The Psychopathic Criminal Enterprise Called America
By
Larry Romanoff – November 05, 2020
I provided in earlier articles some evidence
of the fundamental criminality of American corporations, with only a brief
introduction to the criminality of the US government and of Bernays' 'invisible
people' who control it from behind the scenes. This latter subject is too large
to be adequately dealt with here, but later articles in this series will be devoted
in part to the crimes committed domestically and internationally by the US
government and its agencies. These comprise many astonishing events that are
genuine and well-documented but that have been totally erased from the history
books and from American public consciousness, and therefore have disappeared
from the awareness of the world. It is time to bring them back into the open.
This is important because American multi-national corporations (MNCs) are
reading from the script written for them by the US government and its
puppet-masters. For the present, I will provide a few details to make a point
about the close links between the two sectors.
Several years ago, Jim Kouri reported an FBI
study which stated:
"...
character traits exhibited by serial killers or criminals may be observed in
many within the political arena. They share the traits of psychopaths who are
not sensitive to altruistic appeals, such as sympathy for their victims or
remorse or guilt over their crimes. They possess the personality traits of
lying, narcissism, selfishness, and vanity. These are the people to whom we
have entrusted our fate. Is it any wonder that America is failing at home and
world-wide?"
The
important point is that those "within the political arena", namely
American Presidents, Vice-Presidents, Secretaries of State, Defense
Secretaries, White House staff, and many Senators and Congressmen display many
or most of the traits of criminal psychopaths and mass murderers. They could
have included a great many corporate executives in that statement, and indeed
the corporate arena is a primary source of the psychopaths necessary to
populate the White House and Congress, the Departments of State, Defense and
Commerce. The government of the United States of America has always been a
criminal enterprise, ruled most often by thugs and genocidal psychopathic
killers. As outrageous as that sounds to a Western ear, it fits all the facts
and happens to be the defensible truth. Americans will of course want to
profess outrage, and attribute such accusations to a vicious
"anti-American" bias, but the statements are based on fact. Evidence
of US government atrocities is not difficult to find.
Consider
Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney,
respectively George Bush's Secretary of Defense and Vice-President, two of the
most savage and malignant humans that have ever cursed this earth. Rumsfeld was
at one time the president of the Searle pharmaceutical company and Cheney the
CEO of Halliburton oil well services. Where do you suppose these two pustulent
stars of American political life acquired their talent as pathological killers?
How do you imagine they were induced to conceive and build the largest network
of torture facilities in the world's history? Do you suppose they joined the US
government and were so corrupted by the experience they became criminally
insane? You know that didn't happen. Rumsfeld and Cheney were psychopaths and
mass killers long before they became kingpins of "the world's greatest
democracy", and were prized by the government precisely because of these
'talents'. They weren't given high
places in the US government in spite of their criminal tendencies, but because
of those tendencies. From this one example of hundreds I could cite, you
can begin to appreciate the sociopathic malignancy that permeates, and is
shared by, both the American government corridors of power and those of the
American MNCs.
I would add to this an insight gained from
long exposure to the corporate world, that sociopathic tendencies increase in
direct relationship to the steps on the corporate ladder. That is to say, the
higher a man (or woman) rises in corporate rank and responsibility, the more
pronounced are their anti-social, psychopathic and sociopathic characteristics.
This is so true that promotion to the higher levels becomes increasingly
impossible without these tendencies. And this means that in very large part the
senior executives of large corporations are fundamentally pathological
criminals, arrogant sociopaths driven by greed. This may appear a shocking
statement to many readers, but it is a defensible truth.
