.A lot of the Wall Street, City of London, and Frankfurt crowd have kind of said, oh, well, they're not territorially ambitious. They've never been an expansionist power. Well, they're a geopolitically, expansionist power. And it's quite extraordinary what they're doing. And they're doing it at the same time.KB: And do you think that their new found economic greatness or perceived greatness, post-financial crisis--they always believed they were a second rate power, financially, going into 2008. And the world seems to believe that they were the engine of the world's growth from 2009, 2018. Is it that economic growth that they build their geopolitical assertiveness on in your opinion?SB: Listen, since time immemorial the access to the Chinese market, this mystery of the Chinese market, has always drawn in the West, whether it's the British coming there at first, or the East India Company, or the China schooners from the United States--the China trade. It was always this thing about China. What we've seen, and I happen to believe, is that the Chinese economic system is built on a house of sand.And I think it's going to lead us to a greater financial debacle than 2008 ever was in the exact same culprits that led to the financial crisis in 2008--the investment banks, the commercial banks, the hedge funds, and the government entities. It was the same elites that led to that financial crisis and got bailed out. They had no responsibility and no accountability. They've been the same exact actors that have exacerbated the situation in ChinaAnd so yes, the reason the world's elites--the Party of Davos, the people on Wall Street, what I call the IR departments of China, which are the investment banks, particularly Goldman Sachs and some commercial banks, the lobbyists for China, which is basically the 25 or 30 largest corporations that deal in China today--their lobbyists in Washington, DC. And the big private equity guys like Schwarzman and these guys are all going to have to be held accountable for what went on in China.What China was able to do in basic coordination with the elites in the West was de-industrialize the industrial democracies of the West, both Europe and the United States. That's why Brexit and 2016 are inextricably linked. What it is is the exporting of Chinese overcapacity, and Chinese deflation, and basic industrial goods. And from the Chinese point of view, it's been quite brilliant.They've essentially taken 350 million of their people from working poverty to middle class, and 400 million people from abject poverty to working poverty. So that's essentially 2/3 of their population, because their population I really think is closer to 1.3 or 1.4 billion than what they say, 1.1. So what they've done is heroic in 30 years from a strategy point of view. But that has been exacerbated by the elites in the West who basically kind of financed it and brought it on.In fact, the reason Trump was I think so special was that he said, hey, this is not the way the world has to be. It could be very different. We've basically financed the rise of China. We've built China. And all he heard for years and what you heard for years is no. This is what I call the second law of thermodynamics. This is a immutable law of physics--the rise of China.And what Trump said is no, this is through human agency. It's the commercial banks, the investment banks, the corporations that kowtowed to the Chinese regime. And one thing I want to make sure, Kyle, I get out up front is this is not about the Chinese people. I served as a Naval officer over in China in the Western Pacific in the Seventh Fleet on a destroyer in the mid '70s. I think '76-'77 was the first time I went to China.I have been involved in China virtually all my life. I've owned businesses over there. I've lived in Shanghai for a while in the French Concession. I have a great not just admiration, but a deep love for the Chinese people. In fact, that they have a saying over there called, old hundred names, which is basically the common man because there's a 100 last surnames in China. So old hundred names is essentially the deplorablesAnd those in the old hundred names is a sense of common decency, their grit, and their determination. What they've been through as a people is nothing short of heroic. The problem we have is we have a totalitarian regime of the Chinese Communist Party, and quite frankly, the elite leadership of the Chinese Communist Party that are really in business with the Party at Davos, which is this scientific, engineering, managerial, financial, cultural elite that I say kind of emanates from the World Economic Forum in Davos. But it's really in London, New York, Washington, DC, Silicon Valley, et ceteraKB: And do you think the way that they've ingratiated themselves into, let's say, the Davos man, as is commonly referred to--the way that they've gotten there--is it through economic coercion? Is it through investing in our universities, our think tanks, our lobbyists, as you said, and our corporations, and even the people that are US citizens looking to make profits in China. Is that how they control that narrative. And how do they get there?SB: Let's go back to one week in January 2017 when we had two seminal speeches. We had the Davos speech from President Xi, which was the high hosanna to globalism. And it was, to me, repulsive how the mainstream media and Davos man just sat there, and bought it all, and said, what a great leader, what a great humanitarian, what he's going to lead us through on the world's environment, what he's going to do for globalization or for the economy.And then you saw Donald Trump's Inaugural Address was I think three days later in which he said, hey, we're getting back to the nation state. And America is going to start to focus on our sovereignty. And other nations should start thinking about their sovereignty. But this globalization and what's coming out of Davos has stripped our sovereignty from us. And we're going to reassert that. And two years later, which happened this week, was Mike Pence's speech about the new strategy of the United States.KB: It happened last night.SB: It has really been going along for quite a while, which is now kind of engaging China. But it's not like Henry Kissinger and not like the Thucydides Trap crowd. And I know you did this seminal interview with Graham Allison, but not what those guys want, which is for us to stumble along and play along with China. This is a direct confrontation with China to say, we're not going to take it anymore. You've been in economic war with us. And we're going to reassert