RUSSIA, CHINA AND THE DON PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES - WILL IT BE WAR? PART 2.

Donald Trump, even before he takes up residency in the White House, has loudly declared his intention to cause major upheavals in the how his Administration will do business in America and the world. We might not be far wrong if we were to get the impression that Donald Trump is currently operating as if he and his Administration is and will be running the government as if it is a mafia or teamster organisation.

Already he has declared his intention to move America's Embassy to Jerusalem, in an attempt to strengthen America's support for Israel, and the realisation of his and his supporters Christian agendas. Similarly, the soon to become The Don President, has gone out of his way to declare effectively, war on China. Not just a trade war, which we know can lead to military conflict, but actual war with China. 

The Don has sought to give succour to China's detractors, such as the leader of Taiwan, just as how he has, effectively, sought to reassure the Prime Minister of Israel that he should not be too bothered by the recent UN's Resolution forbidding that country from continuing to build settlements on occupied lands, as he, The Don, will endeavour to roll it back when he takes office.

Now, it seems to me that China, over the past 10 or more years, has been a significant and substantial driver of the world's economy, which has benefited many countries, including America. By helping them to begin to crawl out of the pit of economic despair which the rotten and greedy capitalist have plunged the world into in 2007/8. China's industrial resurgence has had a multiplier effect on the global economy, putting it back on the road to recovery. 

The capitalists have invested heavily in the opportunities China offered them to minimise their costs and maximise their profits. Of course, as is the way with capitalism, which is constantly set to exploit opportunities promising lucrative returns, many companies set up operations in China and opted to get their supplies from that country. Yes, resulting in the contraction or displacement of industries in America which could not compete with the emerging ones in China.

That, of course, led to job losses in America and the dereliction of communities. This is not of course anything new. People need jobs to survive, and if the jobs are lost due to new and more economical supplies coming onto the market, or being demanded because of, say, changed lifestyles, such as having healthier and more sustainable fuel or food, or building material supplies, then the economic base on which that community was founded, is lost, and the community atrophies and dies.  The people of that community then have to move or seek jobs in other places and commute; providing the transport infra-structure is there. 

We can appreciate people not wanting to lose their/our jobs, but, let us face it, by what right do we insist on 'the right' produce poisonous products or to produce such products in a way which is harmful to humans and the environment?

Sustainable communities need to diversify into being more than just a one industry and/or one produce-dependent community. This is why industries and companies hedge their bets, as it were, by not just having one product in their portfolio. It is the same with communities, or for that matter, countries, such as those which base their future on reliance on their main produce, whether it be oil and gas, timber, palm oil or cocoa production, etc. Left to the capitalists, whose primary motive is to make profits, and the politicians and local officials who are in their employ and lack vision to plan for the future, the life and sustainability of a community, indeed, a country, can be placed in great jeopardy.


To be continued.