Consider Steve Jobs, formerly of Apple. Put
aside for a moment your Hello Kitty feelings for Steve the 'innovative designer
of the iphone' and consider Steve 'the greedy sociopath'. There are not many of
us lacking empathy for the 1.5 million young people at Foxconn being paid
peanuts for assembling iphones and living in a concentration camp environment
where they experienced so much pressure they were committing suicide. That situation is a direct
reflection of the personality and character of Steve Jobs, and it does you no
good to delude yourself into believing otherwise. In my article on Nestlé’s
baby milk marketing, I observed that,
for the executives at Nestlé, it wasn't their intention to kill babies but that
they simply didn't care if the babies died. It was precisely the same with
Steve Jobs; he didn't want those young people to kill themselves; he just
didn't care. You or I in that position would order Foxconn to back off the
pressure and pay the workers an appropriate salary, an attitude stemming from
basic humanity. Steve Jobs, with $200 billion sitting in a cash pile, plus
billions in his personal bank account, did no such thing. He certainly knew of
the situation and unquestionably had the power to change it by a simple command
to the owners of Foxconn and an agreement to pay higher costs for the
manufacture of his products. Steve Jobs made a deliberate choice to not do
that. So did Tim Cook.
The
executives of Nike, KFC, McDonald's and many others, are the same. Those at
Coca-Cola and Nestlé are worse. You have read of the pharma companies who are
perhaps the worst of all. These latter are precisely as I described them above:
fundamentally pathological criminals, arrogant sociopaths driven by greed. In
the corridors of corporate power we will of course find some exceptions, but
not many; most high-level corporate executives fit the psychopathic mold
perfectly. They have no sympathy for their victims; they feel no guilt or
remorse for their actions. They are morally bankrupt to the point where their
only measure is money. This is why
General Motors and Ford made decisions to not recall their automobiles but to
let the customers die from faulty ignition switches and gas tanks; it was
cheaper.
The
general public typically sees things as disconnected events instead of part of
an integrated plan, thanks in large part to the US media who steadfastly avoid
presenting a context, with the result that we see only a local event instead of
an integrated picture. Local news media inform us that P&G paid a fine for
false advertising and fraudulent promotion, and we see this as a one-off event,
perhaps an aberration and by no means their standard practice. But our
perceptions are altered when we discover that Argentina stripped Procter &
Gamble of its commercial registration for fraud, prohibiting P&G from
operating in that country, and that EU regulators fined P & G $300 million
for fixing prices. The media tell us Nike was charged with false advertising
and we see this as an isolated event, but when we learn Nike is one of the four
most-boycotted firms in the world, and the reasons, our perceptions change. We
learn of Pepsi buying and killing several Chinese brands and attribute this to
various shortcomings of Chinese origin and unfair behavior on the part of
Pepsi. But when we learn that virtually all American (and some European) MNCs,
including P&G, Coca-Cola, L'Oreal and others, have cooperated in buying and
killing hundreds of treasured Chinese brands, we now see these events as an
established and deliberate pattern to destroy all domestic competition, and we
understand something we didn't understand before.
We
learn of Apple violating warranties in China or of Coca-Cola's arrogance in
dealing with its contaminated beverages, but when we learn these companies
behave in similar fashion all around the world, we can form a better picture.
We are shocked by GSK's recent astonishing bribery scandal in China, but again
view it as a local phenomenon, an isolated event we tend to blame on China or
Chinese culture. But when we learn that GSK was involved in the same fraudulent
schemes in many countries simultaneously, the picture changes, and when we
further learn that all American and European pharma companies conduct
themselves in the same way in all countries, we can now see the pharma industry
as it really is. We read of the US government attempting to bully China to
commit economic suicide by appreciating the international value of the RMB and
perhaps attribute this to misbehavior on China's part, but when we learn that
the US has done the same to every nation that posed a threat to American trade
supremacy, as Japan did, we can understand this in a context of American
imperialism rather than shortcomings on the part of China. It is only when we
assemble all the pieces that we can see the true picture of any government,
corporation or event.
The Chinese media and authorities accused
Coca-Cola executives of arrogance in their dealing with the massive
contamination problems in their beverages. Some thought the accusation might
have been a bit strongly-worded, but when we learn that Coca-Cola executives threatened to sue the government of India if it
didn't immediately stop reports that Coca-Cola products were flooded with
pesticides, now we understand something we didn't know before. When a local
government in Florida ran ads claiming the local tap water was "cheaper, purer
and safer than bottled water", Nestlé
immediately threatened to sue the government. When the UK government made
public statements about Starbucks paying no tax, company executives demanded an immediate meeting with Prime
Minister Cameron to instruct him to keep his mouth shut.
