Generated Summary:

Total Words: ~39,000 Total Pages: 101 (iii-xii, 1-101)

Summary: Stabilizing the U.S.-China Rivalry

This RAND Corporation report, authored by Michael J. Mazarr, Amanda Kerrigan, and Benjamin Lenain, analyzes the potential for stabilizing the intense geopolitical rivalry between the United States and China. It argues that while the competition is real and driven by conflicting interests, both sides have a critical interest in avoiding conflict and establishing a stable “modus vivendi.” The report provides a framework for stabilization and offers specific recommendations for the overall relationship and three key flashpoints: Taiwan, the South China Sea, and the science and technology competition.

Main Points and Analysis

1. The Need and Possibility for Stabilization

• The Rivalry is Dangerous but Can Be Managed: The U.S.-China rivalry poses significant risks of military conflict, economic warfare, and global instability, threatening consensus on issues like climate change and AI (p. 1-2, 4). The authors reject the argument that seeking stability is a sign of weakness or “appeasement,” drawing a parallel to Cold War détente, which they argue ultimately hastened the Soviet Union’s internal crisis rather than strengthening it (p. 2, 14-15).
• A Limited, Not Transformative, Goal: The report’s goal is not to end the rivalry or achieve a grand transformation of the relationship. Instead, it seeks a more limited “stable competition” or “modus vivendi”—a condition of continued rivalry managed by mechanisms that prevent crises, avoid war, and protect each side’s most vital interests (p. 3, 18-19).

2. A Framework for a Stable Rivalry (Chapter 2) The report identifies six principles that define a stable strategic rivalry (p. 22-23): 1. Mutual acceptance that a modus vivendi is necessary. 2. Acceptance of the other’s essential political legitimacy. 3. Development of shared rules and norms in specific issue areas. 4. Restraint in developing capabilities that undermine the other’s existential deterrent. 5. Acceptance of a shared vision of basic organizing principles for world politics. 6. Establishment of mechanisms (e.g., communication links, crisis management) to maintain equilibrium.

Based on these principles, the authors propose six broad-based initiatives for general stabilization (p. 25-27): 1. Clarify U.S. objectives to reject absolute victory and accept the Chinese Communist Party’s legitimacy. 2. Reestablish trusted lines of communication between senior officials. 3. Improve crisis-management practices and agreements. 4. Seek new agreements to limit cyber competition. 5. Declare mutual acceptance of strategic nuclear deterrence. 6. Seek modest cooperative ventures on shared interests (e.g., climate, pandemics).

3. Assessing Chinese Intentions: Is Coexistence Possible? (Chapter 3)

• The chapter critiques recent analyses (by Doshi, Rolland, Rudd, Pottinger) that portray China as having immutable, aggressive goals that preclude coexistence.
• Through re-examination and re-translation of Chinese-language sources, the report argues that Chinese strategic concepts are often more ambiguous and less aggressively expansionist than portrayed (p. 31-43). For example:
  • Taoguang yanghui (韬光养晦) is better understood as “keeping a low profile” for domestic development rather than a sinister “hide and bide” strategy (p. 31-32).
  • The concept of “strategic space” is often framed defensively, as a response to perceived U.S. containment, and is coupled with calls for a stable external environment (p. 44-46).
• Conclusion: While China is assertive and a strategic competitor, its official rhetoric (e.g., Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, Community of Common Destiny) and the nuance in its documents suggest there is potential flexibility and an “opening for coexistence,” contradicting the most alarmist interpretations (p. 46-53).

4. Stabilizing Specific Flashpoints (Chapter 4) For each of the three critical issues, the report proposes recommendations in three categories: (A) Broad Political/Signaling, (B) Near-Term Steps, and © Bolder Initiatives for the future.

