Smoking gun. A primer on Corruption, using Ching Dynasty China, Putin, The Freedom Caucus, and Trump as examples, with effect on Ukraine aid added
Aid to Ukraine in the mists of the heartless invasion by Putin has occurred precisely due to a suspension of MASSIVE corruption on the American side as to the dynamics of the war.
The following is meant to illustrate how that could be imperiled by a break down caused by out of control corruption as delegated here in this article
Should the corruption of the sort described resume full force, everywhere, Ukraine will be ruined.
To start, look at China, the center of what was for 3000 years the most entrenched sea of corruption known in history, save the example of Caligula in Rome, in the First century AD
In the middle of the 700s, Yang Gufei made herself infamous as the woman whom allegedly got a Tang emperor so besotted with her that he neglected to defend the Tang imperial capital from the Tibetan army which sacked the city, 763 AD
quote
“When the emperor Suzong died, in 762, Tengri, the khan of the Uyghurs, decided to make himself ruler over China. . Part of the court clique supported him, and only by the intervention of P'u-ku Huai-en, who was related to Tengri by marriage, was his plan frustrated. Naturally there were countless intrigues against P'u-ku Huai-en. He entered into alliance with the Tibetan T'u-fan, and in this way the union of Turks and Tibetans, always feared by the Chinese, had come into existence. In 763 the Tibetans captured and burned down the western capital, while P'u-ku Huai-en with the Uyghurs advanced from the north.
end of quote
whereas
Yang Yuhuan?(Chinese :?楊玉環; 26 June,719 – 15 July 756, often known as?Yang Guifei?(楊貴妃, with?Guifei?being the highest rank for?imperial consorts ?during her time), was the beloved consort of?Emperor Xuanzong of Tang ?
During the?An Lushan Rebellion , as Emperor Xuanzong and his cortege were fleeing from the capital?Chang'an ?to?Chengdu , the emperor's guards demanded that he put Yang to death because they blamed the rebellion on her cousin?Yang Guozhong ?and the rest of her family. The emperor capitulated and reluctantly ordered his attendant?Gao Lishi ?to supervise her?forced suicide .
end of quote
In a word, she , as later did Ching China hot housed the following corruption scandal
quote
It reminds me of the Chinese dynastic practice before 1911 where each Governor of an imperial Chinese province was given such a tiny stipend, that in order to perform duties demanded by the imperial court in Beijing, that the Governor would HAVE to be corrupt. If he was not, the Emperor would destroy him for not running the province, and if he was corrupt, the?Sword of Damocles of a guaranteed conviction for corruption hung over the head of the province, as a guaranteed death sentence, should the Emperor decide to uphold the law
Seriously, both the reign of Trump and Putin engender the use of this game plan exactly as a tool of vengeance driven internal rule of a domain.
Ancient China , especially the Ching Dynasty from 1644 to 1911 wrote the BOOK as far as this double edged weapon of destruction for elites under the thrall of a supreme ruler
end of quote
So what do we have in the Russian version of all this ?
quote
For years, critics inside and outside Russia relied on one major theme to galvanize opposition to Mr. Putin: corruption.
But corruption is the glue that holds the system together, not the catalyst to bring it down. Basing his power on the thievery of his subordinates, Mr. Putin’s goal was hardly to ensure their comfort and well-being. The point, more likely, was to bind the ruling class within a conspiratorial system of collective responsibility, ensuring its absolute solidarity. In this condition of complicity, no one could emerge to challenge the president.
Strictly speaking, it is not completely correct to call such a system corruption. Corruption entails a deviation from the norm, whereas in Mr. Putin’s Russia the norm is precisely that of officials living on money of dubious origin. If the law were to be followed literally, then practically every Russian minister or governor could end up in prison.
What is called corruption in Russia would be more correctly called a system of incitement and blackmail. If you are loyal and if the president is pleased with you, you have the right to steal — but if you are disloyal, you’ll be thrown in prison for theft.
end of quote
And now what is the Trump- Freedom caucus version of this horrid game of bait and switch ?
quote
When John Eastman, the highly controversial Republican lawyer on Donald Trump’s team in the aftermath of the former president’s defeat, wrote?an infamous memo ?intended to help overturn the 2020 results, his strategy focused on a specific task:?exploiting ambiguities ?in the Electoral Count Act of 1887.
The law was passed in the aftermath of a brutally messy election controversy, and it was designed to establish a congressional process for certifying electoral votes. For generations, it was largely treated as a legal afterthought, if it was thought of at all.
All of that changed in dramatic fashion during the Trump era — or more specifically, as the Trump era came to a difficult end — when it became obvious that the antiquated law was in need of an overhaul.
To that end, as NBC News?report ?explained, the bipartisan Presidential Election Reform Act would amend the 135-year-old Electoral Count Act “to remove any doubt that the vice president’s role in counting Electoral College votes is simply ministerial. . And it would require governors to send electors to Congress for the candidate who won, based on state law set before Election Day, which cannot be retroactively changed.”
In theory, given the crisis from the recent past, this bipartisan bill is exactly the sort of measure that should pass easily. In practice, House Republican leaders peddled a series of claims?in bad faith , demanded that GOP members reject the bill, and largely succeeded in creating a partisan outcome.
End of quote
The end result of this crap is that the entire FREEDOM caucus is guilty of supporting future attempts at unlawful overthrow of the US Government. This means effectively that the guilt of the House members as to setting the match for insurrection is a slam dunk
And this fits perfectly within the confines of the Tang dynasty to Ching dynasty web of corruption insuring that all members could be destroyed as being guilty of treason by an enraged governmental elite: The intersection with Russian practices is obvious and does not have to be stated
https://factsanddetails.com/china/cat6/sub32/entry-4422.html
quote
TIBETAN EMPIRE
Songsten
?Tibetan history begins with the Tibetan Empire period (A.D. 632 to 842): During this time, Tibetans dominated the Tibetan plateau, much of the Himalayas and parts of China, South Asia, Mongolia and Central Asia. Tibetan armies occupied Nepal, received tributes from parts of the Yunnan province and invaded Western China, where they took control of the Silk Road trade routes. Written Tibetan was adapted from a northern Indian script in the A.D. 8th century. The oldest extant example of Tibetan writing has been dated to A.D. 767. Knowledge of astronomy, medicine and science came from China . Tibetan forts known as dzongs were built across the countryside.
The Tibetan Empire grew out of the Yarlung Kingdom and embraced parts of Yunnan, Gansu, Qinghai, Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim, and Kashmir. From the 7th to the 9th century a series of emperors ruled Tibet. From the time of the emperor Songts?n Gampo the power of the empire gradually increased over a diverse land with many ethnic groups. By the reign of the emperor Ralpacan, in the opening years of the 9th century, Tibet controlled territories extending from the Tarim basin to the Himalayas and Bengal, and from the Pamirs to the Chinese provinces of Gansu and Yunnan. [Source: Wikipedia +]
The power that became the Tibetan state originated at the castle named Taktsé in the Chingba district of Chonggy?. There, According to the Old Tibetan Chronicle a group convinced Tagbu Nyazig to rebel against Gudri Zingpoje, who was in turn a vassal of the Zhangzhung empire under the Lig myi dynasty. The group prevailed against Zingpoje. At this point Namri Songtsen was the leader of a clan which one by one prevailed over all his neighboring clans. He gained control of all the area around what is now Lhasa, before his assassination around 618. This new-born regional state would later become known as the Tibetan Empire. The government of Namri Songtsen sent two embassies to the Chinese Sui Dynasty in 608 and 609, marking the appearance of Tibet on the international scene. +
Under the first great Tibetan king, Songtsen Gampo (630-649) Tibet expanded into Nepal and China through threats of military action and marrying of Chinese and Nepali princesses; Jokhang and Ramoche temples were built; and a fortress was built on site that would later be occupied by Potala palace in Lhasa. In paintings Songtsen Gampo has a mustache and wears a white turban with a small Opagme (Amitabha) emerging from the top. He is often flanked by Princess Wencheng, his Chinese wife, and Princess Bhrikuto, his Nepali wife.