When government authorities
sent letters to all consumer products companies to attend an important meeting
on China's warranty policies, Apple executives returned the letters unopened.
When
we learn these facts and many more like them, we now have a better context for
evaluating foreign companies in China. In an article on changing cultural
values, I wrote that the Americans are on a search and destroy mission to
over-write China's cultural heritage and replace it with American so-called
'values' as a prelude to effective colonisation and control of the government.
Seen in isolation, that concern may appear highly exaggerated, but when we
learn that the Americans have done precisely that in the Philippines, Vietnam,
Indonesia and many other nations, we then have the context to see a pattern and
suddenly the concern is no longer an exaggeration.
•The Lying Must Stop
When Pfizer
was forced to pay $2.3 billion to settle civil and criminal charges, the
largest health care fraud settlement and the largest criminal fine of any kind
ever, Amy Schulman, Pfizer’s general counsel, dissembled by saying Pfizer
employees "spend their lives dedicated to bringing truly important
medications to patients and physicians in an appropriate manner". When AstraZeneca pleaded guilty to felony
charges in one of their massive health care frauds and was forced to pay
hundreds of millions in fines, a spokesman said the company "adheres to
high ethical standards in the pharmaceutical industry, and doesn't tolerate any
illegal or unethical conduct." After Chinese police discovered evidence of
15 years of "massive and systemic bribery" and other crimes at GSK, company executives stated,
"We have zero tolerance for unethical behavior", claiming further
they had investigated their business in China and "found no evidence of
bribery or corruption" - while paying billions of dollars in fines in the
US and other countries for precisely the same crimes at the same time. When Nikon's D600 camera proved fatally
defective, with all units being replaced in the West but replacement and repair
being denied to customers in China, the company glibly stated that Nikon
"provides Chinese customers with high quality, standardized global service".
When a customer paid $20,000 for a defective and broken piece of LV luggage, the company refused to
replace it, claiming "We offer all customers (worldwide) the same
standardised service." Immediately prior to replacing 400,000 defective
transmissions they knowingly imported into China, Volkswagen executives denied any defects in their cars, claiming
any problems were the fault of the drivers. When Marriott Hotels were caught jamming customers' Wi-Fi hotspots to
force them to pay outrageous prices for using the hotel's Wi-Fi network,
Marriott executives claimed they weren't jamming anything but were protecting
hotel guests from "rogue wireless hotspots and identity theft."
After two people died of pesticide poisoning from its Minute Maid drinks, and others became seriously ill from mercury poisoning, Coca-Cola's senior managers insisted all their products were "completely safe to drink." After thousands of Coca-Cola drinkers in Europe suffered rupturing of their red blood cells from drinking contaminated beverages, a Coca-Cola executive stated, "It may make you feel sick, but it is not harmful.'' After American OSI and its Husi subsidiary were discovered to have been conducting the largest contaminated food operation in China's history, Husi's Yang Liqun told the media "Husi has a strict quality control system". When mothers complained their babies became "violently ill" after drinking Nestlé's baby milk, company executives stated there is "nothing wrong with our milk" and that all Nestlé products were "absolutely safe". Having its stores shut down after repeated discoveries of massive, organised consumer frauds, Wal-Mart placed signs on its stores that read, "operating with credibility and integrity and safeguarding the interests of the customers."
With this now-common flood of outright lies
automatically issued by the PR departments of all MNCs (but especially
American), it seems to me the line has been crossed. When a government health
department states that Coca-Cola is not safe to drink because it contains
excessive levels of toxic pesticides, chlorine and other chemicals, that
statement is definitive. When a Coca-Cola executive then flatly denies in the
media that his drinks contain pesticides and further claims they are perfectly
safe to drink, those statements constitute false advertising and criminal
consumer fraud and should be treated accordingly. If those same statements were
published in an advertisement, enormous fines would be levied for fraudulent
advertising and criminal recklessness. It should be the same when those
statements are made verbally to the media, especially considering they have far
greater public reach and are more likely to be believed by the public than are
TV commercials. Each time a multi-national corporation is caught in criminal
activity, its executives turn to the media with its vast public exposure, and
they lie. They are never held to account because the statement is attributed to
the company, but those false statements were not made by a 'company' but by a
real live person who should be identified and held to account. There is no
justification for the anonymity granted to these corporate executives who are
escaping punishment for outrageous acts of consumer fraud. The lying must stop.
