风萧萧_Frank
以文会友
How a Jewish Catholic Canadian became a scholar of Confucianism and how teaching elite students at Tsinghua University made him a fan of the Chinese meritocratic ideal
After Oxford, Princeton and Stanford, and being a university dean in China, Daniel Bell is breathing easy in Hong Kong, where his Mandarin no longer sticks out
Kate Whitehead 26 Jun, 2023
In the 1960s in Quebec, Canada, the anglophone and francophone worlds were completely separate, but there were exceptions, including my family.
My father was an anglophone Jew and my mother was a francophone Catholic and they married against the wishes of their parents a couple of years before I was born, in 1964. My sister is 11 months younger.
We were brought up in a bilingual family. Eventually my grandparents reconciled, but there was an issue about which religion we should be brought up in. My father wanted me circumcised and my mother wanted me baptised – they decided on both. I heard later that when I was being baptised my father was very upset and ran into the church and rang the church bell and it was quite a tense time.
When I was about two, my parents decided the best way to maintain harmony in the family was not to have any religion at all, so I was brought up in a not really religious environment except when I went to my grandparents’ home.
Bell at the Faculty of Law at the University of Hong Kong, where he is professor of political theory. Photo: courtesy of Daniel A. Bell
With my Jewish grandparents we celebrated Passover and with my Catholic grandparents we went to church. I did not experience it as a conflict and maintained an interest in both sides.
Playing the fool
My mother worked as a secretary and my father (Don Bell) was a journalist and writer. His best-known work, Saturday Night at the Bagel Factory, won the Stephen Leacock Medal for Humour in 1973.
My mother had bipolar disorder. Sometimes it was serious, and we had to call the police to take her to hospital. I went to a private French Catholic school, Collège Stanislas, in my early primary years.
My parents got divorced when I was about 10. It was a good divorce in the sense that they had a policy of not criticising each other in front of the children. I saw my father much more after the divorce, he picked us up every weekend and brought us to museums.
I went to West Hill High School, a rough school where there was a lot of ethnic warfare – the Jews versus the blacks, and the Asians. I did not fit into a clear category, I was not quite Jewish, and I was not quite anglophone.
EVERY FRIDAY
Your weekend dose of current affairs, culture and lifestyle features from Hong Kong, delivered with wit and panache.
By submitting, you consent to receiving marketing emails from SCMP. If you don't want these, tick here
“I was a year younger than the other kids in my class and shorter – I was a late developer – and survived by pretending I was a little retarded, so I would be left alone.
I was not beaten up but there were close calls. Because I developed this persona of being somewhat retarded, no one predicted that I would go on to university or be a professor.
Bell’s son, Julien, with Bell’s mother in Montreal in 2022. Photo: courtesy of Daniel A. Bell
Understanding mother
In Quebec, they have a system called cegep between school and university. I began by studying applied sciences, which I did not enjoy, and then switched to social sciences, which I found more interesting and from there I went to McGill University to study psychology – probably because I wanted to better understand my mother’s condition.
I took a course in abnormal psychology, which was helpful, but the rest of the psychology at McGill was scientific and disappointing intellectually.
Tsinghua is super competitive to get into and many of the students have political aspirations, so I felt I played some role in helping to educate the elite.
Daniel A. Bell on teaching at Tsinghua University in Beijing
I lived at home with my mum, sister and British stepfather, who was a stabilising influence. He was kind and the rock of stability when my mother had problems.
In my final year, I took a course with the philosopher and political theorist Charles Taylor, which I found much more interesting. After I graduated, I went to Oxford University in England to do a master’s and then a PhD in politics.
At Oxford, I met a mainland Chinese student and we got married in 1989. I wanted to learn the language to meet her parents and friends, so I studied intensive Chinese language at Middlebury College summer school in 1990 and 1991, which gave me a good foundation.
Confucianism – like the Ten Commandments without any god
Getting published
At Oxford, I studied with British political theorist David Miller and G.A. Cohen, a Marxist from Montreal, and that is where I learned about Marxist theory. I still use a lot of Marxism, much of which came from Oxford rather than my experience in China.
At that time, a leading debate was between liberals and communitarians and the communitarians criticised liberalism for favouring more individualistic ways of life and the communitarians think we should value social relations more. I found the debate fascinating and wrote my thesis in dialogue form, which you could not get away with today.
No one talked about finding jobs and only at the end of my time in Oxford, in 1991, did I realise that maybe I would need to apply for jobs. My supervisor suggested getting my PhD published. Communitarianism and its Critics was published in 1993; it was my first book.
At Confucius’ birthplace, a ‘holy land’ of cultural tourism is being built
Confucian scholar
I got an offer from the National University of Singapore to teach political theory. I had never been to a hot country, so it was difficult just from the climate point of view.