us.Your question about how they ingratiate themself. They're the guys wrote the biggest checks. They wrote checks to the universities. They've essentially bought off the city of London, Wall Street, and the corporations. I say this in a sense of kind of anger. The great investment banks in London and in New York became the investor relations department for this regime. OK?KB: In the pursuit of profits.SB: In the total pursuit of profits. And corporations became their lobbyists. When Li Hu, deputy, came to the United States about four weeks ago when they had this last round of trying to put something together in the trade deal, there wasn't much going on. But he sent his deputy and a small contingent to see Steve Mnuchin and the guys at Treasury. The very first stop they made was the day before they went to Treasury.They stopped, and they had a meeting with I think 15 or 20 large corporations. It was the heads of government affairs and I think the presidents, but not the CEOs because the guy wasn't high enough. And he basically said, hey, boys, you have a problem. And you have to figure out how to help us fix it. OK? Another thing is that had Wang Qishan announce this kind of financial advisory panel.Being on their back foot by the Trump strategy, they kind of said, hey, we need a financial advisory panel to help us understand what the United States wants and what the United States needs. And it was Paulson, and Schwarzman, and all these characters. And it's interesting. When they need somebody to come over and help intermediate with the United States, they go to the same guys who have been profiting on this.My understanding is that people came back and said, hey, the UN General Assembly is happening. It's opera season in New York. My schedule is full. And Wang Qishan said, hey, boys, I don't think you're listening. We're having a meeting. I want everybody to show up.This is general quarters. And so no. I think when we look back on this, people are going to be absolutely stunned when they see how the elites of the Western democracies and the United States went along with China and exacerbated a situation when it was quite evident they were at economic war with us.KB: Going back on this one issue about the way that the influence is being pushed through the corporations, we at our firm know that there are several--there's a couple of handfuls of corporations that each have more than $1 billion in capital that they're trying to get back from China. And they have been unable to get a dime out of China since November of 2016 when China closed its capital account completely. When you were in the administration, did you interface with any of these companies that were going through a lot of--pardon the pun --red tape?-trying to get their money out of China. Did they come appeal to you?SB: Yeah. I think this will be a big shocker to people. Remember, when Trump won in a complete upset that nobody saw coming, and particularly, you have this post-war, liberal, democratic, rules-based order. OK? The Chinese have done nothing but gamed the system from day one on every set of rules. The rules are what they determine they are. OK? And nobody calls them on it because everybody thinks they're too weak.KB: Are the corporations afraid to call them on it?SB: Absolutely. 100%.KB: Because they know if they say that we can't get our money out, they shut their business off.SB: They'll be shut down.KB: There's a quid pro quo?SB: Shut down. They absolutely fear it. By the way, on the entire situation with the tariffs--and tariffs are just not about tariffs and not about protectionism. That's why Trump's done it at such a scale. Remember, before Trump got here, people are talking about $25-$30 billion of tariffs, it was like, oh, my god. That's so huge. Trump's program is half a trillion dollars to tariff goods because he knows the Chinese can't respond.And here's why they can't respond--people in the United States have to understand one thing. The Chinese look at us as a tributary state to them. And let me explain that. China's been around for 4,000 years, right? They've had good runs. And they've had bad runs. OK? But one thing they know, and the reason they're still organized as a nation over 4,000 years, is they know how to handle allies. And they how to handle bad guys. OK?Now what they've done is they've got this system called barbarian management. And they know how to manage barbarians. The way they manage barbarians is they take the leaders of the barbarians, and they give them a taste of the good life. And you're going to be something special. You're going to get a special deal. Now what happens back into the tributary state is your problem. OK?In the United States, what they have done for 25 and 30 years is play this as a barbarian state. It's barbarian management. OK? They incentivize our elites. And our elites de-industrialize, particularly the upper Midwest of this country. It's the reason Donald Trump's president.The audience should understand one thing that's important is that JD Vance, the great guy from Yale who wrote Hillbilly Allergies--it's the best sociological study of the Trump voter. And it was JD Vance who told me those studies that come out of MIT and Harvard show that there is a direct correlation between the factories that left for China, the jobs that left with them, and the opioid crisis. Because this is not about tariffs.KB: It's actually logic.SB: It's not about tariffs. What this is about is human dignity and self-worth. Those factories went. Wall Street made the money. The corporations benefit from it for lower costs. And devil catch the hindmost on the workers. And so this is what Trump is totally reverse now. What China sees this as is we're a tributary state. We send them natural resources, soy beans, beef, cattle, Boeing Airlines and Apple products.Oh, excuse me. We don't send Boeing airlines and Apple products. you know why? Because they forced Boeing to do a joint venture. And they forced Apple to make their products over there. So we're Jamestown to their Great Britain. That's why the tariffs at the scale that Trump put them up at, they can't respond to. OK?KB: But what's interesting--let's assume we put 25% on $520 billion. We're literally talking about a little over $100 billion dollars. And I know that's a lot of money. But our economy is $19 trillion. It's still not that functionally meaningful to us, in my opinion. But I do think it's a leveling of a field to your point. They've been fighting a trade war with us since 2001. And we just haven't fought back.SB: OK. The average compounded growth of