A. Taiwan (p. 74-77)

• Theory of Success: Create maximum incentive for Beijing to pursue gradual approaches by combining robust deterrence with political reassurances to make a patient strategy comfortable.
• Recommendations:
  • A1. Mutual Reassurances: Exchange statements; the U.S. reaffirming it does not support Taiwan independence, and China reaffirming a preference for peaceful reunification (p. 75).
  • A2. High-Level Dialogue: Establish a regular senior-level dialogue to communicate concerns and avoid surprises (e.g., on military moves, arms sales) (p. 75).
  • A3. Reinforce Deterrence: China should clarify its redlines; the U.S. should work with partners to signal that aggression would make China an international pariah (p. 75).
  • B1. Empowered Track 2 Dialogues: Create unofficial dialogues with strong connections to high-level officials to discuss strategic and operational issues and serve as crisis backchannels (p. 76).
  • B2. Strengthen Military Communications: Maintain and improve existing military-to-military and crisis communications links, which are often cut off during tensions (p. 77).
  • C1. U.S. Leverage with Taiwan: The U.S. should use its influence to ensure Taiwan’s actions do not escalate tensions, as part of burden-sharing (p. 77).

B. South China Sea (p. 80-82)

• Theory of Success: Combine deterrence of military escalation with intensified multilateral diplomacy to establish a peaceful resolution as the default process.
• Recommendations:
  • A1. Clarify Treaty Obligations: The U.S. and Philippines should jointly clarify the actions that would invoke the Mutual Defense Treaty (p. 80).
  • A2. Chinese Red Lines: China should clarify its specific redlines regarding other claimants’ actions (p. 80).
  • A3. Coordinated Statements: Issue mutual statements recognizing China’s security interests and U.S. commitments to maritime freedom (p. 81).
  • B1. Mutual Restraint: Agree to forswear specific actions around flashpoints like the Second Thomas Shoal (p. 81).
  • B2. Bilateral Code of Conduct: Build on the July 2024 provisional agreement to develop a bilateral code for incident management (p. 81).
  • B3. Reduce Publicity of Operations: The U.S. could selectively reduce the publicity of FONOPs and ISR flights to test for reciprocal Chinese restraint (p. 81).
  • C1. Doctrinal Shifts: Both sides could shift military doctrine from “offense and control” to “defense and access” (p. 81-82).
  • C2. Negotiate U.S. Operations: The U.S. could privately signal a willingness to negotiate some ISR/FONOP activity conditional on China moderating its claims (p. 82).

C. Science and Technology Competition (p. 83-85)

• Theory of Success: Manage the worst risks of emerging technologies while stepping back from extreme efforts to undermine the other’s progress.
• Recommendations:
  • A1. Political Reassurances: Offer statements that the U.S. does not seek to retard China’s general development and welcomes cooperation in non-threatening areas (p. 83).
  • A2. Track 1.5 Dialogues: Initiate government-nongovernment dialogues on emerging tech (especially AI and biotech) to build mutual understanding (p. 84).
  • B1. Deterrent Commitments: Clarify that attacks on critical S&T infrastructure (e.g., labs, data centers) will be met with proportional responses (p. 84).
  • B2. Reciprocal Restraint: Formalize agreements to limit gain-of-function research, AI-enabled cyberattacks in peacetime, and AI in nuclear command and control (p. 84).
  • B3. Deepen AI Dialogue: Build on existing intergovernmental AI dialogues to address risks more seriously (p. 84).
  • B4. Expand Basic Science Collaboration: Identify limited, non-sensitive areas for joint basic research under the U.S.-China Science and Technology Cooperation Agreement (p. 84-85).
  • C1. AI Loss-of-Control Cooperation: Undertake deeper cooperation with other nations to assess and mitigate potential AI misalignment dangers (p. 85).
  • C2. Return to Deep Collaboration: In a future thaw, identify areas for a significant return to deep collaboration between U.S. and Chinese universities and researchers (p. 85).

Overall Conclusion

The report concludes that while the proposed agenda is ambitious and faces significant political barriers, stabilizing the U.S.-China rivalry is an urgent and necessary goal. The path forward involves a combination of improved dialogue, targeted deterrent commitments, tangible mutual restraint, and formalized mechanisms to manage competition and avoid conflict. The authors stress that seeking stability is not an alternative to firmness but a complementary strategy to make intense competition sustainable and less risky (p. 85-86).

Just FYI, I had it on in the background. I’ll rewatch to catch anything I missed, once I make some time.

It was a get-together to appease the masses.