I was a white guy from Canada, so they asked me to teach United States foreign policy. The debates were around the communitarianism and Asian values and I thought it was interesting as an idea, but the term was an empty one. But as I dug into it, I realised a lot of it was about Confucianism, which has themes that are similar to communitarianism such as critique of individualism, but it is a deeper and richer tradition.
Bell (second from left) with his wife, mother and sister (far right) in Montreal. Photo: courtesy of Daniel A. Bell
The Confucian tradition has themes such as the importance of social harmony or ritual propriety and I decided I needed to go in that direction and improve my Chinese and become a more Confucian-oriented scholar.
After three years, I got an offer of a fellowship at Princeton University, which is where our son, Julien Song Bell, was born. He is now an electronic music composer and DJs at Cassio – a nightclub in Hong Kong’s Central district – most weekends.
In 1996, when Julien was one, we moved to Hong Kong and I taught philosophy at Hong Kong University. In 2000, I moved to City University of Hong Kong for three years and then had a one-year fellowship at Stanford University.
Educating elites
In 2004, I was offered a post at Tsinghua University, so we moved to Beijing. I had a substantial cut in salary, but my wife had a high-paying job as a lawyer and then at Goldman Sachs.
Julien went to the primary school affiliated to Tsinghua University for three years, so his Mandarin is good, and then to nurture his musical talent he went to Dulwich College Beijing.
Tsinghua is super competitive to get into and many of the students have political aspirations, so I felt I played some role in helping to educate the elite. That experience gave me the idea to write a book on political meritocracy, the idea that the political system should aim to select and promote public officials with above-average ability and virtue.
The China Model (2016) is probably my most controversial book because you can imagine the reaction in the West – “Oh, China apologist” and so on – but I describe an ideal and I also describe what is wrong with the reality.
Bell with his wife, Wang Pei, at Hong Kong University in 2023. Photo: courtesy of Daniel A. Bell
Becoming dean
In my first year at Tsinghua, I was handed a mini copy of The Analects of Confucius by a student surnamed Kong who was the 76th descendant of Confucius. A few years later, the party secretary of a new campus at Shandong University, also named Kong, suggested I become a dean of the faculty of political science.
They wanted to Confucianise the university – find an interesting way to teach The Analects – and to internationalise the university. I started as dean in 2017. It was a great opportunity for a guy who was not a Communist Party member.
A better city
To the extent that I was successful, that was due to my wife, Wang Pei. We met when she was a postdoc at Tsinghua, I got divorced in January 2020 and we married in April. I dedicated my new book – The Dean of Shandong (2023) – to her because she was the key emotional and intellectual support and adviser.
Why are mainland Chinese professionals dominating Hong Kong’s talent hunt? 18 Jun 2023
It is very hard for academics to find jobs at the same university, so we are very happy to have both been offered positions at Hong Kong University. We started last October and she is teaching Chinese intellectual history.
Compared to when I was in Hong Kong 25 years ago, I feel more at home. I speak Mandarin rather than Cantonese – in the late 1990s, there was hardly any Mandarin on campus, but now there are more teachers from the mainland than from Hong Kong.
The air is much better than 25 years ago, the MTR now comes to HKU and the restaurant scene is flourishing. I do not like the constraints on academic freedom and political freedom but compared to how it was on the mainland the academic freedom is much better. So far, I tend to see the positive things.
Daniel Bell debates with Professor Ferguson
"Debate" with Professor Ferguson: Another Update
https://danielabell.com/2020/05/30/debate-with-professor-ferguson-another-update/
BY DANIEL A. BELL ⋅ MAY 30, 2020 ⋅ 3 COMMENTS
Thanks to Professor Ferguson for correcting his error-filled initial response to my blog (http://www.niallferguson.com/blog/six-questions-for-xi-jinping-another-update). He now correctly notes my nationality (Canadian, not American) and has deleted the wrong information about my latest book and field of expertise.