the United States of America from 1946, the end of World War II, to 2000, was 3.5%. OK? It's the reason we became a superpower. That economic engine that was unlocked and grew every year at 3.5% and 1/2 percent through good times and bad on average--when China joined the World Trade Organization, they got most favored nation. The growth of the United States is 1.9%.There's a lot of factors to that. But the central beating heart of it is China because we de-industrialize. We sent our manufacturing over there. Yes, the tariffs in and of themselves, on a nominal number and absolute number, are not huge. But we look at the convergence of everything. What Trump has done is said, hey, we're at economic war. And we're going to hit back with the 301s that stop the forced technology transfers.We're going to put these tariffs into the scale they've never seen before. We're going to have the ability, if we so desire, to liquidate companies like ZTE to basically cut them off from their component parts in the West. They'll be out of business in 90 days. Also, the new things about these limitation investments that-?KB: The CFIUS Reform.SB: --the CFIUS Reform that people are talking about--you bring all forces of government together on that and the stopping of intellectual property, you have something. And this is why NAFTA was so important. People mocked and ridiculed Trump. There's a book out called Fear that Gary Cohn, the president of Goldman Sachs--great Goldman Sachs--and I used to work there. He takes the documents off the president's desk.The book opens where he's taking the NAFTA deal early on and the deal on Korea and actually takes them off the desk because in his judgment, the president wasn't smart enough to understand what he was doing. Well, here's what Trump's done--the new NAFTA deal that he's created is basically setting up a geostrategic manufacturing base to counter East Asia. And Japan is very quickly going to be part of that.It's a bilateral deal, and not some TPP deal where we're just one among many. It's a direct bilateral deal with Japan as a partner. We've got one with Korea we're updating. And in the EU, Juncker has already told Trump and indicated that they're going to be a part of this too. What Donald Trump has done in less than two years against the second law of thermodynamics--the immutable law of the rise of China--what he's done is reorient the entire world's supply chain away from China.And this is going to have economic growth opportunities that are going to be incredible. And he's done that kind of single-handedly against the fighting of the corporatist lobby, the fighting of the Wall Street investor relations department, et cetera. So that's why I think it's really heroic.KB: It's interesting with the timing. If you look at just, let's say, the economic laws of China, were already slowing down before we decided to fight back. It just so happens to be that this pushback from a tariff or whether--the most elegant idea was the border adjustable tax which was immediately killed by you and I both know who.SB: I loved that one.KB: That was perfect in my opinion.SB: By the way, I am a huge believer that--and Paul Ryan and I have had our differences, but when he first brought me through that, I said, that's the solution. That's the solution.KB: It's kind of an egalitarian way of going at it.SB: I Think--And we all know why it got crushed. I think that that is something that should be brought back up very quickly in future years.KB: We could do away with tariffs if we imposed a border adjustment tax.SB: Well, by the way, let's talk about tariffs for a second. President Trump--remember the G7 when he was lectured by his betters--Merkel and Macron on the first day about this whole thing about tariffs. He came back the next day for breakfast. And what Trump told the G7, he said, OK, I thought about it last night. How about this? No tariffs.Absolutely no tariffs. But no subsidies. People have to realize that the White House put out this document over two months ago now. It was the 50 things that China's doing in its economic war with us. It's kind of what the United States wants China to stop. That's the deal. You stop that, we're all good. When you look at that, it's not just the tariffs. It's the investment in state-owned industries.KB: Free land. Free electricity.SB: Free land. Look at what they've done with steel and aluminum throughout the world. Look at what they've done with ship building. You could go every heavy industry. They've gutted Western Europe. And they've gutted the United States. And they continue to do that.KB: Purposefully.SB: Purposefully. And by the way, ZTE showed you this. They have to create some number of 11 million jobs a year. They're under enormous, internal, economic pressure to create those jobs. They can't afford to have 150,000 high value added jobs at ZTE just go away. It's the same thing with the steel. They're kind of caught on the wheel now.They're the first to admit they have to keep adding capacity because they've got to keep these guys working. So I think that's why the Chinese model, and all this happy talk that comes from the West about the Chinese model, when you really look at it--and I know you are one of the world's handful of experts I think had looked at it and looks at the numbers as they really are not what people hoped they are, and not how they're spun by China. Because every number that comes out of China, to me, has to be questioned, verified--trust, but verified.It has to be questioned, verified, and then verified again. You've got to get on belt and suspenders. And that's why I think we may be hurtling to another financial crisis driven by this financial model of China that can't stand up on its own.KB: Right. Well, the good news about that is if we're right about China, and we're right about their reckless build of credit, coupled with the fact their economy's slowing down, coupled with the size of their banking system and GDP--if we're right about all those things, the good news is their banks aren't inextricably linked to ours the way that ours were to Europe and Asia's back during our financial crisis.SB: They're not. But you used the word they're reckless. This is what upsets me about the lack of accountability and responsibility by the world's elites. We just went through the worst financial crisis in history. Not one CEO went to jail. And not anybody significantly gave up any equity. OK?People have got to remember that on September 18, 2008, when Bernanke and Paulson walked into the Oval Office with Bush, and he sent them up to Capitol