Under King Trisong Detsen (755-97), Tibet conquered Gansu and Sichuan and extended its influence into present-day India, Pakistan and Central Asia. The Tibetans were at the peak of their power in 763 when they sacked the Tang capital of Chang'an after responding to a Chinese advance into western China. King Trisong Detsen founded the Samye Monastery and is regarded as a manifestation of the Bodhisattva Jamelyang (Majushri). In paintings, he wears white turban and holds the sword of wisdom in right hand and scripture on a lotus in his left arm. He is often depicted in a triad of kings with Songtsen Gampo and King Ralpachen (A.D. 817-36).
?See Separate Articles: ANCIENT AND PREHISTORIC TIBET AND EARLY TIBETAN HISTORY?factsanddetails.com? ; 10TH TO 18TH CENTURY TIBET: FEUDALISM, BUDDHISM, CHINA, MONGOLS?factsanddetails.com? ; EUROPEANS IN 16TH-20TH CENTURY TIBET?factsanddetails.com
Yarlung Valley Kings
Creation myths suggest that the Yarlung Valley, along the Tsangpo River near Tsetang, is the cradle of Tibetan civilization. Yarlung kings, probably just local chiefs, were glorified in Tibetan myths. The 28th king is said to have received the first Buddhist scriptures to reach Tibet at the fortress in Yumbulagang in the A.D. 5th century. According to legend the scriptures fell from the sky and landed on the roof of the fortress. The first solid evidence of the Yarlung kingdom dates to the 6th century, when the Yarlung kings claimed much of southern and central Tibet. Under the 32nd Tibetan king, Nmari Songsten (570-619), the Tibetans defeated the Qiang tribes in present-day Sichuan.
In the 6th century, the chief of the Yarlung tribe in the area became leader of the local tribal alliance and declared himself the "Zambo" ( or “Zanpu”, king). He established the Po Dynasty and was the grandfather of early 7th century, Songtsen Gampo (Zanpu’s grandson) Traditional Tibetan history described the exploits of a lengthy list of rulers. External corroboration is available from the 7th century in Chinese histories, which called the country Tubo. [Source: China.org?china.org ?]
The dates attributed to the first Tibetan king, Nyatri Tsenpo (Wylie: Gnya'-khri-btsan-po), vary. Some Tibetan texts give 126 BC, others 414 BC. Nyatri Tsenpo is said to have descended from a one-footed creature called the Theurang, having webbed fingers and a tongue so large it could cover his face. Due to his terrifying appearance he was feared in his native Puwo and exiled by the B?n to Tibet. There he was greeted as a fearsome being, and he became king. [Source: Wikipedia +]
The Tibetan kings were said to remain connected to the heavens via a dmu cord (dmu thag) so that rather than dying, they ascended directly to heaven, when their sons achieved their majority.[7] According to various accounts, king Drigum Tsenpo (Dri-gum-brtsan-po) either challenged his clan heads to a fight,[8] or provoked his groom Longam (Lo-ngam) into a duel. During the fight the king's dmu cord was cut, and he was killed. Thereafter Drigum Tsenpo and subsequent kings left corpses and the B?n conducted funerary rites. +
In a later myth, first attested in the Mai bka' 'bum, the Tibetan people are the progeny of the union of the monkey Pha Trelgen Changchup Sempa and rock ogress Ma Drag Sinmo. But the monkey was a manifestation of the bodhisattva Chenresig, or Avalokitesvara (Tib. Spyan-ras-gzigs) while the ogress in turn incarnated Chenresig's consort Dolma (Tib. 'Grol-ma).
The historic name for the Tibetan Empire is Bod Qiang. According to the historian Christopher Beckwith: "This first mention of the name Bod, the usual name for Tibet in the later Tibetan historical sources, is significant in that it is used to refer to a conquered region. In other words, the ancient name Bod originally referred only to a part of the Tibetan Plateau, a part which, together with Rtsa (Tsang), has come to be called Dbus-gtsa? (Central Tibet)." +
Tubo Kingdom and the Yarlung Dynasty
From the A.D. 7th century, Chinese historians referred to Tibet as Tubo, though four distinct characters were used. The first externally confirmed contact with the Tibetan kingdom in recorded Tibetan history occurred when King Namri L?nts?n (Gnam-ri-slon-rtsan) sent an ambassador to China in the early 7th century.
At the beginning of the 7th century, King Songzan Gambo (Zanpu’s grandson) began to rule the whole of Tibet and made "Losha" (today's Lhasa) the capital. He designated official posts, defined military and administrative areas, created the Tibetan script, formulated laws and unified weights and measures, thus establishing the feudal kingdom known as "Bo," which was called "Tubo" (“Tupo) in Chinese historical documents. This is known in Chinese history as the Tupo kingdom. [Source: China.org?china.org ?]
According to the Chinese government: “After the Tubo regime was established, the Tibetans increased their political, economic and cultural exchanges with the Han and other ethnic groups in China. The Kingdom of Tibet began to have frequent contacts with the Tang Dynasty (618-907) and the Tibetan and Han peoples got on well with each other. In 641, King Songzan Gambo married Princess Wen Cheng of the Tang Dynasty. In 710, King Chide Zuzain married another Tang princess, Jin Cheng. The two princesses brought with them the culture and advanced production techniques of Central China to Tibet. From that time on, emissaries traveled frequently between the Tang Dynasty and Tibet. The Tibetans sent students to Changan, capital of the Tang Dynasty, and invited Tang scholars and craftsmen to Tibet. These exchanges helped promote relations between the Tibetans and other ethnic groups in China and stimulated social development in Tibet. The Tubo Kingdom began to decline in 842 and was finally replaced by the Guge Kingdom. [Source: China.org?china.org ?|]
Songtsen Gampo
Nepalese princess
?Songtsen Gampo was the 33rd Tibetan ruler of the Yarlung kings and is considered to be the real founder of the Tibetan Empire. Songtsan Gambo brought together more than 10 separate tribes to create the kernal of what is now Tibet and is traditionally credited with introducing Buddhism to Tibet. Under hime, Tibetan laws, a calendar, alphabet, and system of weights and measures were created.