I also thank Professor Ferguson for conceding that his allegation that the Chinese government allowed regular international flights out of Wuhan to cities in North America and Europe after flights were cut off to the rest of China has no basis in fact. But I’m a bit surprised by the ugly tone of his latest “update.” This whole blow up could easily have been avoided if he had responded in a civil way to my informal email asking if he had evidence to support his allegation. He could have said, as he says in his latest posting, “Journalism is harder than it looks. There are deadlines to meet.” He could have added, “Sorry, Dan, I was rushed, I was a bit sloppy, I didn’t look at the records closely, and I will ask the Sunday Times of London to print a correction.” I would have dropped the matter. No doubt I’ve made similar mistakes in my academic career. We would have met again at Schwarzman College, had a couple of drinks, and talked about other things. But Ferguson chose to go on the attack, vehemently defending his allegation and sending me records that did not support his allegation. He even asked me to apologize. I knew then that our personal relation was probably poisoned beyond repair. And I worried about his inflammatory allegation because it had already entered the public domain and was being used to further poison US-China relations. So I went public on my blog. Then Ferguson was forced to publicly concede he was wrong. I thought that was the end of the story. But President Trump twice repeated the false allegation. I was then contacted by FactCheck.org, a political fact-checking site run by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. They supported my argument that Ferguson’s allegation has no basis in fact (https://www.factcheck.org/2020/05/trumps-flawed-china-travel-conspiracy/). I also asked the Sunday Times (of London) to write a correction. They did not respond to my request. So I asked the UK-based “Independent Press Standards Organisation” to ask the Sunday Times to publish a correction. They intervened and then I was finally contacted by the Sunday Times. They agreed to publish the following correction: “Our column ‘Let’s Zoom Xi. He has questions to answer’ (Comment, April 5) stated that available records suggested direct flights continued to leave from Wuhan to destinations in Europe and the US after the city went into lockdown on January 23. Further investigation, and other records that have come to light since the column was written, show that flights to these destinations due to depart from Wuhan after that date were either cancelled or departed from Guangzhou. We are happy to make this clear.” I assume they will publish it soon. I am grateful to independent truth-seeking organizations such as Factcheck.org and the Independent Press Standards Organisation. I’m saddened to report that there are no such organizations in China and I look forward to the day that the Chinese government allows such organizations to operate in the country.
Professor Ferguson’s latest response once again tries to deflect the argument from his false allegation. I do admire Ferguson’s tenacity chasing leads to nowhere. Now he asks if some flights left from Wuhan after January 23rd for international destinations other than the cities in North America mentioned in his column. My question to Professor Ferguson was whether regular international flights left from Wuhan to the rest of the world after they were cut off to the rest of China. But the records he posts for January 24-25 show that flights left for some destinations in Asia and China. Even if true, the fact that flights left for destinations in China would show that there was not a problematic double-standard as alleged in his column. But it’s not true. He does not show that the flights to international destinations were regular flights (in my initial email to Ferguson, I specifically asked about regular flights, as opposed to humanitarian flights). He concludes “only crew members appear to have been aboard these flights—albeit with one known exception, the mysterious South Korean passport-holder—confirms that the authorities did prevent Chinese citizens from flying from Wuhan to foreign destinations after January 23.”
In short, Ferguson provides no evidence to support his initial allegation. So why is he still pursuing this “debate”? As far as I can tell, he wants to defend himself from the implication that he was engaged in “conspiracy theorizing.” On the face of it, the accusation is not implausible. He put forward a fake fact and then asks an inflammatory question, addressed to President Xi: “Third, after it became clear that there was a full-blown epidemic spreading from Wuhan to the rest of Hubei province, why did you cut off travel from Hubei to the rest of China — on January 23 — but not from Hubei to the rest of the world?” If the Chinese government indeed let regular flights out of Wuhan to the rest of the world after they knew that such flights were likely to spread the virus abroad (how could they not have known, given that they cut off flights to the rest of China to stop the spread of the virus to the rest of China), it is reasonable to surmise that the Chinese government made a deliberate effort to spread the virus abroad, or at least a deliberate decision not to stop the spread of the virus abroad. So it’s not surprising that the fake news has been picked up by conspiracy theorists, including President Trump himself. Still, as I wrote in my blog, “Given that [Ferguson] has changed his mind in response to the evidence (only in response to a public challenge and without openly admitting that he has changed his mind), I am happy to retract the implication that he is a conspiracy theorist. It seems he was guilty of sloppy scholarship.” What’s surprising, however, is that Ferguson has nothing to say about President Trump’s (mis) use of his allegation. Nor does he seem to worry about (mis) uses by former government officials such as Joseph Bosco who continue to spread the fake news that “Air travel between Wuhan and the rest of China was abruptly terminated to contain the virus, but flights between Wuhan and the rest of the world were allowed to continue and spread the contagion abroad.” (https://thehill.com/opinion/international/493679-china-must-pay-for-the-calamity-it-has-unleashed-on-the-world). Perhaps I’m naïve, but I would have thought that a truth-seeking academic who made an “innocent” mistake might want to go on the record to distance himself from such conspiracy theorizing, to criticize misuses of his ideas, and to separate fact from fiction. But Ferguson stays silent.