We have the same problem with foreign journalists both inside China
and outside the country. The coverage is invariably one-sided, often omitting
crucial details that lead readers to very different and usually very incorrect
conclusions. Articles are frequently outrageously dishonest, and too often
riddled with outright lies. When GSK was fined and its executives convicted of
systemic bribery and fraud, Western journalists referred only to
"allegations" or "accusations", clearly implying that no
proof existed. Andrew Browne of the WSJ
wrote an article lamenting Google's demise in China, whining about the tragedy
of domestic Chinese companies "dominating an Internet market of 400
million users", neglecting to note that Google, an American company
'dominates' the American market. We can reasonably ask why it is okay for an
American search engine to dominate the American market but it is not okay for a
Chinese search engine to dominate the Chinese market. Browne also whined about
US makers of wind turbines and solar panels "being shut out of big
renewable-energy projects" in China but neglected to mention that Chinese
makers of wind turbines and solar panels have been completely shut out of the
US market. In an article on Wal-Mart I discussed John Bussey's (again of
the WSJ) unforgivably dishonest portrayal of Wal-Mart's activities in China. The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal,
the Washington Post, CNN, the Financial
Times, the Economist, the London Telegraph, Canada's National Post and so
many more politically Right-Wing media perform in precisely the same way,
skewing the context and eliminating essential details for the sole obvious
purpose of slandering China.
The
Wall Street Journal is perhaps the worst of these in terms of frequency of
biased and slanderous articles, but none of the Western media are trustworthy,
and most of their journalists lie to an astonishing extent. In 2013, the WSJ
ran an article that had by that time become a template followed at least
hundreds and quite possibly thousands of times since. The article was titled,
"China Uses Dairy Scare to Help Domestic Firms", so you can already
see where this is going. Any foreign, but especially American, firm that is
criticised in China for anything, is automatically a sacrificial lamb used by
China to enhance the development or competitiveness of domestic Chinese firms.
When GSK was charged with massive fraud and bribery, the Western media
portrayed GSK as innocent and pure as the driven snow, being unjustly attacked
solely to assist Chinese pharma companies. When VW was charged with
fraudulently installing hundreds of thousands of defective transmissions in its
cars, the media stated that China’s intent was to boost the market share of
domestic brands by destroying Volkswagen. When Coca-Cola was forced to destroy
a couple of hundred thousand cases of drinks contaminated with chlorine and
pesticides, the Western media portrayed this as a cynical action to enhance
local brands by irreparably damaging the American company. When Apple was
criticised on China’s CCTV for its illegal and racist service and warranty
policies, the Western media attributed this to the government giving Xiaomi “a
bit of a market lift”. In another case, according to the WSJ, the foreign
brands of baby milk products recalled and destroyed were not really
contaminated with deadly bacteria but, even if they were, the recall was
ordered only to raise the market share of domestic brands. And of course, the
tens of millions of dollars paid by these same foreign companies for conspiracy
and price-fixing were merely unfair allegations against innocent Western firms,
even though they had already engaged in such illegal practices in many foreign
countries.
Another
similar template occurs when the Chinese public becomes outraged at the
criminal behavior of an American MNC in China, as they were with Apple,
Coca-Cola, and P&G among others. In these cases, according to Western
journalists, the authorities took action against these firms not because of
their criminal behavior but because the government was terrified that civil
unrest might "challenge the legitimacy" of China's government. Given
that 1.5 billion Chinese consider their government perfectly legitimate, the
point is moot, but the impression deliberately implanted in the minds of
Western readers is very different from the reality.
