And yet, remind me, did the Warsaw Pact encircle the US? Did China send troops to nations bordering England? Do you see a lot of Scottish Dragons singing about the example of Lei Feng?
Truth is that it's absolutely neoliberalsm. China is a peaceful country, it is also a country with the world's biggest parliament, and they have a multi-party electoral system.
China doesn't have anything even remotely close to the Rupert Murdoch conglomeration, or MSNBC, or Washington Post. There's no Chinese Al Jazeera or Chinese Congress for Cultural Freedom.
In fact you should look into Deleuze's connections with the CCF. Le Monde especially published some of his more dare I say interesting stuff.
When I want to learn about Chinese news I have to actively look for it. Finding Chinese authors and journalists takes a bit of effort and research. I had to curate Chinese newspapers over several months. Meanwhile I've never set foot in England or the United States, and yet their news appear to be the default selection.
Even other European news go through an interesting filtering process. Ever asked yourself why French foreign policy analysts always seem to get funding from places like the Hoover Institute? Why all those lunatics who are currently pushing for war with Russia always seem to find themselves on the receiving end of US funding?
There's thousands of NGOs and statistics mills with names such as "The Institute Of Trilateral Co-Ordination" or "The Institute Of Policy Research" and they all got branches all over the world, and they call themselves journalists, and they publish studies bought and paid for by reassuring sponsors like Lockheed Martin or the British Army.
Where is the Chinese equivalent of this? Where are all these Chinese arms manufacturers who own these kinds of institutions? I never seem to find them.
Rather we are supposed to believe that China's system of media, which is subsidized by the tax payer, is somehow a conflict of interest to the tax payer. But I've yet to understand precisely how.
What I see as a conflict of interest is when people who sell bombs have a direct phone number to the editorial offices of most major world publications, and can have their op-eds published by the New York Time wherein they produce headlines such as "Is it time to stem the red tide?" and then go on some megalomaniacal diatribe about how maybe nuclear war wouldn't be such a bad idea.
To compare the two is bizarre even on the face of it. But I don't fault you, seeing as how the only author you've quoted was sponsored and published by the CIA.