It is said that Songtsen Gampo was born at Gyama in 617, in Maldro (a region to the northeast of modern Lhasa), the son of the Yarlung king Namri Songtsen. The book “The Holder of the White Lotus” says that it is believed that he was an incarnation of the Buddhist Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara, of whom the Dalai Lama is similarly believed to be a manifestation of. He is also said to have had webbed hands and feet, a deformed face and odd skin; the early Tibetans saw him as a god and enthroned him. His identification as a cakravartin or incarnation of Avalokites'vara began in earnest in the indigenous Buddhist literary histories of the 11th Century. [Source: Chloe Xin, Tibetravel.org?tibettravel.org? ]
Greatly influenced by his father,Songtsen Gampo showed leadership skills and other talents at an early age. When he was thirteen, he acceded to the throne after his father was poisoned in 618 and Songtsen Gampo put down a rebellion. He moved the capital of Tibet to Luosuo (today's Lhasa) after he quelled the rebellions from all parts of the region. Because of his efforts, Tibet was finally unified. By making laws, regulations and tax systems, and by fostering the development of farming and stockbreeding, Tibet prospered.
At the time Songtsen Gampo took the throne, the Tibetan people did not have a writing system and kept records by tying knots. To address this, Songtsen Gampo sent sixteen nobles including minister Thonmi Sambhota to India to study Sanskrit and writing. They created a written language for Tibet, and translated the Buddhist doctrines into this new language. This contribution helped to preserve, transmit and develop the Tibetan culture.
Unfortunately, Songthen Gampo died of an illness in 650, at the age of thirty-four. He was succeeded by his infant grandson Trimang L?n (Khri-mang-slon). Real power was left in the hands of the minister Gar Songts?n. It is said that Songtsen Gampo was buried in Yumbu Lakhang in southeast Tibet.
Expansion of the Tibetan Kingdom Under Songtsen Gampo
Through warfare and Songthen Gampo expanded the Tibetan empire deep into Nepal and Tang Dynasty China, and it was during these battles that he gained an appreciation of the neighbouring cultures. He adopted Buddhism and encouraged his subjects to take p the faith. Under his rule, Buddhism began to replace the shamanistic practices of the Bon religion.
Songts?n Gampo was skilled in diplomacy as well as combat. His minister, Myang Mangpoje defeated the Sumpa people in 627. Six years later he was accused of treason and executed. He was succeeded by minister Gar Songts?n (Mgar-srong-rtsan). The Chinese records mention an envoy in 634. At that time Songtsen Gampo requested marriage to a Chinese princess but was refused. In 635-36, Songtsen Gampo attacked and defeated the Tuyuhun, who lived around Koko Nur, a lkae in present-day Qinghai Province, and took control of important trade routes into China. After a Tibetan campaign against China in 635-6, the Chinese emperor agreed—only because of the threat of force, according to Tibetan sources—to provide a Chinese princess to Songts?n Gampo. [Source: Wikipedia +]
Around 639, after Songts?n Gampo had a dispute with his younger brother Ts?nsong, the younger brother was burnt to death by his own minister Kh?sreg, presumably at the behest of Songtsen Gampo. Songts?n Gampo’s sister S?makar (Sad-mar-kar) was sent to marry Lig-myi-rhya, the king of Zhangzhung in what is now Western Tibet. However, when the king refused to consummate the marriage, she then helped her brother to defeat Lig myi-rhya and incorporate Zhangzhung into the Tibetan Empire. In 645, Songts?n Gampo overran the kingdom of Zhangzhung.+
There is some confusion as to whether Central Tibet conquered Zhangzhung during the reign of Songts?n Gampo or in the reign of Trisong Dets?n, (r. 755 until 797 or 804). The records of the Tang Annals do, however, seem to clearly place these events in the reign of Songts?n Gampo for they say that in 634, Zhangzhung and various Qiang tribes "altogether submitted to him." Following this, he united with the country of Zhangzhung to defeat the Tuyuhun, then conquered two more Qiang tribes before threatening the Chinese region of Songzhou with a very large army (according to Tibetan sources 100,000, according to the Chinese more than 200,000 men). He then sent an envoy with gifts of gold and silk to the Chinese emperor to ask for a Chinese princess in marriage and, when refused, attacked Songzhou. According to the Tang Annals, he finally retreated and apologised and later the emperor granted his request. It is recorded in the tradition of Tibet, that after Songtsen Gampo died in 650 A.D., the Chinese Tang dynasty attacked and took control of Lhasa, "but they could not sustain their presence there in the hostile environment, so they soon returned to China." +
Tibetans and the Tang Dynasty
From 650 onward, when China was under the Tang Dynasty (A.D. 618 to 906), the Tibetans gained immensely in power, and pushed from the south into the Tarim basin. In 678 they inflicted a heavy defeat on the Chinese, and it cost the Tang decades of diplomatic effort before they attained, in 699, their aim of breaking up the Tibetans' realm and destroying their power. [Source: “A History of China” by Wolfram Eberhard, 1951, University of California, Berkeley]
The Tang Empire competed with the Tibetan Empire for control of areas in Inner and Central Asia,which was at times settled with marriage alliances such as the marrying of Princess Wencheng (d. 680) to Songts?n Gampo (d. 649). A Tibetan tradition mentions that Chinese troops captured Lhasa after Songts?n Gampo's death, but no such invasion is mentioned in either Chinese annals or the Tibetan manuscripts of Dunhuang.
There was a long string of conflicts with Tibet over territories in the Tarim Basin between 670–692, and in 763 the Tibetans even captured the capital of China, Chang'an, for fifteen days during the An Shi Rebellion. In fact, it was during this rebellion that the Tang withdrew its western garrisons stationed in what is now Gansu and Qinghai, which the Tibetans then occupied along with the territory of what is now Xinjiang. Hostilities between the Tang and Tibet continued until they signed a formal peace treaty in 821. The terms of this treaty, including the fixed borders between the two countries, are recorded in a bilingual inscription on a stone pillar outside the Jokhang temple in Lhasa. [Source: Wikipedia]
Songtsen Gampo and Princess Wencheng
Songtsen Gampo married two princesses respectively from Nepal and Tang Dynasty China. In 639, after he married Princess Bhrikuti Devi of Nepal, he proposed a marriage to the Tang Dynasty leadership. In 641, the Chinese Emperor Tang Taizong sent Princess Wencheng to marry Songtsen Gampo (some sources say she was sent to his son). Both princesses are credited with introducing Buddhism to Tibet. Princess Wencheng is regarded as the founder of Jokhang Temple in Lhasa, Tibet’s most important temple, and is credited with bringing Buddhism and Chinese culture to Tibet.
The Chinese Princess Wencheng departed China in 640 and arrived a year later in Lhasa, bringing a statue, the Jowo Shakyamuni, a life-size (1.5 meters tall) statue of the Buddha.. Some stories say she was 12 when she arrived; other say she eight. Her arrival is traditionally credited with being the first time that Buddhism came to Tibet, but it is very unlikely Buddhism extended beyond foreigners at the court. Statues of Princess Wencheng and Songtsan Gambo stand together at Jokhang Monastery in Lhasa.
Prince Wencheng was a daughter of a courtier: the niece or daughter, of the Tang Emperor Taizong. It is said that Emperor Taizong of the Tang dynasty needed to find a bride for King Songtsen Gampo and smart and pretty Wencheng seemed an ideal match, so she was conferred the title of princess and sent west.