Instead, he resorts to McCarthy-like tactics. He attacks me as an “apologist” for the Chinese government. If “apologist” means that I defend whatever the Chinese government does, then it’s more fake news. As mentioned in my initial blog about Ferguson’s fake news, “The Chinese government did make terrible mistakes at the start of the coronavirus crisis and Ferguson asks some legitimate questions. I’ve made similar points in two comments that harshly criticized Chinese authorities (https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3051402/coronavirus-holds-mirror-chinas-problems-and-nation-will-be-better; https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3074850/chinas-coronavirus-response-and-italys-struggles-show-benefits). More recently, I wrote a longer essay in the periodical American Affairs that is even more critical of the Chinese government’s initial response and tries to explain some of the political background: https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2020/05/chinas-anti-corruption-campaign-and-the-challenges-of-political-meritocracy/. And I wrote about the terrible mistakes in an interview with the Center on National Security at Fordham Law (https://www.centeronnationalsecurity.org/vital-interests-issue-32-daniel-bell). Like Ferguson, I would also like to learn what exactly wrong at the start. But I totally reject his concluding accusation that I am helping the Chinese Communist Party to keep honest answers buried. What I do hope is that we can bury false allegations and conspiracy theories and focus on real problems.
Perhaps Professor Ferguson thinks I’m an apologist because I wrote for the Global Times, which is controlled and censored by the Chinese Communist Party. For the record, I did try to publish my refutation of Ferguson’s allegation in Western media outlets, but I had no luck. In these times, it seems almost impossible to publish anything about contemporary Chinese politics in leading Western media outlets that is not entirely negative about the Chinese government. Off-the-record, however, some friends in the Western media recognized the importance of the story and helped in informal ways. Meanwhile, I was contacted by the Global Times asking if they could republish my blog. I said OK, so long as they do not make changes. They agreed to that condition. Later on, I was contacted by the Global Times for an interview, and again, I agreed on the condition that they it would not be censored. They agreed, and the interview was published, including a critical comment about the mistakes in Wuhan (http://enapp.globaltimes.cn/?from=groupmessage&isappinstalled=0#/article/1187304). In principle, I will talk to, and write for, any media outlet that offers the opportunity to accurately communicate what I say if I think I have something important to say that’s not being said by others. Like other writers, I’m sometimes frustrated by lack of space to express my views. In China, it’s an extra challenge because of the censorship regime. More than once, I’ve withdrawn consent for publishing my articles in Chinese media outlets after they were censored. But sometimes I have good luck. For example, Phoenix News invited me to write a long critical essay on the Chinese government’s response to Covid-19 that was not censored (https://ishare.ifeng.com/c/s/7wSk8K3cbzc?from=singlemessage).
Perhaps Ferguson means “apologist” in the sense that I am not entirely negative about the Chinese political system. I’d rather use the word “balanced.” My recent academic works develop normative standards that help us to think systematically and critically about what’s good and what’s bad about the Chinese political system. I try to expose the large gap between the ideal and the reality and to propose ways of reducing that gap. In the case of the fight against Covid-19, terrible mistakes were made at the start but I do think the government did a relatively good job fighting the virus once the central authorities became involved. Today, to be frank, it feels lucky to be in China. We can lead our ordinary lives as in pre-Covid days, except for blocks on international travel. Some countries like Vietnam and New Zealand also did relatively well combating the virus. Others, like the United States, did a terrible job, and the blame lies mainly with misguided policies and lack of preparation in those countries rather than what happened in China. I regret to report that Canada has not done so well. My home town– Montreal – has been especially hard hit.
My dear professor Ferguson, this “debate” is over. You lost, I won. In the future, let’s stick to facts and try to draw lessons from what went wrong – and what went right — in different countries so we can get Covid-19 under control globally.
Update (May 31st):
The concluding paragraph, of course, is not meant to be completely serious. From my point of view, there was no “debate.” It was a matter of checking a fact with the potential to further poison US-China relations. But Ferguson seems to view our exchanges as a debate with a winner and loser. So I half-jokingly wrote that he lost the debate on the assumption that the debate was about seeking the truth. If the debate is about political influence, however, Ferguson clearly won. His (false) allegation that the Chinese government allowed regular flights out of Wuhan to cities in the United States and Europe after they were cut off the rest of China continues to make the rounds among conspiracy theorists. In yesterday’s “remarks on actions against China,” President Trump repeated the fake news:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-actions-china/
“The world needs answers from China on the virus. We must have transparency. Why is it that China shut off infected people from Wuhan to all other parts of China? It went nowhere else. It didn’t go to Beijing; it went nowhere else. But allowed them to freely travel throughout the world, including Europe and the United States.
The death and destruction caused by this is incalculable. We must have answers not only for us but for the rest of the world.”
