Predvidevam, da je ključna kolateralna korist of Muskovega lomastenja po ameriških institucijah prekinitev financiranja “razvojne pomoči” v obliki financiranja “nevladnih organizacij” po svetu, katerih vloga je bila v zbiranju in pripravi informacij, ki so služile za dezinformiranje velikim tujim medijem o državi. Britanski The Economist neposredno objokuje, da se je s prekinitvijo USAID financiranja zdaj sesul celoten ekosistem dezinformiranja, na katerem so se napajali tudi njegovi novinarji, ko so prali možgane svojim bralcem glede Kitajske. Kot najbrž veste, je v zadnjih 20 letih The Economist najmanj dvakrat letno objavil kampanjo, v kakšnih hudih težavah je kitajsko gospodarstvo in kako se bo zdaj-zdaj kitajsko gospodarstvo sesulo. Kot veste, se ni. In nič ne kaže, da se bo v doglednem času. Nasprotno, kitajsko gospodarstvo nesramno hitro tehnološko prehiteva gospodarstva razvitih držav. Torej je bilo nekaj zelo hudo narobe s kvaliteto oziroma natančnostjo informacij, ki so jih o Kitajski pripravljale ameriško financirane “nevladne organizacije”. Očitno so jih načrtno pripravljale za namen dezinformiranja.

Spodaj je zapis Arnauda Betranda na to temo:

Hilarious how the Economist describes the news of the US government cutting funding to part of the vast network of anti-China propaganda shops it was financing. Or, as they put it euphemistically: “groups promoting rights in China”.

They argue that “some aid money has been very well spent” and when you read through the article to understand what they mean by that it’s because “journalists rely on them for first-hand accounts and data.”

So in effect the US government was financing the entire ecosystem: the journalists writing on China and their sources! “Money very well spent” indeed…

Ever wondered why the narrative on China was almost exclusively of the “China bad” or “China collapse” type? Wonder no more.

Hopefully this will serve to awaken people as to the extent to which they have been brainwashed on this topic (and many others).

Včeraj se je na to temo razjokala Bethany Allen, Head of China investigations @aspi_cts (ASPI je Australian Strategic Policy Institute, avstralski inštitut, za katerega se je ta teden izkazalo, da je tudi na plačilni listi USAID), ki brez sramu priznava, da je bil namen “neprofitnih” “nevladnih organizacij” v zbiranju in širjenju informacij o tem, kako zanič je kitajski model upravljanja in kako bo zdaj bistveno težje dokazovati, da je demokratični sistem boljši. Takole pravi:

Brez dela, ki ga opravljajo kitajske neprofitne organizacije, bo veliko težje pokazati, da je kitajski model upravljanja globoko napačen. Če tega ne moremo več dokazati, postane veliko težje razumeti, zakaj se je za demokracije sploh vredno boriti.

Spodaj je celoten zapis.

Because of the U.S. funding freezing, the entire global ecosystem of China nonprofits is facing an extinction event.

I’m not exaggerating for clicks. This is really what is happening. Read my piece below:

In many cases, these orgs provide our last window into what is actually happening in China. They do the painstaking, risky work of tracking Chinese censorship, tallying local protests, uncovering rights violations, & documenting the Uyghur genocide.

With US funding freeze, China nonprofits are facing extinction. They need emergency assistance | The Strategist An entire ecosystem of vital China-related work is now in crisis. When the Trump administration froze foreign funding and USAID programs last week, dozens of scrappy nonprofits in Hong Kong, Taiwan, a… https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/with-us-funding-freeze-china-nonprofits-are-facing-extinction-they-need-emergency-assistance/

The research and other work done by these nonprofits is invaluable. It largely isn’t replicated by think tanks, universities, private firms, or journalists. If it disappears, nothing will replace it, and Beijing’s work to crush it will be complete.

The US spending freeze has revealed how dependent these organizations are on a single government for their survival—and, by extension, how fragile our sources of information about China really are.

The US must immediately grant emergency waivers to China-focussed nonprofits. If the US is not able to do this, governments around the world that value democracy, human rights, and truth must step in and find a way to restore funding to these organisations now.

This crisis should serve as a wake-up call for democracies everywhere. Funding from a single government should not be the only thing standing between us and an information blackout on Chinese civil society. That is not a model of international democratic resilience.

A key part of China’s agenda is to persuade its own citizens and the world, falsely and through deception and coercion, that democratic systems are not better. Beijing claims its system is the best way to guarantee economic prosperity and stability.

It is difficult and time-consuming to do the work that proves Beijing is lying. Tools that allow us to uncover the flaws of China’s own system, and the actual struggles Chinese people face, directly support the goals, security, and resilience of democratic governments.

Without the work that China nonprofits do, it will be much harder to show that China’s governance model is deeply flawed. If we can no longer prove that, it becomes much harder to understand why democracies are worth fighting for in the first place.

Vir: Bethany Allen via X

Zabavno brezsramne so te ideološko profilirane “neprofitne nevladne organizacije”, ki jih financirajo zahodne države z namenom dezinformiranja in vpletanja v notranje zadeve tretjih držav. Poskusite si predstavljati, kaj bi se zgodilo v zahodnih državah, če bi se zgodilo nasprotno in bi denimo Kitajska in Rusija zagnali takšno mašinerijo prek financiranja lažne milijardne “razvojne pomoči” s kanaliziranjem sredstev nevladnim organizacijam v zahodnih državah z namenom zbiranja in širjenja dezinformacij o teh državah?

Se spomnite, kakšno frko so zagnali v ZDA o “ruskem vmešavanju v volitve” ob Trumpovi zmagi leta 2016, čeprav naj bi šlo zgolj za poskus manipuliranja prek družbenih medijev (kar se je sicer kasneje v preiskavi FBI izkazalo kot popolnoma neresnično)? Se spomnite zgodbe izpred dveh mesecev, ko so zahodne države zagnale kampanjo o “ruskem vmešavanju v volitve” v Romuniji, zaradi česar je romunsko ustavno sodišče predsedniške volitve preklicalo? V preiskavi se je kasneje izkazalo, da ni šlo za rusko vpletanje, pač pa za kampanjo vladajoče stranke prek družbenih medijev, da bi škodovali predsedniškemu kandidatu konkurenčne stranke, zaradi česar je kot kolateralna korist pridobil tretji, neodvisni kandidat. In ta teden se je izkazalo, da je bila tožilka, ki je vodila to preiskavo, pred tem direktorica “nevladne organizacije”, financirane s strani USAID.

Zabavno, ni kaj.