Hill, the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve was $880 billion. On the day that Donald Trump took the oath of office on January 20, 2017, it was $4.5 trillion. All we did in the Bank of England, ECB, Bank of Japan-?did the same thing.KB: And the PBOC.SB: PBOC. What they did to save the elites was to turn on the spigots of liquidity. So if you owned assets, real estate, stocks, or intellectual property, you've had the greatest 10-year run in history. If you're a working class schmendrick, wages are flat. This is what's unfair, and this is where the anger that's driving the populist movement--the whole burden comes down on the little guy to finance these deficits with his taxes.And then his kids get sent everywhere in the world to defend this. That's what's got to stop. You used the word reckless. It is reckless disregard what the elites have done this time. Because what they've done--look, the American banking system has $19 trillion of assets on it. You're 10 times smarter than me on this. I'd respectfully submit that all of those assets are not good. OK? Maybe, let's say, 10% or more could be written off today.That's the American banking system. The Chinese banking system I think has $49 trillion of assets. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think $45 trillion have been put on the books since 2008. This is completely reckless. Now, thank god they're not interconnected through the SWIFT system with the rest of the banks.KB: Or through derivatives.SB: Derivatives. And by the way, the reason is--and this is another tell--because none of the investment banks or none of the guys want to say, whoa, we can't hook up with China because they all stopped themselves from doing it. They all limited their exposure to it because they understand when it implodes, they don't want to be taken down in the first couple of minutes.That being said, those banks are going to implode. Nobody can put those kinds of assets on and have a great banking system. This is a total and complete sham in the economists, the Financial Times of London, all the elites, and all the conferences they have. You had Richard Haas on this morning on Morning Joe. Richard Haas is from the Council on Foreign Relations. And all he's doing is beating up Mike Pence and Donald Trump from Pence's speech.You know what he's saying? He's saying, hey, all my Chinese colleagues and buddies in China are telling me they don't know what the United States wants. They came over here. They wanted to deal. And they want to be our partner. But we keep moving the goalposts. That is reckless for him to say that. He fully understands what the issues are. OK?And he sits there on a general news show in the morning that basic voters watch and starts putting this stuff into the mind. It's unacceptable. I got to tell you, Kyle, that's why I think what you're doing here, what you're doing with your work, and other things--there are a number of people like yourself that are sitting there going, this can't continue. And people are going to be held accountable for this.If the elites think they're going to skip on this one, it's not going to happen. The reason Donald Trump's president, the reason you're seeing these populist revolts, whether it's in Italy, Germany, France, throughout the world, in Brazil this weekend, in Argentina, in Pakistan is the little guy is fed up with a group of elites that know better. And to take care of themselves, they will play ball with anybody.KB: You're right. And when you talk about the Chinese banking system, let's assume that it has to restructure. They're very smart.SB: Let's talk about this. Here's how smart they are--when we went over with Trump's visit, remember, they didn't make any other changes. They weren't going to let us in on anything outside of that, except they would open up the finance sector.KB: Says the spider to the fly.SB: Exactly.KB: They've already wrecked their financial system. And now you can invest.SB: Now you can invest.KB: Why does the world not see this, Steve?SB: The world absolutely sees this.KB: They're starting to see it.SB: Hang on, Kyle.KB: The world's economists are just starting to see this.SB: No, no, Kyle, Kyle. Kyle, you are much too kind. You're a good man. OK? You've got to call it like it is. It's bullshit. OK? You're telling me the guys at the Wall Street Journal, Financial Times of London, and The Economist--these smart guys and think tanks don't know exactly what's going on? Some moron like me can look at the balance sheet of these banks and say, hey, guess what? I think we have a ticking time bomb. They know exactly what it is.KB: But you know what they say? But it's China. That's what I hear all the time. I agree with you. But it's China. So we're going to keep writing what we write.SB: Yeah. That's got to stop. OK. We cut a deal with China in the late '90s. Remember, you had a spectrum back then of the China cheerleaders the rational accommodationist, and the hawks. So let's talk about this. Back in '99, that was the pitch from the appeasers. The people have to understand it's both political parties. This is not about ideology.This is all Democrats and Republicans. OK? When they're talking about China, they're just trying to figure out how to get more money in their own pockets. So the cheerleader said, hey, it's China. Once we get them into the most favored nations, once we get them into the WTO, they're going to turn out to be liberal capitalists. They're going to vote.KB: Liberalize our economy. They're going to democratize. They're going to let us invest in everything.SB: They're going to be middle class.KB: Maybe create a rule of law.SB: Rule of law. It's going to be nirvana. OK. So we know 17 years later--guess what? They're a totalitarian, mercantilist regime. They've got a system that works for them for the elite for their regime. And it works well. Now you have two sets of folks. The cheerleaders are gone. Nobody's a cheerleader.You have rational accommodationist and you have hawks. Rational accommodation has got a new name. Its Thucydides Trap. It's your buddy Graham Allison and Henry Kissinger. And here's the great concept they got. Their great concept is America's a declining power. China's a rising power like Athens was a declining power, and Sparta was a rising power.And what you have to figure out to avoid a global conflict, which has only happened 16 times in world history. And 12 times, they just weren't wise enough to take it. What has to happen is the declining power can figure out how to noodge the rising power to kind of get into their system.Now you'll always be the