Princess Wencheng Gongzhu was one of the five wives of Songtsen Gampo. She brought a dowry of precious Buddhist gifts to Lhasa, notably the Jowo Rinpoche statue. The story of Princess Wencheng’s marriage to Songtsen Gampo has been used as a basis for numerous songs, operas, films and paintings in China since 1950. According to Tibetologist Robert Barnett, “Hers is the main story used officially in modern China to describe the Sino-Tibetan relationship. Most if not all of this cultural production is state-sponsored.” [Sources: Save Tibet, (‘Lhasa: Streets with Memories’ by Robert Barnett, Columbia University Press, 2010).
Princess Wencheng and Jokhang Temple
Songtsan Gambo had the Ramoche Monastery built for the Buddha statues that Princess Wencheng brought with her. The princess herself had the Jokhang Temple built. In front of it she and Songtsan Gambo planted some willow trees now known as tangliu (the Tang willow). Today, the original statue of Sakyamuni believed to be brought by Princess Wencheng is still enshrined in the center of the main hall of the Jokhang Monastery. [Source: Chloe Xin, Tibetravel.org?tibettravel.org ]
Prince Wencheng passed away in 680 thirty years after Songtsan Gambo. Reportedly a large, ceremonious funeral was held to honor her. Generations of poets have written verses to eulogize her and her story has been adapted to various theatrical forms. Two traditional observations have been devoted to her: the fifteenth day of the fourth month of each Tibetan year (the day when Princess Wencheng arrived in Tubo) and the fifteenth day of the tenth month of each Tibetan year (the birthday of Princess Wencheng). Her statue and that of Songtsan Gambo are worshiped in the Jokhang Monastery. The chamber where they spent their first married life is still kept intact in the Potala Palace.
Jokhang Temple was built on the former site of a lake. The site was selected, according to legend, when the cart in which Wendheng was bringing the statue of Sakyamuni sank into the mud by Wotang Lake. Divination identified this as the site of the Dragon Palace, the malign influence of which could only be counteracted by the building of a monastery. The foundation stone was laid in 647. [Source: UNESCO]
Actually two temples were built, Queen Bhrikuti (the Nepali princess) founded the monastery to house the statue, while Wencheng chose the location, purported to be the best location based on the traditions of geomancy and the site of a lake said to be a witch’s heart (by building the temple there would exorcise the evil she brought to the region). Another temple, the Ramoche Temple, was founded about the same time. The former was originally built to house the Sakyamuni brought by Princess Wencheng, but shortly thereafter was moved to the larger Jokhang Temple. [Sources: orientalarchitecture.com, travelchinaguide.com]
According to the legend, the lake site was chosen after many failed attempts to build a temple in the region. Prior to this, every time a monastery was built, it would collapse. Unable to get to the bottom of this problem, Bhrikuti turned to Wencheng for help. Being a learned and wise woman, Wencheng told the Nepali princess that the geography of Tibet was very much like a witch, with the lake at the heart. In order to build the monastery, Wencheng said the could defeat the witch by filling in the lake, which was done using 1,000 goats to carry soil from a mountain far away. When the construction work was done, it was called Ra-Sa-Vphrul-Snang ('ra' meaning goat and 'sa' meaning earth in Tibetan) to commemorate those goats. In the side halls flanking the Main Hall of Jokhang Temple are the statues of Songtsan Gambo and Princess Wencheng. Their faces have been heavily gilded by worshipers using gold paint and gold leaf. [Ibid]
Battle of Talas and the Silk Road in Tibet
The Battle of Talas is one of history's most important battles. In 751, Chinese forces of the Tang dynasty attempting the extend Chinese control into Central Asia were annihilated by a Muslim army assisted by Tibetans in Talas (present-day Tara in Kazakhstan) not far from Samarkand. The defeat of the Chinese in 751 gave Muslims control of the Silk Road. As China became strong during the Tang dynasty it began expanding westward, for the most part relying more on diplomatic skills than military might to achieve its goals. The strategy worked well until one Chinese viceroy went too far and ordered the murder of the khan of the Tashkent Turks.
In 751 an alliance of enraged Turks, opportunist Arabs and Tibetans maneuvered a Chinese force into the Talas Valley in present-day Kazakhstan and Kyrzgzstan. In the ensuing battle — the Battle of Talas — the Chinese were routed and forced back across the Tian Shan. Tibetans moving up from the south were driven out of the Tarim basin by Uighur Turks, allies of the Tang. The Uighars have been in the region ever since. The Battle of Talas, ended Chinese ambitions in Central Asia. After the battle, the Turk, Arab and Tibetans splintered and instability was the rule in Central Asia until the 9th century when the Samanid dynasty rose up.
In 2016, scientists announced that evidence from a high-altitude tomb that suggests the Silk Road went through Tibet. Jane Qiu wrote in Scientific American: “Discovered in 2005 by monks, the 1,800-year-old tomb sits 4.3 kilometers above sea level in the Ngari district of Tibet. When excavations began in 2012, the research team examining the site was surprised to find a large number of quintessential Chinese goods inside. The haul lends itself to the idea that merchants were traveling from China to Tibet along a branch of the Silk Road that had been lost to history. [Sources: Jane Qiu, Scientific American, April 1, 2016; Source: “Earliest Tea as Evidence for One Branch of the Silk Road Across the Tibetan Plateau," by Houyuan Lu et Al., in Scientific Reports, Vol. 6, Article No. 18955; January 7, 2016; Map by Mapping Specialists \=]
Scientists " also were taken aback by what looked like tea buds. The earliest documentation of tea in Tibet dates to the seventh century A.D., but these buds would be 400 to 500 years older. To confirm the identification, Lu and his colleagues analyzed the chemical components of the samples and detected ample amounts of caffeine and theanine, a type of amino acid abundant in tea. Moreover, the chemical fingerprints of the tea residues were similar to those of tea found in the tomb of a Chinese emperor of the Han Dynasty dated to 2,100 years ago, and both could be traced to tea varieties grown in Yunnan in southern China. “This strongly suggests that the tea [found in the Tibetan tomb] came from China," Lu says. The findings were recently published in Scientific Reports.
?See Archaeologists Uncover Branch of the Silk Road in Tibet Under SILK ROAD ROUTES?factsanddetails.com
Tibetans and Uyghurs During the An Shan Rebellion in the Tang Dynasty
During the An Shan Rebellion(from 755 to 763), an uprising against Tang dynasty , the Uyghur khan Moyanchur took advantage of the situation and married his own daughter to a Chinese diplomatic envoy, receiving Chinese princess as his bride in return. The Uyghurs helped recapture the Tang capital from the rebels, but refused to leave until the Tang paid them an enormous sum of tribute in silk. Abbasid Arabs also assisted the Tang in putting down the An Lushan's rebellion. Tibetans took advantage of the upheaval to grab Chinese territory, and held on to some it even after the Tibetan Empire fell apart in 842. The Uyghurs empire fell soon after that but the Tang was so weakened by the An Lush rebellion it was unable to reconquer much of the territory it lost.
“In the Tang capital, eunuchs ruled in the interests of various cliques. Several emperors fell victim to them or to the drinking of "elixirs of long life". Abroad, the Chinese lost their dominion over Turkestan, for which Uighurs and Tibetans competed.