Yet
another template is the insulting disparagement of the Chinese media in
reporting any negative stories about American firms or the US government,
referring to every newspaper or TV station as "the mouthpiece of the
Communist Party", tarring every Chinese news report with dirty political
overtones that are never justified since Chinese media never engage in
politically-biased op-ed pieces disguised as news, as is done in the Western
media. In the US, when the NYT or WSJ report that General Motors has recalled
yet another million defective automobiles, the story simply delivers the facts,
without disparaging political commentary. But when the Chinese media report a
recall of GM autos, the NYT and WSJ journalists claim the "mouthpiece of
the communist party" is unfairly damaging an American brand solely to
assist domestic manufacturers. And yet it is the NYT and WSJ that are in real
terms the primary "mouthpieces" of the US State Department and of
American criminal capitalism. It is disturbing that these Western media can
recruit native Chinese to participate in these ideological frauds, people like Pi Xiaoqing in Beijing, who contribute
to trashy articles about their own country. Maybe she would prefer to emigrate
to the US where she could boost her own "tarnished image".
The reporting by foreign journalists on China
is so often sufficiently dishonest and slanderous as to qualify for criminal
charges, almost none of the content able to withstand scrutiny. I have
identified a few of these articles and exposed the lack of integrity of the
journalists, but probably to no avail. Most of us would be humiliated to be
reproached publicly and exposed for this kind of deliberate dishonorable
conduct but these foreign journalists are neither ashamed nor embarrassed and
instead appear proud of their cleverness. Certainly, they are insensible to
disgrace. But perhaps there's little point in going on about it. Almost all the
columnists writing for the Western media fit this mold and, from all the media
articles I have monitored and read, my conclusion is that most every American
journalist is congenitally unable to tell the truth. I have in preparation an
entire Volume on the Western media, which will contain hundreds of examples of
Western "media mouthpieces" deceiving their publics with an
astonishing array of false and misleading stories. It will include a discussion
of the reporters and columnists who wrote those stories, especially those in
the Beijing Foreign Correspondent's Club, a veritable tsunami of mouthpieces
whose only apparent credential would be a pass in Ideology 101. And in fact
many quality foreign correspondents will confide that a prerequisite for such a
position is a healthy dose of 'Anti-China' to make their articles morally
acceptable to Western readers. One such journalist with a French network
confided that "If you get too cozy working in China, they will rotate you
out to cover other another region". The message is clear: if you are in
China and writing about China, your assignment is largely unrelated to
journalism and reporting news but primarily to find negative political slants
that place China in a poor light. If you can't find a story, manufacture one.
Lastly, many columnists in the Western media
took note of what appeared to be Chinese citizens posting comments on Weibo or
WeChat that were supportive of Apple or other American firms and critical or
even condemnatory of CCTV, China's government authorities, and China itself.
But the truth is that few if any of those posters were actually Chinese, the
posts were most likely being made from CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia,
not Changsha or Shenzhen.
These
people use what are called "sock puppets", software permitting
creation of multiple fake people to populate the social media on the Internet.
An unlimited number of virtual people can be created by only a few real
individuals, giving these government agencies the power to create an illusion
of public consensus. The software is extremely detailed, providing extensive
backgrounds for these fictitious people, permitting a single human to assume
the identities of as many fake people as desired, and make them appear to
actually be in a certain physical place or even to be attending an actual
event. They control the IP address, making it impossible to detect that a
single person in one location is orchestrating all that activity. The program
manual stated, "There is a variety
of social media tricks we can use to add a level of realness to all fictitious
personas". The contract requires "virtual private servers"
located in and outside the US, to give false locational information, and also
requires what it calls "traffic mixing", blending the persona
controllers' internet usage with that of the general public in a manner that
offers "excellent cover and powerful deniability". Many US government
agencies have obtained and are using this "Persona management
software" to manipulate public opinion on key issues in the US. Government
agencies regularly flood the US social media with fake people making fake posts
in support of government positions, and discrediting those who are critical of
the US government. This is pro-government propaganda used to manage public
perception and kill political activism. This is called
"counter-messaging" and has been used for years, especially by the US
military. The Pentagon has made no secret of its activities in promulgating
"black propaganda" - which means knowingly spreading lies to mislead
and misinform the public for the purpose of stifling political dissent. In its
increasing fear of political activism, the US government has labeled the
Internet as a "breeding ground for domestic terrorists", and appears
to include in this category anyone who questions the government's version of
events. The US government has also used these social media tools in smear
campaigns against reporters and other high-profile individuals who criticise US
government policy, to the extent of creating fake Facebook and Twitter accounts
in their names, containing fake posts meant to be personally damaging, and have
even created fake websites and Wikipedia pages purporting to belong to an
individual, all for the purpose of discrediting "dissidents". This is
regular practice in the United States of America, the "birthplace of all
freedoms", the nesting ground of "free speech", and the one
nation in the world that "treasures dissidents". And that mythical
narrative is all rubbish. As you will read later, the US government is so
terrified of domestic civil unrest that the Department of Homeland Security has
built and staffed more than 800 internment camps, all empty and waiting for
another 'Occupy Wall Street' protest - or the next American revolution.