They spoke about important subjects, but it’s the same opinions they’ve always shared.

I think everyone should be exposed to this interview—it’s important to know what’s coming.

A bit of a love fest.

They made up, but it seemed just for show.

I think this is a normal reaction, to be defensive, when being called out from the left, labeling the messenger the boogeyman so as to dismiss any thinking and move on.

We should have standards.

A genocide should have raised the standards for choosing politicians while increasing our demands.

The duopoly is a broken system.

We must stop our celebrity worshipping and hold politicians to our demands.

We should continue to build up our communities and unite the poor and working class.

“We should focus our actions, time, and resources on direct action, mutual aid, and community outreach. If you do engage in electoral politics, do not support the duopoly (red or blue team). No War but Class War!”

Thank you for your reply!

My communication needs improvement, but being direct seems to fit in this chat.

Thanks for sharing this video with us!

Generated Summary:

Summary of Major Points: Chris Hedges on the Silencing of Palestinian Journalists

This speech, originally intended for the National Press Club of Australia, is a scathing critique of Western war journalism and its complicity in the Israeli genocide in Gaza, focusing on the systematic silencing and killing of Palestinian journalists.

Introduction: Context and Ironic Censorship (0:00 - 2:15)

• The host introduces Chris Hedges and provides his credentials as a Pulitzer Prize-winning foreign correspondent.
• The speech he is about to give was cancelled by the National Press Club of Australia on the topic of “the silencing of Palestinian journalists.”
• The host describes the cancellation as a “travesty” and “institutional gaslighting,” framing the event as an act of delivering an uncensored truth.

1. The Two Types of War Correspondents (2:50 - 6:14)

Hedges establishes a fundamental dichotomy that defines all war coverage, including Gaza.

• Type 1: The Real War Correspondent (2:54-3:17): A tiny minority. They avoid press conferences, take risks in combat zones, and report what they see, which often contradicts official narratives.
• Type 2: The “Poseurs” or “Play-at-War” Correspondents (3:21-4:05): The majority. They avoid danger, rely on official briefings, participate in military-staged events, and “slavishly disseminate” official lies.
• The Conflict Between Them (4:20-6:14): The real war correspondents are the “mortal enemy” of the poseurs because they expose their reporting as false. Hedges supports this with an anecdote from reporter Ben Anderson in Liberia, who found other journalists getting drunk in a hotel bar instead of reporting from the field.

2. The Divide in Gaza and the Targeted Assassination of Journalists (6:17 - 7:29)

Hedges applies his two-type model directly to the genocide in Gaza.

• The Dividing Line: Palestinian journalists are the real war correspondents, exposing Israeli atrocities. The Western press are the poseurs, who do not.
• Unprecedented Death Toll: Israel has murdered over 245 Palestinian journalists. (7:03-7:29) Hedges states this is more journalists killed than in the US Civil War, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, and Afghanistan combined.

3. Personal Testimony: The Death of a Colleague (7:44 - 14:13)

A powerful, first-hand account from Palestinian journalist Salman Al-Bashir.

• The Killing of Muhammad Abu Hattab (8:00-10:57): Hattab was killed by an Israeli strike along with his family just after finishing his broadcast shift. Salman reported his colleague’s death live on air, breaking down and removing his press helmet and flak jacket, declaring they offer no protection.
• Forced Self-Censorship (12:24-13:02): After Hattab’s death, Salman changed his language to avoid “aggravating the Israelis,” stopping terms like “Zionists,” “new Nazis,” and “occupation army.”
• The Final Straw: Death of Samer Abu Daqqa (13:04-14:13): Salman left Gaza after his friend, Al Jazeera cameraman Samer Abu Daqqa, was killed by an Israeli drone strike and left to bleed to death for five hours while rescue workers were targeted.

4. Complicity of the Western Media: Amplifying Israeli Lies (14:46 - 18:43)

Hedges documents how Western media outlets act as a mouthpiece for Israeli propaganda.