Wolfram Eberhard wrote in “A History of China”: “When the emperor Suzong died, in 762, Tengri, the khan of the Uyghurs, decided to make himself ruler over China. The events of the preceding years had shown him that China alone was entirely defenceless. Part of the court clique supported him, and only by the intervention of P'u-ku Huai-en, who was related to Tengri by marriage, was his plan frustrated. Naturally there were countless intrigues against P'u-ku Huai-en. He entered into alliance with the Tibetan T'u-fan, and in this way the union of Turks and Tibetans, always feared by the Chinese, had come into existence. In 763 the Tibetans captured and burned down the western capital, while P'u-ku Huai-en with the Uyghurs advanced from the north. Undoubtedly this campaign would have been successful, giving an entirely different turn to China's destiny, if P'u-ku Huai-en had not died in 765 and the Chinese under Kuo Tzu-i had not succeeded in breaking up the alliance. The Uyghurs now came over into an alliance with the Chinese, and the two allies fell upon the Tibetans and robbed them of their booty. China was saved once more. [Source: “A History of China” by Wolfram Eberhard, 1951, University of California, Berkeley]
“Friendship with the Uyghurs had to be paid for this time even more dearly. They crowded into the capital and compelled the Chinese to buy horses, in payment for which they demanded enormous quantities of silkstuffs. They behaved in the capital like lords, and expected to be maintained at the expense of the government. The system of military governors was adhered to in spite of the country's experience of them, while the difficult situation throughout the empire, and especially along the western and northern frontiers, facing the Tibetans and the more and more powerful Kitan, made it necessary to keep considerable numbers of soldiers permanently with the colours. This made the military governors stronger and stronger; ultimately they no longer remitted any taxes to the central government, but spent them mainly on their armies.
Chinese Take on Songtsan Gambo, Princess Wencheng and Early Tibetan History
Chinese call the kingdom established by Songthen Gampo the Tubo Kingdom or the Tubo Slavery Regime. The Chinese say he contributed to the unity of the Chinese nation and his influence in establishing lines of communication between Tibet and China was part of his great legacy. King Songtsan Gambo established good relations with the Tang court and benefitted from the importation of Tang technologies (advanced for the day), and was influenced by Tang culture and politics. He twice sent ministers to the Tang Dynasty court requesting a member of the imperial family be given him in marriage and in 641 he married Princess Wencheng, a member of Emperor Taizong's family. [Source: Chloe Xin, Tibetravel.org?tibettravel.org , June 3, 2014 ]
During the Tubo Kingdom, the Chinese say, various Chinese technologies were introduced into Tibet, such as wine-making, grinding, and paper and ink making. Sons of the Tibetan aristocracy were sent to the Tang capital Chang'an (present-day Xi' an) to study. Literati from the Tang court went to the Tibetan capital to handle communications with the emperor. During the reign of Songtsan Gambo political, economic and cultural relations between Tang and Tubo were friendly. The Chinese say Songtsan Gambo studied Chinese and became skilled in the art of leadership.
Andrew Jacobs wrote in the New York Times, “To the consternation of many Tibetans, Princess Wencheng is frequently portrayed as having pacified Tibet and introduced from China advanced farming practices, weaving and even Buddhism and the Tibetan alphabet. Some historians question whether she even existed. The story of Princess Wencheng is a familiar one to Chinese youngsters, and her persona has come to dominate Lhasa, the Tibetan capital, in the form of an operatic extravaganza that, according to promotional materials, “celebrates the enduring friendship between the two peoples.”
The Chinese say Princess Wencheng brought crop and vegetable seeds to Tibet, and joined her entourage in teaching the local people how to grow crops and vegetables, grind wheat flour and make wine. In addition, Princess Wencheng brought scriptures and statues of Buddha from out Buddhist pagodas in China. which she had brought into the Tubo area for construction of monasteries. They also say Songtsan Gambo loved Princess Wencheng so much that he had a palace built for her where present day Potala Palace (started in 1645 under the 5th Dalai Lama) stands today.
Princess Wencheng Mega-Drama
In August 2013, the Chinese government unveiled an expensive stage drama of on the Princess Wencheng Myth that the Chinese government financed itself. Save Tibet reported: A multi-million dollar drama about a Chinese princess is being staged in Lhasa in a bid by the authorities to increase high-end tourism and assert China’s propaganda message of its ownership of Tibet. The Princess Wencheng spectacle is being staged with a cast of nearly 600 on a stage nearly 100 metres long, in a fake Potala Palace that faces the real Potala. It is being performed at a time when Lhasa is under military lockdown with snipers visible on rooftops and its citizens subject to intense surveillance and ideological campaigns. [Source: Save Tibet?^]
CCTV reported: “A dazzling drama production. "Princess Wencheng" is an epic show based on the history of Princess Wencheng's marriage to the local ruler of Tibet. The show tells a tale old, with stunning costumes, elaborate sets and a captivating plot. A drama of epic proportions! The 2014 show has made improvements to the show. It includes more aspects of Tibetan culture and is 15 minutes shorter than the 2013 version, delivering a more compact experience. "We have included more dances, such as the Zhuo dance and the dance of blue masks. Tibetan lifestyles are also highlighted in the show. It's even more spectacular than last year," He Ping, member of production management, said. "I think this is a must see if you want to travel to Tibet. To see a show like this at such a high altitude is just spectacular," an audience member said. The production employs the latest technology to create mind blowing effects. The props are also massive in scale, and the show involves more than 70 cows and 30 horses, twice the amount of last year's edition. [Source: Stanley Lee, CCTV.com, April 25, 2014]
The Princess Wencheng drama is part of China’s ambitious plans to bring large numbers of Chinese and international tourists to state-owned scenic sites and cultural icons of Tibet to receive a story scripted and delivered by the state and its state trained guides.The drama, which is re-enacted 180 times annually according to the Chinese official media, is a state-scripted narrative in which the Chinese, embodied by Princess Wencheng of the 7th century, ‘civilise’ the Tibetans and bring harmony to Tibet. The controversial Princess Wencheng drama is opening amid a tourist boom in Tibet, with Lhasa the main focus.