I mention this because these 'sock puppets'
are now in widespread use by the US military and intelligence agencies around
the world as part of a massive program to actively manipulate and lead public
opinion in many countries, usually with the intent of inciting civil unrest and
revolution. Because of this, the use of
Chinese social media by the Americans has increased exponentially in the past
few years, where we now see accounts on Weibo and Weixin (Wechat) that purport
to contain posts of Chinese nationals but which in many cases are clearly fake
accounts operated by non-Chinese and are almost certainly American in origin.
When China's CCTV network reveals problems with American products like Apple's
iphones or P&G's SK-II cosmetics, we immediately see postings condemning
either the network or the government for criticising anything American. When
Apple was revealed to have been charging Chinese customers 50% of the purchase
price for a repair of a defective iphone that was still under warranty, we saw
posts staunchly defending the practice while claiming CCTV should spend their
time worrying about housing prices rather the cost of repairing mobile phones.
We don't need much wisdom to realise these posts are not genuine; Chinese
owners of Apple products were widely incensed at the warranty policies,
evidenced by Apple's sales immediately plunging by 35% and the company's
products falling from first to sixth place in only a few months. And in any
case, nobody praises a company for charging them a huge amount for warranty
repairs that by law must be performed free of charge.
McDonald's
was one of the companies covered in CCTV's Consumer Day report, and once again
did what most American companies do when under attack in China - they had sock
puppets (fake people) posting defenses on Weibo and Weixin, and even began a
movement called "I believe McDonald’s and not CCTV", and asking all
online citizens to "use your voice to support McDonald’s". But they
went too far and it became quite obvious the so-called 'support' was
fabricated. The fake posts became so numerous and so obvious that McDonald's
had to issue a public denial of their involvement in the scandal, though it was
also apparent that the Internet postings had been organised by either
McDonald's or the company's advertising agency and were in no way spontaneous.
We saw the same with the scandals involving KFC's chemical chicken, the American sock puppets doing their best
to protect American businesses, usually posting from the US under fake names,
one of these calling himself (or herself) Chi Boxiong, posting on Weibo with
the comment, "Speaking truthfully, KFC's quality is better than everywhere
else."
These 'sock puppet' posts are very often
political, with almost no limit in their application. In September of 2016, a
launch of one of China's observation satellites appeared to have suffered a
malfunction, leaving the Americans extraordinarily curious as to the mechanics
of that failure, if indeed it were a failure. But no information was published
on the matter, upon which the Wall Street Journal immediately ran an article
claiming that many "Chinese citizens" were "irked",
"rankled", and resentful of that lack of information, claiming
"the news spread steadily across Chinese social media", posts
purporting to be made by Mainland Chinese, accusing the government and mass
media of "blatant censorship and hypocrisy", lacking
'professionalism' and "propaganda departments" not being frank about
failures. But once again, we need only use our heads to know the posts could
not be genuine. China has had remarkable success with its satellite launches,
but launch failures are a normal hazard for every country and are not
especially rare. But this was not like sending a man to the moon or some other
such event involving national pride and capturing the attention of a nation.
Observation and communication satellites are regularly launched without
publicity and are of interest only to those launching them, there being no sane
people in any nation who would have motivation to be so angered as to accuse
their government of censorship and hypocrisy for not bothering to provide
detailed information on the technical causes of a simple failed satellite
launch. It was the Americans who wanted to know what happened, and this was
their way of needling China while attempting to mislead Chinese to believe
their own citizens were turning against their government for its "official
secrecy".