junior partner, but you'll make the big guy work with you. And everything will be happy.This is the exact same nonsense from the exact same people from Allison Graham and from Henry Kissinger that they spun on Nixon in the late '60s about Russia. Let's go back in time. It was the same exact pitch. Russia's a rising power. America's a declining power. And what we need is détente. We need a rapprochementWe need to let them have their sphere of influence. It was bullshit then. And it's bullshit now. Ronald Reagan came in and said, hey, you know what? How big is their economy? And they said Russia's economy is the size of California. He says, why do people fear them?The very first thing that Andy Marshall at the Net Assessment Group in the Pentagon and Bill Casey at the CIA did was do a complete analysis of the Russian economy. And they found out it was only half as big. Whoops. I have a miss. It was 15% bigger.KB: And they were desperately short dollars.SB: Desperately short of dollars. This is the whole thing that always happens with a regime. 
KB: So exactly where China is.SB: Because they did the exact same thing as China. They put it into military spending that was not productive. So here we go with the exact same set of guys. And what they tell us 40-50 years later is hey, America's a declining power. China's a rising power. And I look at it. It's the exact same thing. They have an economy with no dollars.Here's a point I make to them--how about this. How about we stop being a declining power? That is not a law of physics. A process that manages us to decline is not a process I accept. I am looking for a leader to step up and make America great again. And that's Trump's basic pitch. And guess what? In two years, he proved the Chinese are a paper tiger.KB: When you think about their grand strategy, our pushback, and where we are in the globe today, what do you think China's next step is? If you were predicting what their next step would be, given our assertiveness that we've stepped forward on the economic side of the coin and pushed in some tariffs, and are starting to reassert ourselves, what do you think they're going to do. What's textbook?SB: Number one, they want regime change in the United States. They believe they have an 80% chance of getting Trump--winning the House and doing whatever they need to do with psychological warfare, with money, with whatever they have to do to basically thwartTrump and lose the House of Representatives and see him impeached this year.And there's 100% probability they'll beat him at 20-20. Number one is the removal of Donald J Trump as President of the United States. Because they say, that is the rail head of everything that's happened to us badly. We've got to get a globalist in there.KB: They're game just to wait him out.SB: Not just wait him out, but I think take active measures. Pence said yesterday--and Axios and other people reported--there's classified information that shows the Chinese involvement and real meddling. This is not some Russia guys on Facebook. This is the real deal because this is all the chips in the middle of the table. That's number one.Number two, the Italians said today that hey, China's going to be our big buddy. I think you're going to see a double and triple down on One Belt One Road. I think you'll see a double and triple down on Made In China 2025. I think you're going to see the East India Project in Sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean, in Venezuela, and Latin America double and triple down. They've got a lot of RMB to spend, right? And if a guy can take RMB-?KB: But no one's going to take RMB.SB: Well, this is going to be the great question we're going to have in front of us.KB: It's the key.SB: They're in the Gulf right now. They're all over the UAE. They're all over Saudi Arabia. They're all over Qatar. They're all over every resource area in the world from Argentina to Sub-Saharan Africa, to South Africa. And they're going to try to see it –?And number three, remember in the great textbook that they put out and basically printed in English in the late '90s written by these two brilliant Colonels in the Chinese War College called Unconventional Warfare. Unconventional Warfare.KB: Admiral Lou?SB: Yeah. It's a book that should be read by everybody because it laid out China's strategy. They said there's three types of warfare. There's information warfare. There's economic warfare. And there's kinetic or guns up warfare. And what we want to do is avoid kinetic because the one thing America can do is kick your ass, right? So we want to avoid that. OK?And so let's focus on information and economic warfare. And they've run the tables. It's textbook. If you go back and read that, they've done exactly what they said they were going to do. I think, and I believe that given the fact that Trump is now converging all forces of government power onto the economic warfare, and they are taking back, and the regime is under huge pressure, because I believe the Deng Xiaoping faction. And others, even at the highest level who believe in collective leadership, have said, hey, what we have here is acult of personality .KB: You mean the ones that haven't been jailed or killed yet?SB: The ones that haven't been jailed to killed yet have sat there and go, Deng believed in working with the West. Deng believed in reform. Deng believe in opening up. But Deng believed in being a good partner and particularly keep your lights down. Don't get up in somebody's grill. What they see with Xi is a return to the cult of personality of Mao. And he's under tremendous pressure internally.I said on my radio show, and everybody quotes me on this, back in 2014-2015 that in five years, we'll be in a shooting war in the South China Sea. As a 22-year-old Naval officer, I was on patrol in the South China Sea on an American destroyer. OK? And I said, where in the hell am I? Right?What is this place? Because every tanker in the world coming through the Straits of Malacca from the Persian Gulf--you've got every huge tanker. You've got every boxcar. It's a superhighway.KB: 40% of China's energy needs come through the Strait of Malacca.SB: I think it's one third of the world's trade. It's $5 trillion.KB: It is.SB: My point. When people say the South China Sea, what you have to understand is it's a superhighway of commerce. They have the biggest ships in the world 24/7, 365 days a year. China came to the Rose Garden in 2015 and looked the American people and American president in the eye, and lied to him. They built, essentially, seven or eight stationary aircraft carriers.They