Yet another update (June 1st):
The Sunday Times of London, presumably in response to the Independent Press Standards Organisation, has finally published a correction: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/past-six-days/2020-05-31/comment/corrections-and-clarifications-8tvc73g3c
从弗格森的虚假事实到政府主导的全面阴谋论：缺失的环节
https://danielabell.com/2020/06/03/from-fergusons-fake-fact-to-a-full-blown-government-led-conspiracy-theory/？
作者：丹尼尔·A·贝尔 ⋅ 2020 年 6 月 3 日 ⋅ 2 条评论
正如我博客的读者所知，尼尔·弗格森关于中国政府允许从武汉飞往美国和欧洲城市的定期航班在飞往中国其他地区的航班被切断后的指控已被揭穿（参见 https://www.factcheck .org/2020/05/trumps-flawed-china-travel-conspiracy/ 和 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/past-six-days/2020-05-31/comment/ Corrections-and-clarifications- 8tvc73g3c）。
不幸的是，特朗普总统多次重复了这一指控，包括他 5 月 30 日针对中国行动的言论 (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-actions-china/。彼得·纳瓦罗， 史蒂夫·班农和肖恩·汉尼提重申了这一指控，暗示中国政府故意将病毒传播到世界其他地区。
值得一问的是，四月初一家英国报纸提出的最初指控为何会在美国产生如此大的政治影响力。 《尼尔森报告》的克里斯·尼尔森解释说，这一指控被刘易斯·“斯库特”·利比发展成一个全面的阴谋论，“切尼的核心人物向中央情报局施压，要求其支持伊拉克正在制造大规模杀伤性武器并与伊拉克有关的虚假说法”。 9/11 袭击。” （请参阅下面的尼尔森报告摘录，我在克里斯·尼尔森的许可下将其发布在这里）。
我不太担心虚假的阴谋论正在被传播，以证明与中国的战争是正当的。 我推测其主要目的是帮助特朗普总统连任。 也就是说，我们有充分的理由担心此类阴谋论的长期政治影响。 如果许多人开始相信这种疯狂的阴谋论，很可能会助长一种有毒的政治气氛，使与中国的战争更有可能发生。 希望西方媒体能够开始关注这一令人担忧的事态发展。
尼尔森报告摘录（6 月 1 日）：“最近几天，特朗普和他的亲密顾问不再试图将中国的责任归咎于他们压制感染信息或实验室起源理论，而是提出了更大胆的指控： 中国政府故意将这种疾病传播到世界各地。
特朗普在上周的一条推文中指责中国“拼命试图转移其国家向世界各地传播的痛苦和屠杀”。 特朗普顾问纳瓦罗是反华政策的关键人物，他上周对美国广播公司新闻表示，“中国派了数十万中国人乘飞机前往米兰、纽约和世界各地传播”病毒。
这一理论最初是在刘易斯·“斯库特”·利比 (Lewis “Scooter” Libby) 的一篇鲜为人知的评论中提出的，他是迪克·切尼 (Dick Cheney) 的前高级助手，现任哈德逊研究所 (Hudson Institute) 高级副总裁。 政策。
利比在 4 月 29 日发表在保守派《国家评论》上的文章中指出，习近平和共产党领导层正面临着多重挑战的日益严重的威胁——香港的抗议活动、支持独立的台湾政府的连任、曝光 对中国穆斯林的镇压，最重要的是，特朗普政府强硬的贸易政策导致中国经济陷入困境。 他写道，随着特朗普竞选连任，党内针对习近平的异议不断增加。
中国爆发的 Covid-19 疫情给习近平带来了新的挑战。 “只要病毒主要在中国境内肆虐——只会让中国经济脱轨，只会让中国政府蒙羞——他的麻烦就会加剧。 一直以来，世界都可以预见地会领先一步，抢走中国客户，窃取中国长期追求的荣耀。”
但利比认为，这场大流行有潜在的好处。 他写道，它的蔓延将转移人们对中国政权内部困境的注意力，并“使疾病较弱的国家更容易受到中国商品的影响”。 特朗普连任不再确定，经济疲软将影响美国国防支出。
在利比看来，习近平不仅仅只是利用了一个机会。 中共政权故意“让数以万计的感染者离开中国，进入一个不警惕的世界”。 他总结道，所有这一切都是习近平核心圈子追求世界统治的一部分。 “他们对中国主导地位的狂热在燃烧。”
利比对此类叙事的构建并不陌生。 他是切尼的核心人物，向中央情报局施压，要求其支持伊拉克正在制造大规模杀伤性武器并与 9/11 袭击有关的虚假说法。 2007年，他因试图诋毁一名对这些指控提出异议的外交官而被判作伪证和妨碍司法罪。
令人惊讶的是，利比于 2018 年 4 月被特朗普赦免，尽管前总统乔治·W·布什在切尼的恳求下拒绝这样做。
这位高级情报官员表示：“利比的演讲让人感觉又一个问题正在酝酿之中。”他将此与他在伊拉克战争中所扮演的角色进行了比较。
另一位在亚洲拥有长期经验的前高级情报官员表示：“这是斯库特的‘摇狗’幻想。”他驳斥了利比关于中国领导层有兴趣在世界范围内传播这一流行病的观点。
“党的合法性、习近平的地位和中国的未来都取决于持续增长，即使增长速度要慢得多，”这位前情报官员告诉我。 “CV19 病毒的传播只会进一步抑制中国经济增长，并加速供应链重组，对中国不利。中国领导人明白这一点。”
From Ferguson's Fake Fact to a Full-Blown, Government-Led Conspiracy Theory: The Missing Link
BY DANIEL A. BELL ⋅ JUNE 3, 2020 ⋅ 2 COMMENTS
As readers of my blog will know, Niall Ferguson's allegation that the Chinese government allowed regular flights out of Wuhan to cities in the US and Europe after they were cut off to the rest of China has been debunked (see https://www.factcheck.org/2020/05/trumps-flawed-china-travel-conspiracy/ and https://www.thetimes.co.uk/past-six-days/2020-05-31/comment/corrections-and-clarifications-8tvc73g3c).