•The Ultimate Source
A major result of American political and
religious ideological programming is a marked intolerance, and in fact a
contempt, for all other peoples and cultures, due entirely to their supremacist
Christian racism, which is inherent in American ideology to a shocking degree.
Americans are, and have always been, repugnantly and unapologetically racist.
An Al-Jazeera article wrote that religion and racism are such completely
natural features in the American landscape that to even notice them would be
like noticing the air you breathe. Americans individually, their government
leaders and their media, are so steeped in white colonial supremacy that they
feature a daily barrage of negative commentary on China and other nations to
mock, ridicule and condemn cultural attitudes or practices that conflict with
their own political-religious narrative. It is their peculiarly twisted version
of evangelical Christianity that produced the overwhelming conviction in
Americans that they were special, closer to their Creator than any other living
beings. As one author wrote,
"To
understand Americans, we must first understand that they believe they are
"good". Not good in the sense that they behave in accord with the
abstract idea of good (which they in fact do not), but rather they are the
embodiment of good - good incarnate. ... its effect in the American mind means
that, by definition, whatever Americans do is "good", and that
whenever Christian Americans choose to do something, however intrinsically
evil, their actions are still morally righteous. Moreover, not only do
Americans believe they are good, but anyone not adhering to their framework of
religious, political or commercial ideas is either primitive or an aberration,
and is not only 'wrong' but probably 'evil'."
Of course they're crazy, but this is America.
These pathologically-twisted religious convictions are so deeply-programmed
into individual Americans that they could never be extracted, with evidence of
their god-given moral superiority exhibiting itself in sometimes surprising
places.
One
American complained that as a geologist working for a Chinese company, his
Chinese exploration manager told him that it was no business of his how many
people died in the Cultural Revolution. His reaction was one of disbelief and
offense, and of his being the victim of a great moral wrong. He said he felt
"like a Judas Iscariot" - a despicable traitor to his God and his
religion, for not forcing the issue with his manager. But if I question my
American manager about how many people his government tortured to death in
Guantanamo Bay, he would tell me to shut up, mind my own business, and do my
work. But it's not like that for the Americans because, steeped in the
supremacist racism of their twisted Christianity, they have not only a right
but a holy obligation to challenge other nations on any wrongs real or
imagined, saddling every individual American with a God-given mission to ensure
that all individuals in all other countries confess their mistakes to him
personally. After all, he's an American.
It is this same morally-superior goodness that
produces the flood of China-bashing articles by the US media and by American
journalists resident in China. Their misrepresentations of the truth are
necessary to do good. When they write their dishonest and misleading articles
about China, they justify it because they are "good" and are
punishing a sinner who is "not good". Sometimes, to do God's Holy
work, it is necessary to tell vicious lies about people but, since I am good
and I act only to do good, my god will approve. The foolish myth of American
Exceptionalism stems from the same source: Americans, being good, have a
natural mandate from their god to influence, control and determine the fate of
the world. And if they choose to do this with the barrel of a gun, we already
know that God and Guns are a natural and blessed combination. The countless
millions of deaths, the hundreds of millions of innocents living in hellish
misery from American involvement, are, by definition, the result of doing
"good". The horrors, the racism, the misery and poverty, were all
good things done by good people doing good. To see all this properly, we must
only adopt the profound belief that Americans, and only Americans, are
"good". God does not want his 'exceptional' children to compromise
with sinful heathens. This may seem unfair, but who are we to question God's
will? To summarise all of the above in one sentence, Americans have been destined by their god to either convert or kill
anything that is different from them.
When
you insert into this equation the pathological greed underlying the Western
form of unrestrained capitalism, you now understand something about America.
*
Larry
Romanoff is
a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive
positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international
import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan
University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA
classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of
ten books generally related to China and the West. His writing has been
translated into more than 20 languages and is available on more than 100
foreign-language websites around the world. He can be contacted
at: 2186604556@qq.com.
Larry Romanoff is one of the
contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new COVID-19 anthology ”When
China Sneezes”.
Copyright © Larry Romanoff, Moon of Shanghai, 2020
+