call them reefs. These are stationary aircraft carriers—Mischeif, Scarborough Reef. All these-?these reefs are basically aircraft carriers. And what they've done is they've put fire control, radar, search radars, and combat planes on them. These things can go.KB: They're 10,000-foot runways. So China said to us, specifically, when Obama was president, we will not militarize our islands in the South China Sea. We will not go to the Spratlys. Everything we're building is just for research purposes.How do we engage China now that we see that every single one of these islands, whether it's Fiery Cross, or Mischief, or the others have 10,000-foot runways, missile batteries on them, and all of the weapons that they said they never put there? Now they're landing nuclear bombers there. How do we engage them? Do we engage them over this? Or do we just let them keep going?SB: When I got into the White House as Chief Strategist with Mike Flynn when we first got there on the National Security Council in the transition, I said the three things you got do is devolve fighting capability to the combatant commanders. The White House was running the wars against ISIS.KB: Give it to Harry Harris.SB: Yeah. Well, no. In this regard, give it to the guys in CENTCOM and let them take on ISIS. You've got to devolve the power to fight wars and the ability fight wars back in combatant commanders. Number two, we've got to figure out, in this National Security Council thing, the Obama appointees and how we're going to get our own people in there over time.Number three, I said, we have to go back and get every document related to Obama's pivot to Asia. I said, I want to see exactly what they looked at. And people should know. In the White House, I worked seven days a week, 18-20 hours a day. OK? 50% of my time was on the pivot   to Asia, and why Obama did it, and what we were going to do to counter it.KB: It was Kurt Campbell's.SB: Kurt Campbell.KB: He wrote the book.SB: Here's what I found. I thought it would be a whole room of documents. It was pretty thin. And what I found is that the United States itself was not really engaged institutionally against China. You had some great people. But there wasn't all forces that kind of thought through, hey, an economic plan or a war plan against China to engage in this economic war. In fact, what you saw, the entire pivot to Asia became I think putting a marine brigade in Darwin, Australia, was basically the issue.Everybody told me Harry Harris is the man. So I got Harry Harris back. I spent a lot of time with him getting schooled on exactly what was going on. And the one thing I found that was shocking is that the South China Sea--when I was a young Naval officer, we went through the South China Sea guns up, radars up, and everything moving. It's called free navigation.We did, in international waters, what we wanted to do and when we wanted to do it because we're the United States Navy. OK? We keep the sea lanes free. What I found out now is they got these reefs and everything like that. And China--we only go through in what's called safe navigation. You go through with your radars off and no fire control solutions like a good little boy. You just kind of go. And you're basically asking their permission to go.KB: I was unaware of that.SB: When they lost the International Court, China considers the South China Sea to be an internal sea to China.KB: I know. The Nine-Dotted Line of 1949 is a joke.SB: Well, they think it's a territorial sea. They are not prepared. The first thing they'll tell you is that the territorial integrity and the sovereignty of China is not to be questioned. The more people that put it into documents, the more people that put it on TV shows, the more people that the re-emphasize that meme, they want because they believe that that's reality.You asked me what's going to happen. I said on my radio show five years ago they would be in a shooting war. The situation in Qatar, and the Persian Gulf, and the South China Sea are the two greatest hotspots of the world for global conflict to start. OK? It's not Korea. Korea's a vassal state of China. The whole Korean thing is nothing but a Chinese drama. OK?And President Trump is doing an amazing job on it. The South China Sea is a flashpoint. And you saw this the other night. As a former Naval officer, those two ships-?KB: 50 feet apart.SB: The USS Decatur was on patrol. And you basically had a Chinese destroyer come up and play chicken with it. They were 50 feet apart. If those two ships had hit, 200 or 300 sailors would have died. Absolutely. If those two ships had hit at the relative speeds they were going, we would have had a catastrophe.I don't know what could have happened to the weapons or what could happened to the fuel, but I'm telling you, at the speeds, what the Chinese did was reckless. And that was a challenge to us. Remember, what the Decatur did was go 12 miles from one of these reefs. OK? Now what the Chinese say is within 15 miles is their territorial water.They said it was a violation of their sovereign territory for a United States Navy to come 12 miles off a reef that they built into the South China Sea. My recommendation is I think the President of the United States, Donald J Trump, who to me has been very evenhanded with China and really tried to build a relationship--I think you ought to give the Chinese 72 hours to take every radar, every offensive thing on military, all the jets, everything out of the runways, and everything off the island.You get 72 hours to take it all off. And on the 72nd hour and one minute, the United States Navy is going to go in there take it off for them. And then I think they ought to take those reefs, and they ought to dismount them and turn them back into international waters. They say the United States is provocative by putting the United States Navy back into the South China Sea to keep the sea lanes open.I happen to believe where this relationship is going, and the lack of a real response the Chinese are going to have, that they're going to try to do something provocative in the South China Sea to try to initiate a response. And I think the president ought to be proactive on this. I think you ought to tell them they get 72 hours. If you don't take it off, we're going to take it off for you. And then dare them to stop the United States Navy going in to do it.KB: You're saying go to a kinetic conflict in 72 hours and a minute.SB: I didn't say go to a kinetic conflict.KB: Well, if we go try to take this off, they're not going to let that happen.SB: Well, the international courts ruled that