• Parroting Justifications for Killing Journalists (14:46-15:34): When Israel killed a group of journalists at Nasser Hospital (including Reuters staff), major outlets like AP, CNN, AFP, and Sky News headlines focused on the Israeli military’s claim that they were targeting a “Hamas camera” (which was, in fact, a Reuters camera).
• The Case of Anas Al-Sharif (15:46-18:01): Hedges details the systematic targeting of Al Jazeera’s popular correspondent:
  • He received direct death threats and was ordered to stop reporting.
  • His father was killed when his family home was bombed.
  • He was falsely accused by Israel of being a “Hamas operative.”
  • He was part of a team fired upon by Israeli soldiers, which paralyzed a cameraman.
  • He was eventually killed by an Israeli drone strike while in a media tent.
• Western Media’s Slanderous Obituaries (18:08-18:43): After his assassination, Reuters’ headline called him a “Hamas leader,” and a German paper called him a “terrorist disguised as a journalist.”

5. Historical Precedents and the Cost of Truth-Telling (19:15 - 23:34)

Hedges reinforces his argument with personal experiences from other conflicts.

• First Gulf War Example (19:15-20:23): He witnessed Saudi soldiers flee in panic, but reporters in the official press pool were bused in to do stand-ups repeating the Pentagon’s lie about “gallant Saudi allies.” Hedges was beaten for reporting the truth.
• Personal Backlash for Honest Reporting (20:23-21:09): His refusal to abide by press restrictions in the Gulf War led other New York Times reporters to complain he was “ruining the paper’s relationship with the military.”
• Rejecting the “Hamas Operative” Smear (21:38-23:24): He argues that even if a journalist has political affiliations (citing his own work with Marxists and a conservative Opus Dei cameraman), it doesn’t mean they are dishonest. The accusation is a familiar tactic used to discredit reporters in every war he covered.

6. The Cynical Game: Access Over Truth (24:16 - 27:09)

Hedges dismantles the myth of Western objectivity and explains the systemic incentives for lying.

• Bias Towards Western Reporters is Misguided (24:16-24:44): He argues that even if Western reporters were allowed into Gaza, the coverage would not improve because the system is corrupt.
• Why Israel Bans the Foreign Press (24:44-24:59): To exploit the bias for Western reporting and to continue its assassination campaign against journalists without killing Westerners.
• The “Cynical Game” of Amplifying Lies (25:02-26:42): Western reporters and outlets know Israeli claims (e.g., beheaded babies, Hamas command centers in hospitals) are lies but repeat them to maintain access to Israeli and US officials and to avoid being targeted by the Israel lobby.
• The Career Cost of Truth (26:42-27:09): Telling the truth leads to being blacklisted, having assignments terminated, and talks cancelled. “This is not good for careers.”

Conclusion: A Betrayal of Journalism’s Fundamental Duty (27:32 - 28:17)

• Hedges concludes that the Western press’s amplification of Israeli lies is a fundamental betrayal of journalism’s duty to transmit the truth.
• This practice legitimizes mass slaughter, refuses to hold Israel accountable, betrays Palestinian journalists, and exposes the “bankruptcy of Western journalists” whose primary attributes are “careerism and cowardice.”

TIL

Platforming

“Don’t be in a hurry to condemn because he doesn’t do what you do or think as you think or as fast. There was a time when you didn’t know what you know today.” – Malcolm X

We must stop the establishment (the duopoly—which is bought by the oligarchy) from censoring dissident views and ideas we might not otherwise hear.

This goes back to their divide-and-conquer strategy of keeping the poor and working class infighting instead of focusing on the economic solutions (class war).

We must not be afraid of getting out of our self-built echo chambers and our own self-censorship.

“One of the first things I think young people, especially nowadays, should learn is how to see for yourself and listen for yourself and think for yourself. Then you can come to an intelligent decision for yourself. If you form the habit of going by what you hear others say about someone, or going by what others think about someone, instead of searching that thing out for yourself and seeing for yourself, you will be walking west when you think you’re going east, and you will be walking east when you think you’re going west.” – Malcolm X

“The ultimate test of a society’s freedom is not how it treats its good, obedient, compliant citizens; it’s how it treats its dissidents.” – Glenn Greenwald

Shortened Version:

Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic front-runner for mayor of New York City, said he intends to ask Jessica Tisch to stay on as police commissioner if he is elected. The decision is likely to placate powerful New Yorkers and caps a months-long lobbying campaign.