Unfortunately, the allegation was repeated by President Trump several times, including his May 30th remarks on actions against China (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-actions-china/ . Peter Navarro, Steve Bannon and Sean Hannity repeated the allegation to suggest that the Chinese government deliberately spread the virus to the rest of the world.
It's worth asking how the initial allegation made in a UK newspaper in early April could become so politically influential in the United States. Chris Nelson of the Nelson Report explains that the allegation was developed into a full blown conspiracy theory by Lewis “Scooter” Libby, ” Cheney’s point man in pressuring the CIA to support the false claims that Iraq was building weapons of mass destruction and was linked to the 9/11 attacks.” (please see below for the excerpt from the Nelson Report, which I post here with Chris Nelson’s permission).
I'm not so worried that the false conspiracy theory is being spread to justify a war with China; I’d speculate its main purpose is to help President Trump get reelected. That said, there’s good reason to worry about the long term political effect of such conspiracy theories. If many people come to believe crazy conspiracy theories of this sort, it may well contribute to a poisonous political atmosphere that makes war with China more likely. Hopefully the Western media will begin to pay attention to this worrisome development.
Excerpt from the Nelson Report (June 1st):“In recent days, Trump and his close advisors have moved beyond their earlier attempts to pin Chinese responsibility on their suppression of information on the infection, or the lab origin theory, to a bolder charge that the Chinese government deliberately spread the disease out into the world.
In a tweet this past week, Trump accused China of “trying desperately to deflect the pain and carnage that their country spread throughout the world.” Trump advisor Navarro, a key figure in the anti-China policy, told ABC News this past week that “China sent hundreds of thousands of Chinese on aircraft to Milan, New York and around the world to seed” the virus.
This theory was first laid out in a little-noted commentary by Lewis “Scooter” Libby, a former senior aide to Dick Cheney and now Senior Vice President at the Hudson Institute, a conservative thinktank that has become the most important influencer of the administration's China policy.
In the essay, published on April 29 in the conservative National Review, Libby argued that Xi and the Communist Party leadership were under increasing threat from multiple challenges – the protests in Hong Kong, the re-election of the pro-independence Taiwanese government, exposure of the suppression of Chinese Muslims, and most of all, the stumbling of the Chinese economy due to the Trump administration’s tough trade policy. With Trump heading for re-election, party dissent against Xi was mounting, he wrote.
The Covid-19 outbreak in China posed a new challenge for Xi. “As long as the virus raged primarily inside China – derailing only her economy, stigmatizing only her government – his troubles would soar. All the while, the world predictably would have leapt ahead, taking Chinese customers, stealing China’s long-sought glory.”
But the pandemic had a potential upside, Libby argued. Its spread would divert attention from the Chinese regime’s internal woes and “rendered disease-weakened nations more susceptible to China’s goods,” he wrote. Trump’s re-election was no longer certain and a weakened economy would impact U.S. defense spending.
In Libby’s account, Xi went beyond simply taking advantage of an opportunity. The Chinese regime deliberately “let tens of thousands of travelers, infected among them, leave China and enter an unwary world.” All of this, he concludes, is part of the quest for world domination by Xi’s inner circle. “A fever for Chinese primacy burns among them.”
Libby is no stranger to the construction of these kinds of narratives. He was Cheney’s point man in pressuring the CIA to support the false claims that Iraq was building weapons of mass destruction and was linked to the 9/11 attacks. He was convicted in 2007 of perjury and obstruction of justice for his attempts to discredit a diplomat who disputed those claims. Surprisingly, Libby was pardoned in April 2018 by Trump, even though former President George W. Bush refused to do so, despite pleas from Cheney.