Chinese authorities are seeking to brand Tibet as an exotic, ‘Shangri La’ destination.?^?Andrew Jacobs wrote in the New York Times: “Tsering Woeser, a Tibetan writer who saw the show soon after it opened, said she was troubled by the overriding message that painted the Tibetan people as savages who needed civilizing. “We used to think the story of Princess Wencheng was cute, but she has become such an over-the-top work of propaganda that we can’t help but be offended,” Ms. Woeser said. [Source: Andrew Jacobs, New York Times, August 18, 2014]
In her blog Woeser wrote: “Lhasa has become a big stage where grandiose projects that aim to change our history by imitating the past are being played out. A big stage where casually dressed plain-clothes police lurk on rooftops of the city’s monasteries and private residences, sometimes even pretending to play with Tibetan beads. But, even when the smallest whispers have been silenced, this big stage fails to hide the countless fears that exist in this city...At dawn, I take my DSLR camera and see through the lens a ”copycat” Potala Palace now seating across the Lhasa river. This building, labeled by the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) and the city of Lhasa as their “Number One” project, is a theatre built round the clock to be the stage for the mega-production “Princess Wencheng”. [Source:?woeser.middle-way? =/=]
The Party is trying to create a new myth around the Princess Wencheng, attributing to her much more influence than she really had…. The points below illustrate some of the new “achievements” attributed to Princess Wencheng under the new narrative: 1) The Potala Palace was built in her honor by the Tibetan King Songtsan Gampo; 2) Princess Wencheng is regarded as one of the main founders of Tibetan Buddhism; 3) The sacred mountain Bhumpa in Tibet was named by Princess Wencheng; 4) Princess Wencheng invented Tankas; and 5) Princess Wencheng was responsible for transmitting the greeting “Tashi Delek”. Under the influence of political and economic agendas, the myth of Princess Wencheng is finally becoming a “brain washing” tool. The play will use the latest modern electronic technology to celebrate the revival of an old “splendor”. But, when we talk about celebrating a “splendor” are we celebrating the splendor of the Tang Dinasty, or rather China’s current big nationalistic splendor? Perhaps this is an attempt to use the Princess Wencheng’s myth to materialize the glorious “China Dream”, which in fact is nothing more than a “Sinicization Dream”. =/=
Decline of the Tibetan Empire
As Tibet's control on the Central Asian trade routes faltered, the power of the empire declined. King Tritusng Detsen Ralpchen was assassinated by his brother King Langdarma, who persecuted the Buddhists. In A.D. 842, Langdarma himself — the last Tibetan king of the Yarlung dynasty — was assassinated by a monk disguised as a religious dancer during a festival.
After 842, Tibetan aggression in the region stopped and the Tibetan kingdom dissolved, decentralization ensued, China won back much of its lost territory, many smaller states were created throughout the plateau and they fought among themselves. After that Tibet never again had ambitions of being a military power. When unpleasant chores had to be done the Tibetans relied on others, namely the Mongolians and Chinese.
One small kingdom, Guge, was founded in the A.D. 9th century after Langdarma’s assassination. It endured for seven centuries partly because the leaders that followed Langdrama enthusiastically embraced Buddhism. In the 17th century, Guge was abandoned. No one is sure why. Some blame Muslim invaders. Other say it was because of environmental reasons.
?See Separate Article GUGE KINGDOM AREA OF WESTERN TIBET?factsanddetails.com
Image Sources: Purdue University, University of Washington
Text Sources: 1) "Encyclopedia of World Cultures: Russia and Eurasia/ China", edited by Paul Friedrich and Norma Diamond (C.K.Hall & Company, 1994); 2) Liu Jun, Museum of Nationalities, Central University for Nationalities, Science of China, China virtual museums, Computer Network Information Center of Chinese Academy of Sciences,?kepu.net.cn ?~; 3) Ethnic China?ethnic-china.com ?*\; 4) \=/; 5) China.org, the Chinese government news site?china.org ?|?New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Times of London, Lonely Planet Guides, Library of Congress, Chinese government, Compton’s Encyclopedia, The Guardian, National Geographic, Smithsonian magazine, The New Yorker, Time, Newsweek, Reuters, AP, AFP, Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic Monthly, The Economist, Foreign Policy, Wikipedia, BBC, CNN, and various books, websites and other publications.
Last updated September 2022
end of quote
领英推荐
Whereas the following comes from my next to last Puse article
The normalization of money fueled corruption in USA and Russia: Sword of Damocles of a guaranteed conviction for corruption as a weapon
Andrew Beckwith
quote
This is the problem in America
quote
Ralph Reed’s?Faith & Freedom Coalition, we learned Wednesday, is going to?spend ?$42 million on the midterm elections, focusing on flipping evangelical Hispanics toward the GOP.
Leonard Leo, head of?The Federalist Society?so famous for providing Trump and McConnell with rightwing judges to pack federal courts and the Supreme Court, recently?received ?a $1.6 billion contribution, tax-free.
So much money is sloshing around in our political system — both what we know of and the billions in truly dark money that we know nothing about — that honest politicians are buried and actual criminals are stepping up.
end of quote
We need to smarten up. It is as clear as daylight what is going on
quote
Who Will Get Rid of Putin? The Answer Is Grim.
Aug. 18, 2022
Give this article
By?Oleg Kashin
Mr. Kashin is a Russian journalist based in London.
Sign up for the Russia-Ukraine War Briefing.??Every evening, we'll send you a summary of the day's biggest news.?Get it sent to your inbox.
What’s easier to imagine — Vladimir Putin suddenly declaring an end to the war on Ukraine and withdrawing his troops or a Russia without Mr. Putin that revises his policies, ends the war and begins to build relations with Ukraine and the West on a peaceful new foundation?
It’s a hard one to answer. The war in Ukraine is, to a significant degree, the result of Mr. Putin’s personal obsession, and it’s hardly likely that he will voluntarily agree to end it. Which leaves the other possibility: Russia without Mr. Putin, with all hopes for a peaceful Russia tied to a change of power in the country.
That also seems pretty unlikely. Six months into the war, Mr. Putin’s power does not appear to be any less solid than it was during peacetime. His approval ratings are high, and he doesn’t have a single opponent in Russia whose voice can be heard. Of his two most likely successors —?Mikhail Mishustin , the prime minister, and?Aleksei Navalny , the opposition leader — one is bound by loyalty to the president, and the other is in prison. For either to come to office, Mr. Putin would have to depart. But short of a sudden change of heart or medical emergency, he’s not going anywhere. Mr. Putin’s successor may well be Mr. Putin.
It’s a bleak prospect and one many find hard to accept. Why are no members of the ruling elite, faced with a president driving their country to ruin and themselves badly affected by the war, pushing for the removal of Mr. Putin? Where are the brave technocrats or functionaries who will, in the interest of their class and their country, contrive to oust the president? Such questions, given regular voice in the West, are more of a lament than a spur to analysis. But the answer lies close at hand.
For years, critics inside and outside Russia relied on one major theme to galvanize opposition to Mr. Putin: corruption. For a spell, the approach made some inroads, especially in the hands of Mr. Navalny, whose?well-produced videos ?documenting corruption throughout the ruling elite — including Mr. Putin — appeared to dent the president’s popularity.
But corruption is the glue that holds the system together, not the catalyst to bring it down. Basing his power on the thievery of his subordinates, Mr. Putin’s goal was hardly to ensure their comfort and well-being. The point, more likely, was to bind the ruling class within a conspiratorial system of collective responsibility, ensuring its absolute solidarity. In this condition of complicity, no one could emerge to challenge the president.
Strictly speaking, it is not completely correct to call such a system corruption. Corruption entails a deviation from the norm, whereas in Mr. Putin’s Russia the norm is precisely that of officials living on money of dubious origin. If the law were to be followed literally, then practically every Russian minister or governor could end up in prison. In practice, though, Mr. Putin always applied the law selectively. Every time one of his influential subordinates found himself charged with corruption, the main question on people’s minds was about the hidden political reason for the arrest.
Such was the case with the former economic minister?Aleksei Ulyukayev , who was accused of taking bribes after clashing with Igor Sechin, the influential chief executive of the Russian oil giant Rosneft and a friend of?Mr. Putin . So, too, with several governors, including?Nikita Belykh , who at one time headed a major opposition party, and Sergei Furgal, whose victory in an election ran counter to the Kremlin’s desire and who was duly accused not of corruption but?murder .