For Mamdani, a democratic socialist with a history of criticizing the police, the choice is significant. He confirmed the decision in a debate, stating, “I’ve said time and again that my litmus test for that position will be excellence.”

The move is a strategic one, aiming to counter attacks from rivals who portray him as hostile to law enforcement. The ideological differences between the two are stark: Mamdani once called the department “racist” and “anti-queer” (positions he has since disavowed), while Tisch is a billionaire heiress who has pushed for stricter criminal justice laws.

Campaign aides believe Mamdani can work with Tisch to implement key promises, including creating the community safety department to shift responsibility for mental health episodes away from the police. This plan, along with proposals to cut the police overtime budget and disband the unit that handles protests, is likely to face internal opposition.

The decision has drawn praise from establishment figures but skepticism from others. Former Commissioner William Bratton said he would advise Tisch to decline, stating, “I think she would have an extraordinarily difficult time working with him.”^[1]

All is well.

2:18:53.800 - 2:56:43.500 Tucker Carlson Faces Young MAGA

Looking back at the Tucker segment, did you agree with Sabby’s commentary, or did you have a different view? Or was it a bit of both?

Did you watch the video…

It seems you replied after just reading the title…

I thought the video was simple and direct.

All is well.

Peace.

The Fourth Branch^[1].

I think it has to do with propaganda and the continued political tribalism and divide-and-conquer of the working class and poor.

The only difference is some believe they are immune or above its influence, while some try to take account of it and continue to learn from not only government and establishment sources but dissident views and independent journalists as well.

We never stopped calling out the duopoly, and we never will join the establishment and celebrity worship talking points.

True, hahaha

They are the tags from the genius source.

Thanks!

platforming

This is still a thing…

Interesting…

I would think most people would ignore and move on, especially since it is a 23-minute segment versus a 02:58:04-long video.

Sabby talks about way more fascinating and vital topics in this video.

Again, it’s interesting that Joe Rogan was the part you decided to spend your time on…

The unrelated cases, identified in Long Beach and Los Angeles county, involve patients who had not recently traveled abroad. All three were hospitalized and are now recovering, according to the California department of public health.

Mpox is a viral infection that often begins with flu-like symptoms such as fever, chills and muscle aches. These are usually followed by a rash that starts as small raised spots, then develop into fluid-filled blisters before forming scabs.

Dr Rita Nguyen, assistant state public health officer, said in Friday’s statement that “clade I mpox cases can be severe” and the “risk of severe disease and hospitalization are highest for people with weakened immune systems.”

Anyone can contract mpox through close physical contact, including sex. Past outbreaks of clade II primarily affected gay and bisexual men and transgender or non-binary people who have sex with men. California’s public health department now believes person-to-person spread of clade I is occurring in California, mainly affecting these communities.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has reported six prior US clade I cases, all linked to travel abroad. The first was detected in San Mateo county in 2024. Officials said the overall risk to the public remains low, and casual contact in settings like offices or public transit is unlikely to spread the virus.

The Jynneos vaccine protects against both clade I and II mpox. It is a two-dose series given a month apart, with full immunity reached two weeks after the second dose. No booster is currently recommended.

The CDC said it is not known how long vaccine protection might last, or if protection might decrease over time, according to its website. The public health agency is analyzing the current data and conducting studies to better understand how the Jynneos vaccine works amid the current mpox outbreak, as well as how long protection might last.^[1]

The unrelated cases, identified in Long Beach and Los Angeles county, involve patients who had not recently traveled abroad. All three were hospitalized and are now recovering, according to the California department of public health.

Mpox is a viral infection that often begins with flu-like symptoms such as fever, chills and muscle aches. These are usually followed by a rash that starts as small raised spots, then develop into fluid-filled blisters before forming scabs.

Dr Rita Nguyen, assistant state public health officer, said in Friday’s statement that “clade I mpox cases can be severe” and the “risk of severe disease and hospitalization are highest for people with weakened immune systems.”