“Libby's presentation has the feel and smell of yet another problem in the making," said the senior intelligence official, comparing this to his role in the Iraq war buildup.
“This is Scooter's 'wag the dog' fantasy," agreed another former senior intelligence official with long experience in Asia. He dismissed Libby’s belief that the Chinese leadership would have an interest in spreading the pandemic around the world.
“Party legitimacy, Xi's position, and China's future depend on sustained growth, even if the rate of growth is much slower,” the former intelligence official told me. "Spreading CV19 could only further depress Chinese growth and accelerate realignment of supply chains in ways that disadvantage China. Chinese leaders understand that."
Related
“Debate” with Professor Ferguson: Another UpdateMay 30, 2020With 3 comments
Did the Chinese Government Deliberately Export Covid-19 to the Rest of the World?April 21, 2020Liked by 6 people
“Debate” with Professor Ferguson: Another UpdateMay 30, 2020With 3 comments
Did the Chinese Government Deliberately Export Covid-19 to the Rest of the World?April 21, 2020Liked by 6 people
«"Debate" with Professor Ferguson: Another Update
Two online “book talks” in two languages »
关于“从弗格森的虚假事实到政府主导的全面阴谋论：缺失的环节”的 2 条思考
这个房间里有一头大象。法国医生相信他们可能在去年秋天治疗过冠状病毒患者。
视频：https://youtu.be/XVZMb5oOOCE
http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-05/08/c_139040660.htm
法国研究人员认为，有证据表明冠状病毒可能早在 2019 年 11 月就已在欧洲出现，这将标志着冠状病毒传播时间线的巨大转变。NBC 新闻独家获得的 X 射线显示，两名患者的肺部症状与 新型冠状病毒的日期为 11 月 16 日和 11 月 18 日，比人们认为的 COVID-19 在该国传播的时间早了几个月。 来自法国科尔马的研究人员上周宣布了 X 光检查结果，并正在努力确认患者是否感染了冠状病毒。 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920301643
这项研究与其他法国科学家的一项研究相结合，后者上周发现一名冠状病毒患者于 12 月在该国接受过治疗。 圣但尼巴黎塞纳河医院集团的医生表示，12 月 27 日从急诊室收治的一名 42 岁鱼贩身上采集的样本检测出冠状病毒呈阳性。 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/new-evidence-race-find-france-s-covid-19-病人-zero-n1207871
瑞典首席流行病学家安德斯·泰格内尔表示，冠状病毒可能自 11 月以来就在该国传播 https://www.ft.com/content/aba67162-9129-41b9-b82b-d61a890e6589
Junya Fukushima 博士（筑波大学胃肠病学家）。 来自Facebook，“2019年8月，新型冠状病毒COVID-19入侵并在日本传播。” 在日本，今年的感染是第二波。 未来需要进行大规模的抗体测试。 ＃新冠肺炎。 https://mobile.twitter.com/isaiah_sweetie/status/1257885191864897536
美国国立卫生研究院院长弗朗西斯·柯林斯表示，这种病毒可能已经在人类中悄悄传播了数年甚至数十年，而没有引起可检测到的疫情爆发。 https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3077442/coronavirus-pathogen-could-have-been-spreading- humans-decades
美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）主持人克里斯·科莫表示，他相信最早十月份就会有消息显示新型冠状病毒正在美国传播。 “克里斯蒂娜认为，据传，孩子们现在至少有两个人在过去几个月里得过这种病。 为什么？ 我们不知道，但非典型的长时间鼻窦炎、发烧、嗜睡。 我认为我们将会了解到，自 10 月份以来，冠状病毒就已经在这个国家出现了，已经出现了病例，”科莫说。 “你们都知道，我经常从全国各地听到，有多少人说，‘我想我得了这个，我得了这个，我失去了嗅觉，还有这个…… 那个，但我从未接受过测试'？ 这些案件在全国各地比比皆是，”他补充道。 https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/chris-cuomo-predicts-evidence-will-show-coronavirus-was-spreading-in-us-since-october
新泽西州贝尔维尔市市长迈克尔·梅勒姆 (Michael Melham) 表示，他的冠状病毒抗体检测呈阳性，并补充说，他相信自己在 11 月份就感染了这种病毒，而这比中国医生首次报告这种新疾病病例早了一个多月。 梅勒姆说，他在十一月底生病了，在离开大西洋城的市政联盟会议后，他出现了发冷、幻觉和“体温飙升”的症状。梅勒姆说，这是他成年以来病得最严重的一次。 他没有接受流感测试，并表示自己没有出国旅行。 梅勒姆说，他后来怀疑自己在 11 月份感染了冠状病毒，但他否认了这一说法，因为美国最早的病例直到 1 月份才报告。 梅勒姆十一月生病，促使他要求医生进行血液检查。 他周三得到了结果。市长表示，他完全有可能后来接触了冠状病毒并且没有症状，但觉得这种情况“非常非常不可能”。我血液中的抗体比显示的较新的抗体更旧 梅勒姆说：“他刚刚战胜了它。”梅勒姆相信他可能是早期未被发现的冠状病毒病例。
https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/essex/belleville/2020/04/30/belleville-nj-mayor-tests-positive-coronavirus-antibodies/3057925001/
冠状病毒在我们意识到之前就已经出现在佛罗里达州：《迈阿密先驱报》的分析显示，州卫生官员已记录了 2019 年 12 月 31 日至 2 月 31 日至 2 月 31 日期间报告出现症状的至少 170 名 COVID-19 患者。
2 thoughts on“From Ferguson’s Fake Fact to a Full-Blown, Government-Led Conspiracy Theory: The Missing Link”
There's an elephant in this room.French doctors believe they may have treated coronavirus patients last fall.