Editors’ Picks
What is called corruption in Russia would be more correctly called a system of incitement and blackmail. If you are loyal and if the president is pleased with you, you have the right to steal — but if you are disloyal, you’ll be thrown in prison for theft. It’s no surprise that in recent decades only a few individuals inside Mr. Putin’s system have spoken out publicly against it. Terror is always more persuasive than anything else.
The war had the potential to upend this calculus. The ruling class, which owes its acquisition of wealth to its position in power, has come up against a new reality: Their property in the West has been either seized or subjected to sanctions — no more yachts, no more villas, nowhere to run. For many officials and oligarchs close to the government, this means the collapse of all their life plans, and in principle, it can be presumed that there’s not a single social group in Russia more dissatisfied with the war than Mr. Putin’s kleptocrats.
But there’s a catch: They traded in their rights as political agents for those very yachts and villas. The fundamental intrigue in internal Russian politics is tied up with this fact. Mr. Putin’s military escapade has had a devastating impact on the lives of the establishment elite, on whom he has always relied. But the elites, hamstrung by their dependence on power for their wealth and security, find themselves in no position to say no to Mr. Putin.
That’s not to say their dissatisfaction doesn’t come to light. The finance minister, Anton Siluanov,?spoke publicly ?about the difficulties of carrying out his duties under the new conditions. Aleksei Kudrin, the chairman of the body that audits the state finances and a Kremlin insider, explained at a?meeting with Mr. Putin ?that the war had led Russia’s economy to a dead end. And even the head of the state military-industrial monopoly, Sergei Chemezov,?wrote an article ?about the impossibility of realizing Mr. Putin’s plans. But backed by no political weight, such views hold no interest — or danger — for Mr. Putin.
It’s true that wars often bring out a new elite among officers and generals, who could conceivably threaten the president’s rule. Yet this is not happening in Russia, possibly because Mr. Putin is trying to prevent his generals from gaining too much fame. The names of those in command of Russian troops in Ukraine were?kept secret ?until the end of June, and propaganda about the “heroes” of the war prefers to feature stories about those who have lost their lives and are no longer able to manifest political ambitions. In any case, Mr. Putin has surrounded himself with favored security personnel whose loyalty to him is beyond question.
Given this situation, Russia’s functionaries can do little other than wait. They could try to conduct some kind of quiet game of their own, including separate negotiations with the West, but up to now, there has been no evidence of humanitarian corridors for Russian elites. Even if someone — for example, an oligarch close to Mr. Putin such as Roman Abramovich — managed to break through to the West, all that would await him would be confiscated assets and suspicion. By comparison, even Mr. Putin’s paranoia might be preferable.
If members of the ruling elite aren’t able to topple Mr. Putin, then perhaps the professional middle classes could? But there, too, the outlook is grim. For those who step out to criticize the war, the fate of?Marina Ovsyannikova , an editor at the state-controlled Channel 1, is instructive. After staging a high-profile protest — during a live broadcast of a popular evening news program, she stood behind the announcer and held a poster that read, “Stop the war” — she fled the country to avoid arrest, leaving her family behind in Moscow.
For months she roamed Europe, subjected to numerous accusations that no matter how impressive her protest might have been, she was still, first and foremost, a cog in Mr. Putin’s propaganda machine. She returned to Russia, where she’s been?arrested ?and?fined ?several times, been charged with?spreading false information ?and had her?home raided . Her former colleagues in the media and the professional class more widely must understand that it makes no sense to emulate her action. Better to sit out the war quietly in their jobs than to risk ruin and infamy.
At the popular level, things are no better. The initially promising protests against the war have been completely?choked off ?by the threat of prison time. Critical public statements, let alone rallies or demonstrations, are now all but impossible. Wielding repression, the regime is in full control of the domestic situation.
Instead, the factor seriously threatening Mr. Putin’s strength today is the Ukrainian Army. Only losses at the front have a realistic chance of bringing change to the political situation in Russia — as Russian history well attests. After defeat in the Crimean War in the mid-19th century, Czar Alexander II was forced to introduce radical reforms. The same thing happened when Russia lost a war with Japan in 1905, and perestroika in the Soviet Union was driven in large part by the failure of the war in Afghanistan. If Ukraine manages to inflict heavy losses on Russian forces, a similar process could unfold.
Yet for all?the damage ?wrought so far, such a turnaround feels a long way off. For now and the foreseeable future, it’s Mr. Putin — and the fear that without him, things would be worse — that rules Russia.
End of quote
Whereas
quote
House Republicans reject bill to prevent future coup attempts
In theory, the bipartisan Presidential Election Reform Act should've passed with an overwhelming majority. In practice, Republicans had other ideas.
Sept. 22, 2022, 9:29 AM EDT
By?Steve Benen
During the debate yesterday on the House floor over the?Presidential Election Reform Act , Republican Rep. Liz Cheney told her colleagues, “If your aim is to prevent future efforts to steal elections, I would respectfully suggest that conservatives should support this bill.”
The good news for democracy advocates is that a majority of the House members agreed. The bad news is that the vast majority of Republicans did not. NBC News?reported :
The House voted 229-203 on Wednesday to pass a bill aimed at preventing future election subversion, inspired by the investigation into Jan. 6 and a determination to prevent such an attack from occurring again. The Presidential Election Reform Act was written and introduced earlier this week by Reps. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., and Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., two members of the Jan. 6 select committee.
It’s been a while since we last explored the issue, so let’s revisit our?earlier coverage ?and review how we arrived at this point.
When John Eastman, the highly controversial Republican lawyer on Donald Trump’s team in the aftermath of the former president’s defeat, wrote?an infamous memo ?intended to help overturn the 2020 results, his strategy focused on a specific task:?exploiting ambiguities ?in the Electoral Count Act of 1887.
The law was passed in the aftermath of a brutally messy election controversy, and it was designed to establish a congressional process for certifying electoral votes. For generations, it was largely treated as a legal afterthought, if it was thought of at all.
All of that changed in dramatic fashion during the Trump era — or more specifically, as the Trump era came to a difficult end — when it became obvious that the antiquated law was in need of an overhaul.
To that end, as NBC News?report ?explained, the bipartisan Presidential Election Reform Act would amend the 135-year-old Electoral Count Act “to remove any doubt that the vice president’s role in counting Electoral College votes is simply ministerial. It would lift the threshold for members of Congress to force a vote on discounting presidential electors from just one member of the House and the Senate each to one-third of both chambers. And it would require governors to send electors to Congress for the candidate who won, based on state law set before Election Day, which cannot be retroactively changed.”
In theory, given the crisis from the recent past, this bipartisan bill is exactly the sort of measure that should pass easily. In practice, House Republican leaders peddled a series of claims?in bad faith , demanded that GOP members reject the bill, and largely succeeded in creating a partisan outcome.
Only nine ?House Republicans voted in the majority:
What do these nine lawmakers have in common? Not one of them will be on Capitol Hill next year: They were either defeated in GOP primaries in recent months or they’re retiring voluntarily.
In other words, of the Republicans who intended to be in office in 2023 and 2024, they all opposed a bipartisan effort to prevent future coup attempts.