it was inappropriate for them to be there. Why don't we enforce that? The Party of Davos -- when XI came and gave that great speech at Davos that they all jumped up about, they failed to say what you just mentioned. They looked the people of the United States in the eye and lied to them from the Rose Garden in 2015 with the President of the United States right next to him. OK?KB: And no one called him on it.SB: And never call him on it. And then you saw when the international courts came, they said, hey, this is totally unacceptable. There's no argument for it. It's got to be undone. They just sat there. They've sat there and said, hey, this is our territorial sea. And I realize people saying, Bannon, what kind of crazy whack job are you?We don't even know where it is in the South China Sea we're going go to war. People have to understand the global economy. And I'm a nationalist. OK? But the health of the American economy is based on trade. Populist and economic nationalists are not anti-trade. They're anti?radical concept of free trade when you're trading with a totalitarian, mercantilist society.What Trump wants and what he said from day one is fair trade and reciprocity. OK? And I think now we're going to get down to it with China. China is going to have to understand that Donald Trump is never going to back down on this. OK? He's a fair man. OK? He's a decent man. He's tried to work with them. But the days of the United States being pushed around like this are over.KB: Let me ask you a provocative question then.SB: How can we get any more provocative. I just said we're going to war in the South China Sea.KB: It's just the derivative of that. We're just going even more. It's equally as provocative. What if we were to just take our seventh fleet and go home?SB: Here's the thing. I think it's very important for people to remember is that the United States is a Pacific power. The whole development this country, the transcontinental railroad, and the whole West coast--the West coast--we are inextricably linked to the health of Asia's economy.KB: Well, Article V protections of Japan would be a real issue. I say that because if we were to have to go to--let's say we were to get to the point where we either had to go to war or had to come home-?SB: Coming home is not an option.KB: Not an option.SB: Not an option. The world would get to be an incredibly dark and dangerous place. You could have appeasement. You could have a Munich Right? You could have people say, hey, let's just pull out. They built the islands. They're a rising Naval power.KB: We don't want to fight.SB: And one of the cores about Trump's is it is non-interventionist. However, what America first stands for--national security--is where it's in the vital national security interest of the United States. It will be in the vital national security interests of our local partners. That's what America first means. Trump is not going around the world looking for fights.He's trying to calm things down with Russia. He's trying to calm things down in Syria. He's trying to find a solution in Afghanistan. He's trying to find a solution in Korea. He's trying to find a solution in Venezuela. And your viewers should understand Donald Trump didn't create any of this. This is Richard Haas and all the fucking geniuses of the Party at Davos.They're the ones that dumped Korea. They're the ones that dumped Afghanistan, Venezuela, and China on his lap. What Trump is saying is that our allies--it will be in their vital national security interests either. And you go around and talk to Singapore, and Thailand, and Indonesia, and Australia and ask them, hey, is an American Naval presence in this neighborhood a good thing or a bad thing.And they will tell you, no, it's a vital thing. We need America. We need America here because if we lose the South China Sea, we will lose any type of commerce. China would control the whole place. And the Chinese understand that. That's where they're trying to push us out. And they're starting to already have the psychological warfare of exactly that. Hey, it's 12,000 miles away. It's really Asia. What are we involved here for? This is another debacle.KB: You're already hearing it.SB: This is another debacle like Iraq and Afghanistan. Look, I'm the biggest proponent of America first. South China Sea in engagement with China is absolutely vital.KB: Interesting. OK. I have two more questions for you. One is why has the US not had a people management process in the US? And what I mean by that is you read the DIUX report. They call it declassified. Actually, it never was classified. Defense Department report on the infiltration of China into our research universities and our labs.SB: And our weapons labs.KB: Weapons labs funded by DARPA and the Air Force. Why haven't we put into place a proper people management process?SB: I want you to go back because I don't think people understand these reports. These reports are essentially declassified reports that showed that the 300,000 students are here on student visas and the 10,000 contractors that we have the weapons labs up to I think 2/3 could be intelligence assets. And some percentage are intelligence officers or agents.KB: And they're working in our labs. On weapons technology funded by our government.SB: This is political correctness and greed and avarice writ large. How did contractors--and let's call them out--Booz Allen and all these contractors--how do these contractors and these big government programs get so many Chinese nationals working into our weapons labs? Our weapons labs are at the cutting edge of national security. How did it happen?And so this has got to be done right away. I don't know why it's been a huge, I think, bone of contention inside the administration. The political correctness of it all--the Financial Times of London leaked the other day that my colleague, Stephen Miller, who's a terrific young man, actually had the plan in place to get all 300,000 Chinese students out of the country with a way to cut the visas off right away. Not that we we're going to execute on it, but it was even in thinking.And obviously, it got leaked. In the Times, it goes around the State Department, et cetera.Look at all the appeasers. I am so glad. I take great pride that someone like Susan Thornton now owns a farm up in Maine because she was part of this kind of rational accommodationist, this softness in the Defense Department, in the State Department, in our intelligence services that basically went along with what China wanted to do and looked the other way.KB: So I'm not a proponent of throwing