There Is a Rational (Evil) Reason Why the U.S. Aims to Go to War Against China EVEN KNOWING IT WILL LOSE THAT WAR

The purpose is not to defeat the Communist Party of China, but to defeat the American have-nots

Alexander Mercouris, knowledgeable as he is, cannot understand why the United States wants a war with China

I would like to call your attention to Alexander Mercouris’s discussion—starting at time point 1:19:36 in the video above—of the impending war between the United States and China. If you listen to this video you will hear Mercouris—who is an extremely knowledgeable person about the “what” of world affairs, though not the “why”—express utter inability to understand why the United States is aiming to go to war with China in defense of Taiwan’s likely soon-to-be declaration of independence.

Mercouris points out that it is not in the national interest of the United States to be in a war with China, and yet, as he also emphasizes, it is the United States and not China that is deliberately making such a war take place. Mercouris confesses that he just cannot fathom why the United States (Biden administration) is acting so contrary to the actual interest of the United States. Mercouris asks, for example, why the United States would want to enter into a war with a very powerful China when it has just lost a war in Afghanistan and then (as all who admit reality agree) another war in Ukraine, and has almost exhausted its supplies of weapons and ammunition in the Ukraine debacle. It is especially hard to understand, says Mercouris, when one takes into account that China is not aggressing against the United States or even seriously against Taiwan (it is playing a waiting game there.) It just makes no sense!

The source of Mercouris’s inability to make sense of U.S. warmongering

The reason Mercouris doesn’t understand why the U.S. is warmongering against China is because he takes it for granted as a starting assumption that all national governments and their rulers want a peaceful world in which their business owning class can internationally trade and buy and sell and invest and make money, and that they view war as a bad thing that interferes with this money-making so that war is only something to engage in when forced to do so for self-protection.

Well, Mercouris’s assumption is false.

Oppressive ruling classes worry first and foremost about staying in power and not letting their own have-nots whom they oppress remove them from power. They worry about this first, and only secondarily do they worry about making a lot of money.¹And the most effective way to prevent one’s have-nots from making a revolution is to use a bogeyman enemy to control them, to make them view their rulers as their protector against their real (bogeyman) enemy. This strategy of social control requires war, war against the bogeyman enemy. The purpose of the war is not to win it, but to be AT war. U.S. rulers keep the United States at war and the fact that they’ve lost many of those wars (Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Ukraine) is of no real concern.

My article about this, titled, “Oppressors Need Bogeyman Enemies and Invent them When Necessary: Which explains the actual, versus apparent, aims of U.S. imperialism,” explains all this in detail, with examples from around the world and across centuries of time; it begins with these quotations:

"The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous...The war is waged by the ruling group against its own subjects and its object is not the victory over either Eurasia or East Asia, but to keep the very structure of society intact.” --George Orwell in Nineteen Eighty-Four

"Furthermore, the series of so-called wars since 1945 were never fought to achieve victory. They were waged for dollars, with the generals in a supernumerary role...It has been politically necessary for each major power to have an enemy, even though both major powers knew that they no longer had any way to benefit from a traditional 'all-out' war. Neither one could control its own destiny or its own society without the 'threat' of the other." --Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, chief of special operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Kennedy years, in JFK: The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy (pg. xxv and 31)

The way to stop the warmongering is NOT (as Mercouris apparently believes) to make arguments about how the warmongering is not really in the national interest. No. The way to stop the warmongering is to remove the warmongerers from power. Read here how YOU can help build the egalitarian revolutionary movement to do just that.

1. This is obvious if, and only if, one understands that the oppressed have-nots do not want to be oppressed have-nots, that they do not like being treated like dirt by privileged ruling upper classes, that they want society to be shaped by the values of equality and mutual aid and fairness and truth and not by the contrary values of an oppressive ruling class, and that—if left to themselves—they would remove their oppressors from power. Oppressive ruling classes know this! This is why they make sure NOT to leave the have-nots to themselves, but on the contrary to use lies and manipulation and bogeyman enemies to control their have-nots. This is why, for example, FDR was so anxious to get the United States into World War II and why he waged the war not mainly to defeat the fascists but rather to keep the war going, as I prove in my book online for free as a PDF file here and for purchase here.

But lots of other people don’t understand this. The oppressors don’t WANT people to understand it, so they try to make it seem as if the have-nots think they are part of one big happy family with their oppressors since they are all patriots of the same country. They try to make it seem as if the have-nots all agree with the lies told by the ruling class, as I discuss here. They try to make it seem as if the oppressors in a nation have no need to worry about controlling their own have-nots. And when oppressors make people have this false view of the world then those people—like Alexander Mercouris—have no clue why, for example, the United States rulers engage in one war after another despite losing them and it not being in their narrow money-making national interest.