The fight now shifts to the Senate, where a similar-but-not-identical package?appears to have the votes ?to advance, but where party leaders will likely wait to hold a vote until after the midterm elections. Watch this space.
end of quote
and here is what is enabling it
quote
How the Supreme Court Set Up the Criminal Takeover of America
So much money is sloshing around in our political system that honest politicians are buried and actual criminals are stepping up.
13 hr ago
Republicans in the Senate yesterday?killed ?legislation passed through the House that would require “dark money” to be publicly disclosed: not a single Republican voted for it, although every Democrat in attendance did.
Ralph Reed’s?Faith & Freedom Coalition, we learned Wednesday, is going to?spend ?$42 million on the midterm elections, focusing on flipping evangelical Hispanics toward the GOP.
Leonard Leo, head of?The Federalist Society?so famous for providing Trump and McConnell with rightwing judges to pack federal courts and the Supreme Court, recently?received ?a $1.6 billion contribution, tax-free.
So much money is sloshing around in our political system — both what we know of and the billions in truly dark money that we know nothing about — that honest politicians are buried and actual criminals are stepping up.
Donald Trump‘s phone call to Georgia’s Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger was probably the clearest illustration of this recent incarnation of his lifelong criminality. Although it’s rapidly being eclipsed by his theft and probable sale to foreign dictators of classified documents.
Over the last 40 years, career criminals like Trump have increasingly moved out of the business world and the streets and into politics, something for which we can thank the Supreme Court.
There are, among us, a small number of individuals who are career criminals. They have literally spent their entire lives skirting or outright breaking the law, and not only believe the law doesn’t apply to them, but actually delight in getting away with their crimes.
Because all of us have, at one time or another in our lives, broken a law or told lies; we tend to assume that these career criminals are just like us but only got caught in that one unlucky moment, like that time you drove home after a second glass of wine, or made up an excuse to tell your boss.
But they’re not like you and me. There’s something fundamentally different about these people. And the failure to recognize that goes to the core of the crisis within the Republican Party and our overall political system today.
Back when I was in my late teens, I got a job as a manager of a GNC store in a mall in Okemos, Michigan. There was a test that I had to give to all job applicants to determine their “honesty.”
The test asked really weird questions, along the lines of:
“One of your very best employees just came to you to return some money to the till, money that she had borrowed from the till because a few months back she needed it to help pay for an emergency medical procedure for her child. She has saved up to pay the money back, and is now trying to do so. What do you do?”
Or: “Your mother just called and told to you that she’s been shoplifting at the local store when her food stamps run out and your younger sister is really hungry. What do you do?”
The test, from a national testing chain, went on with 20 or 30 similar questions. In almost every case, the only correct answer to the multiple choice test was, “call the police and send them to jail.”
I protested to my district manager, saying that I would’ve flunked the test, or would’ve had to lie to pass it. There’s no way I turn in my mother or call the police on somebody with a sick child.
My manager pointed out to me that the only way to pass the honesty test is to lie on it, and it was actually designed that way. They expect people to say that they will call the police even for the tiniest of crimes. I protested that I thought that was crazy, that we were requiring people to lie to pass an honesty test, and that made no sense at all to me.
What he explained was that there’s no test in the world that can tell if a person really and truly will or will not call the police on anyone. But the test does tell whether a person understands the difference between right and wrong.
“I know it’s hard for you to realize or believe,” he said as I recall, “but there are some people who literally don’t know what is right and what is wrong. And the people who don’t have that basic understanding, or do know but don’t think the rules apply to them, are the ones most likely to steal from us or let their friends come shoplifting.
“The test expects people to lie by representing themselves as being honest, because to lie on the test they would first have to know the difference between right and wrong, so they could lie and say that they would always do the right thing.”
One of the big challenges the American media and our political system have with Donald Trump and a number of his enablers is that, like the people I was testing to filter out from our potential pool of employees, they are actually career criminals with no deep understanding of, or respect for, right and wrong.
They may know the words and concepts, but truly believe they don’t apply to them.
Donald Trump has been scamming, grifting and stealing his entire life, going all the way back to stealing his father’s money from his parents and his siblings. He is a career criminal.
Many of the people he surrounded himself with are, similarly, career criminals even though they appear to have had high profile, high powered positions in government or industry.
Even Forbes magazine called Trump’s commerce secretary, billionaire Wilbur Ross, a professional “grifter” for all the scams he has perpetrated in his career, and now we learn that Clarence Thomas’ wife was allegedly in on trying to overthrow our democracy.
While fundamentally dishonest people has been a problem for our society and business community for centuries, it has particularly become a problem in our political world since 1976 and 1978.
That was when the Supreme Court explicitly ruled that billionaires or corporations giving massive amounts of money to politicians and political parties is no longer considered bribery or corruption but, instead, is “free speech“ protected by the First Amendment.
Never before in all of American history had bribing politicians been considered free-speech, until the?Buckley v Valejo?and?First National Bank v Belotti?Supreme Court decisions as I laid out in?The Hidden History of the Supreme Court and the Betrayal of America .
In 2010, conservatives of the Court doubled down on these decisions and even expanded their scope with?Citizens United.
The result after these SCOTUS decisions was an ocean of corporate and billionaire money flowing into politics, sweeping Ronald Reagan into the White House on a tsunami of cash from the fossil fuel industry.
In the 40+ years since then, billionaire and corporate bribery of politicians has become the norm, and even institutionalized with national and state-based “policy networks,” PACs and SuperPACs, and dark money groups like the ones affiliated with Mitch McConnell that just poured tens of millions into this year’s elections.
All this money now sloshing around in our political system has produced the result the dissenting Supreme Court justices worried about.
It’s become a giant magnet that draws career criminals and authoritarians into politics, and then helps them become fabulously wealthy as they do the bidding of the corporations and wealthy people who fund their elections and careers.
It’s normalized the “revolving door” where people go into government positions, particularly in regulatory agencies, and make decisions that benefit giant corporations while drawing a modest government paycheck, only then to leave government and pick up multi-million dollar a year jobs in the industries they were regulating.
Trump is a career criminal, and he has surrounded himself with career criminals. Just look at their mob-like meeting just a week or so ago on one of his golf courses: it was right out of?The Sopranos.
But he and many of his criminal Republican allies could never have gained power if the Supreme Court, back in the 1970s, hadn’t struck down the “good government” laws that came out of the Nixon bribery scandals and other laws to keep money out of politics, like the?Tillman Act?that dates back to 1907.
Because of these Supreme Court decisions equating money with free speech, our political system is now overrun with grifters, con artists and career criminals.
Even worse, this dark money spree Republicans are enjoying courtesy of rightwing billionaires and giant corporations is also empowering the recurrent criminal underbelly of the political world itself: authoritarians.
Authoritarians like Mussolini, Hitler, Pinochet, and Trump each came to power through manipulating the political system in ways that, if not overtly in violation of criminal statutes, were certainly so dangerous to democracy that they’re rightly described as “crimes against the nation.”
Job one of the new Congress must be to overturn these corrupt Supreme Court decisions and get big money — and the criminals it draws and empowers — out of American politics.
end of quote
Andrew Beckwith, PhD
???? 37.983810° N ?? 23.727539°E
2 年Andrew Beckwith thanks for your perspective...