Anyone can contract mpox through close physical contact, including sex. Past outbreaks of clade II primarily affected gay and bisexual men and transgender or non-binary people who have sex with men. California’s public health department now believes person-to-person spread of clade I is occurring in California, mainly affecting these communities.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has reported six prior US clade I cases, all linked to travel abroad. The first was detected in San Mateo county in 2024. Officials said the overall risk to the public remains low, and casual contact in settings like offices or public transit is unlikely to spread the virus.

The Jynneos vaccine protects against both clade I and II mpox. It is a two-dose series given a month apart, with full immunity reached two weeks after the second dose. No booster is currently recommended.

The CDC said it is not known how long vaccine protection might last, or if protection might decrease over time, according to its website. The public health agency is analyzing the current data and conducting studies to better understand how the Jynneos vaccine works amid the current mpox outbreak, as well as how long protection might last.^[1]

Don’t consume Joe Rogan content.

All is well.

Timestamps are updated so you can skip that segment, which is the last one Sabby talks about.

Here ya go:

2:28:06.300 - 2:51:53.000 Joe Rogan Comedy War

I watch some of his interviews; Edward Snowden’s are the interesting ones, and others here and there that I see on other social media going viral or that are more politically leaning in certain topics; the Palestine debate was a recent major one.

FYI:

Sign in to confirm your age

This video may be inappropriate for some users.

Edit:

1. Added generated summary
2. Replaced and redid the generated summary, more details and timestamps

Generated Summary:

Hong Kong Under Chinese Control: A Critical Examination

This video challenges the Western media narrative surrounding the Hong Kong protests and the subsequent imposition of the National Security Law. It argues that the situation is more complex than a simple fight for freedom and democracy, suggesting that Western interference and a separatist movement with racist undertones played significant roles. The video further posits that Hong Kong enjoys more freedom under Chinese control than it did under British rule, highlighting the lack of democracy prior to the handover and the economic instability caused by the protests. It also delves into the cultural and linguistic aspects of Hong Kong’s identity.

• 01:43 Historical Context: British Colonialism: The video begins by questioning the legitimacy of British rule in Hong Kong, setting the stage for its argument that Chinese control is not inherently oppressive.
• 03:54 Lack of Democracy Under British Rule: A key argument is that Hong Kong did not have democracy before the Chinese takeover, thus challenging the notion that China is solely responsible for suppressing freedom.
• 06:20 “One Country, Two Systems”: The video explains the framework under which Hong Kong operates, highlighting the intended autonomy granted to the region.
• 09:04 Western Interference: The video alleges that Western powers have interfered in Hong Kong’s affairs, exacerbating tensions and fueling the protest movement.
• 13:35 Racist Undertones of Separatism: A controversial claim is made that the separatist movement in Hong Kong is largely driven by racism.
• 16:18 Right-Wing Ideology: The video further characterizes the separatist movement as right-wing, adding another layer of complexity to its analysis.
• 18:08 Emigration of Hong Kongers: The video acknowledges that some Hong Kongers have left the region, but frames this within the context of broader political and economic factors.
• 21:54 Protests Re-examined: The video questions the motives and actions of the protesters, suggesting they were not solely driven by a desire for democracy.
• 26:32 Characterizing Protests as Riots: The video explicitly labels the protests as “riots,” emphasizing the violence and disruption they caused.
• 32:33 National Security Law: The implementation of the National Security Law is presented as a response to the riots and a measure to restore stability.
• 35:52 Root Causes of Hong Kong’s Problems: The video identifies factors beyond Chinese control as contributing to Hong Kong’s issues.
• 41:09 Cultural Shifts: The video touches upon the evolving cultural landscape of Hong Kong.
• 42:43 Language Debate: The Cantonese language debate is presented as a central element of Hong Kong’s identity and its relationship with China.
• 43:51 Importance of the Narrative: The video concludes by emphasizing the significance of understanding the Hong Kong narrative from multiple perspectives.

pulled headlines from the same sources for the left and the right columns.

I agree; it would have made it more apparent and noticeable.

nazi hasbaroid

What…

Projection?

Self-censorship and building your own echo chambers is your right.

All is well.

Peace.