all--there are 340,000 students here.SB: I am not a proponent. Here's what I am a proponent. I'm a proponent of if they're intelligence assets, I want to know that. What Miller's program was is that hey, if we can prove this, they've got to go home. OK?KB: And I'm not even focused directly on China, or India, or anywhere specifically. But why can't we have a policy with the sovereignty and national security of our own country? Why can't we say if it's a weapons program, you just need to be an American citizen and maybe should be a naturally born American citizen?SB: You're asking basic, fundamental questions.KB: It's simple.SB: I think, actually, that's on the book, and they get waivers I believe that technically, when you look in the details, that's actually the fact that there's kind of waivers given to this because people look the other way.KB: OK. One more issue is the Confucius Institutes. The Confucius Institutes are on many of our colleges. They're funded directly by the PLA. Why do our colleges allow Confucius Institutes on campus?SB: It's unacceptable. It would be like in China, having something funded by the CIA that was directly-?KB: Or the Catholic church.SB: Or the Catholic church. But not the Catholic church because the Catholic church just cut a deal that lets China--no. But this is a huge issue. Pope Francis just cut a deal that lets the atheist that run the regime in Beijing actually pick our bishops. So the Catholic church would not be a good idea since they've already kowtowed. It would be equivalent of having CIA or DNI have a student center that promoted CIA culture in China.OK. That's not happening. OK. You know why it's not happening? Because the Chinese say, hey, that's not going to happen because that may affect our sovereignty. You've got to unwind them.KB: How?SB: I think you just sit there and just shut them down. Right?KB: Under what law?SB: Hang on. This whole thing about people saying, oh, well, they're not that bad. They're pushing culture. And they're helping students learn Mandarin. Hey, they're financed by the PLA.KB: They have server rooms in the Confucius Institutes. What the F's going on?SB: All of this is going to be a shock to the American people. Here's why the American people don't know this. Because nobody reports. Has 60 Minutes ever gone and done a Confucius Institute?KB: They should.SB: They should have done it 20 years ago. The reason this is coming up is there are people now fed up with this. And that's why in this Trump movement, it was Donald Trump. And when he came into the government that changed it that now other people and other voices are coming up, and you're seeing a real pushback. But to allow this to happen at our universities-?Let's be brutally frank. Why is it always Hudson Institute that's having Miles Kwok, or last night Mike Pence, and Dr. Pillsbury? Why is it always Hudson Institute? Why is it not the other institutes having these kind of conferences?KB: Well, because China has paid many of them.SB: The last thing that maybe I'll close on is Li Hu, the economic strategist for President Xi. And I've had the opportunity to know him and build a little bit of a relationship. He's a very brilliant guy. When he came to do the major negotiation that didn't work out in June of this past year, and the very first day, he didn't go to the White House at first. He didn't go to Treasury first.He shows up, and the very first day, he spent on Capitol Hill with the quote, unquote, "free traders" in the Republican Party. Remember, the greatest blowback Trump got on this was the Republicans. It was the Republicans that went crazy. Oh, you got to do free trade. You got to do free trade.All the nomenclature that we've been using in regards to China has always been dismissed as oh, that's just China. And so all the nomenclatures have just been happy talk. And the words don't really mean what they are. And it's people like yourself, it's people like Miles Kwok, it's people like Dr. Pillsbury that are now starting to question this. And I think you see this whole thing that from quote, unquote, "engagement to confrontation."What they're pinning us on now is engagement versus confrontation. And we're being painted as the war party, right? We're the crazy guys who want to go to war. No. What we want to stop is an economic war that's been against the United States.And if you look at the group that's in the engagement process, all they've been in is being tapped along by China in these strategic economic dialogues that didn't go anywhere for 25 or 30 years, and put us in the place where we were de-industrialized by a predatory power. And China's predatory capitalism is what they stand on. So I couldn't be prouder than President Trump.And for people who have not seen that speech, that speech is going to go down in history as an inflection point because Mike Pence yesterday essentially threw down and said, hey, no more games. We understand what you're doing. We understand what you're up to. We understand you have a full force of government against us. And we're going to counter that. And we're going to win.KB: I appreciate that. When you pull into the Commerce Department, right above the entry way where you drive through, there's a quote from Benjamin Franklin. It says, commerce must be fair and equitable. And I think that's where we need to be. I don't think we should be overly punitive. I don't think we should be combative.I think we should say we just need a fair shake at things. And what you're saying is we haven't had one. And that's something we believe too. And the good news is I think in the last six months to a year, culminating with Pence's speech a day ago is finally, the narrative is changing despite all of the efforts from those in China. So thanks for being here today.SB: Thanks. Thanks for having me. It was great.KB: It was really nice.SB: In this undisclosed location.KB: Undisclosed location. We're here with Miles.SB: You've got to be undisclosed. Except he's live streaming it constantly, so that's-?KB: I don't know who's more controversial, you or Miles. But we'll see soon.SB: Miles is a whole different league. I'm junior varsity compared to that.KB: Thank you. Thanks for coming.SB: Thanks for having me.GW: Obviously Steve Bannon and his former boss, Donald Trump, are both very polarizing figures. But hopefully after watching that, it's given you perhaps a bit more perspective and certainly some context on the view of the escalating conflict with China within the White House. For me, it was a fantastic conversation. My thanks to Kyle and Steve for bringing it to us.