Video: https://youtu.be/XVZMb5oOOCE
http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-05/08/c_139040660.htm
In what would mark a massive shift in the timeline of coronavirus spread, French researchers? believe there is evidence coronavirus may have been in Europe as early as November 2019. X-rays obtained exclusively by NBC News show two patients with symptoms in their lungs consistent with the novel coronavirus dated Nov. 16 and Nov. 18, months before COVID-19 was believed to be spreading in the country. Researchers from Colmar, France, announced the X-rays last week and are working to confirm whether the patients had Coronavirus. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920301643
The study comes in conjunction with a study by other French scientists who discovered last week that a coronavirus patient had been treated in the country in December. The doctors from the Groupe Hospitalier Paris Seine in Saint-Denis said a sample taken from a 42-year-old fishmonger admitted to the emergency room on Dec. 27 had tested positive for the coronavirus. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/new-evidence-race-find-france-s-covid-19-patient-zero-n1207871
Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s chief epidemiologist, said coronavirus may have been circulating in the country since November https://www.ft.com/content/aba67162-9129-41b9-b82b-d61a890e6589
Dr. Junya Fukushima (Gastroenterologist, University of Tsukuba). From fb, “In August 2019, the new coronavirus COVID-19 had invaded and spread in Japan.” In Japan, this year’s infection is the second wave. A large-scale antibody test is desirable in the future. #covid19. https://mobile.twitter.com/isaiah_sweetie/status/1257885191864897536
Francis Collins, director of the US National Institutes of Health, said the virus might have been spreading quietly in humans for years, or even decades, without causing a detectable outbreak. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3077442/coronavirus-pathogen-could-have-been-spreading-humans-decades.
CNN host Chris Cuomo said he believes there will be revelations showing the novel coronavirus was spreading in the United States as early as October. “The kids now anecdotally, Cristina believes, that at least two of them have had it in the last few months. Why? We don’t know, but atypically long-duration sinus, fever, lethargy. I think we’re going to learn that coronavirus has been in this country since, like, October, that there have been cases,” Cuomo said. “And as you guys both know, and I hear all the time from all over the country, how many people do you hear saying, ‘I think I had it, I had this and this, I lost my sense of smell and this and that, but I never got tested’? Those cases are, like, abounding all over the country,” he added. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/chris-cuomo-predicts-evidence-will-show-coronavirus-was-spreading-in-us-since-october.
Belleville, NJ, Mayor Michael Melham said he has tested positive for coronavirus antibodies, adding that he believes he was sick with the virus in November — more than a month before doctors in China first reported cases of the new disease. Melham said he was sick toward the end of November and suffered from chills, hallucinations and a “skyrocketing temperature” after he left the League of Municipalities Conference in Atlantic City.Melham said it was the sickest he had ever been in his adult life. He did not take a flu test and said he did not travel overseas. Melham said he later suspected he had contracted the coronavirus in November but dismissed the notion because the earliest cases in the United States weren’t reported until January. His November illness is what prompted Melham to ask his doctor for the blood test. He got the results Wednesday.The mayor said it is entirely possible he was exposed to the coronavirus later and was asymptomatic, but felt it was “highly, highly unlikely.The antibody in my blood is older as opposed to the more recent one showing you just finished fighting it off,” Melham said.Melham believes he could potentially be an early, undetected case of the coronavirus.
https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/essex/belleville/2020/04/30/belleville-nj-mayor-tests-positive-coronavirus-antibodies/3057925001/
Coronavirus was in Florida before we knew it: A Miami Herald analysis shows state health officials have documented at least 170 COVID-19 patients reporting symptoms between Dec. 31, 2019, and Feb. 29. https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2020/05/05/coranavirus-was-in-florida-before-we-knew-it/
