HISTORY'S
END
That
McCarthyism is now being employed by former leftist radicals
gone "conservative" – or, in Judis's case, right-wing
social democratic – shouldn't really surprise anyone.
This, after all, is the stock-in-trade of those "neocons"
who still retain vestiges of their former leftism, as
well as those who have gone all the way to the right:
these guys are professional snitches. Yet, still, one
is taken aback: is this how we know we have come to the
End of History: when an ex-editor of Socialist Revolution
can credibly accuse the Heritage Foundation of . . . selling
out to the Commies?
PHONY
'SCANDAL'
The
Judis piece is 99 percent flapdoodle, and in the course
of some 6,000-plus words only one semi-substantial accusation
is asserted: that secretary Chao failed
to disclose that she was a board member of privately
held Multa
Communications Corp., which offers Internet services
in the United States, China and Taiwan. Chao resigned
from the company's board in January, after eight months,
and never received a penny in compensation: she says her
participation was limited to a single 30-minute conference
call, and that the omission in filling out the financial
disclosure form was a simple oversight. But to Judis,
who seems to think that all companies operating out of
China are virtual arms of the Chinese Communist Party,
it is all a deep dark conspiracy. However, as Judis later
admits (albeit in weasel words), far from being an arm
of the Chinese government, Multacom is an American
company involved in a joint venture with a company on
the Chinese mainland, which, in turn, is 51 percent government-owned
– as are a great many companies, including most publishers,
in socialist China. By this kind of nutball "logic," American
companies must be forbidden from doing business with any
and all companies on the Chinese mainland – on the
grounds that all things Chinese are tainted by the Beijing
regime.
SUBVERSIVE
ACTIVITIES
Judis
complains that "Multacom's cable lines are being laid
through another joint venture with another Chinese government
company, the China Railway Telecommunications Center."
But who cares? What Judis doesn't tell you is that Multacom
is one of the first companies to really pioneer the opening
up of China's embryonic Internet to the outside world.
Last December, Multa announced that its DS3 undersea fiber-optic
cable connection between the United States and Mainland
China was available for sale. With this Trans-Pacific
connection, Multacom
became one of the first companies to connect China to
the US over a single, seamless fiber optic circuit.
That cable is China's lifeline to liberty – that
is, to the uncharted and uncensored netherworlds of the
Internet. John Judis sees something subversive in all
this, but he has it backwards (or upside-down): what's
being subverted is not the US, but China.
A
NERVY TWIT
The
insufferable nerve of this socialist twit, lecturing
conservatives on the proper foreign policy "principles"
for the conservative movement, is underscored by his condescending
tone: "
"For
a decade now the American right has fumbled about in search
of moral clarity in the post-Soviet world. And there it
was-a totalitarian, expansionist China humiliating America
and trying to prevent it from protecting the vulnerable
democracy of Taiwan. Beijing's response to the EP-3's
emergency landing on Hainan Island should have been a
conservative parable and a reminder that the conservative
crusade against communism-perhaps the movement's finest
achievement-is still relevant after all."
MORAL
CLARITY AND FOREIGN POLICY
I
don't recall that anyone on the right has experienced
a lack of moral clarity: indeed, since the end of the
cold war, there has been a sharpening of the moral
sense on the right, much of which has come to challenge
the morality of a foreign policy that bombs Serbian cities
to make the world safe for Albanian maniacs and kills
5,000 Iraqi children per month. The only exception to
this "isolationist" trend being the neo-conservatives,
who came aboard on account of anti-Communism and have
been adrift since the end of the cold war. And therein
lies the rub. . . .
A
MYSTERY
Judis
is enraged that "the American right did not make the EP-3
the symbol of a new crusade." A new crusade – to
do exactly what? To destroy China, of course: economically,
if possible, and militarily, if necessary. But what, you
might ask, is a card-carrying leftist, whose avowedly
socialist affiliations have not exactly been a secret,
doing in the middle of what was, up until now, strictly
an intramural fight on the right?
WHO
STOLE JOE FARAH'S STORY?
Long
before the New Republic discovered this sinister
Commie plot to take over the conservative movement –
not to mention the Bush administration – Joe Farah's
WorldNetDaily ran a
whole series of equally sensationalistic (and baseless)
stories implying that Chao was practically a Chinese
Mat Hari. They dredged up the same tissue of innuendo
as Judis, alleging that Chao, her father, and Chinese
leader Jiang Zemin have a "personal" and "deep" relationship
– because Chao pere and Jiang were classmates
before the Chaos fled the mainland, and their family shipping
company, now based in Hong Kong, does extensive business
in China. But since they are in China, one can
only wonder where else they are supposed to do
business, according to Judis's (and Farah's) moral lights
– Zimbabwe? In any case, Joe Farah practically came
right out and said Judis stole
the WorldNetDaily story, and passed it off
as his own. While Farah reveals that Judis wrote to WND
reporter Paul Sperry before he wrote his New
Republic piece, asking for assistance, Judis
claims that he originally gave WND credit for
the story, but that an editor or a "production person"
must have dropped the reference. Yeah, sure –
whatever. The piece as it stands mentions that
stories of Chao as a kind of Chinese fifth columnist within
the administration had been percolating around "conspiracy-minded
right-wing websites," although it does not deign to mention
WorldNetDaily except in a note posted later. Not
only did Judis fail to give them a link, he wouldn't even
name them – and, frankly, on this issue, who
can blame him?
"WHO
REALLY RULES THE WORLD?"
Now,
I love Joe Farah, and WorldNetDaily (WND)is
one of my favorite websites: I plugged it in my
"Bookmarks" column not so long ago. It is often informative,
and, more importantly, it never fails to entertain. Here,
for example, is my favorite WND ad: "Who Really
Rules the World?" the front-page headline asks, and WND
has an answer: "Dr.
Monteith reveals how secrets societies have directed civilization!"
Click, and you are confronted with the cover of
the Good Doctor's "incredible but true" tell-all book,
The Dark Brotherhood. "Most people don't realize
they exist because their minds have been conditioned to
reject any thought of such organizations." Get out your
tinfoil hats, guys and gals, and set yourself down for
a nice long read: for a mere $12.95, the secrets of the
ages are revealed. Such a deal!
THE
YELLOW PERIL?
Now,
I have nothing against conspiracy theories, per se,
but the particular conspiracy theory being pushed by WND
and the New Republic (an odd couple if ever there
was one!) is not only wrong but pernicious. For what,
exactly, is supposed to be Elaine Chao's great crime?
That she was connected to a company that wants to open
up China to the Internet? That she believes that it would
be a good thing if China's markets were opened up to US
producers, and vice-versa? That she is Chinese? This last
seems to be her greatest transgression, since all the
nasty implications about her family ties – specifically,
her father's alleged connection to Jiang Zemin –
are made much of by both Judis and WND. But at
least WND is quasi-honest about the sick racist
filth it is spreading. This is something that Judis, the
politically-correct Social Democrat, would rather not
get too close to: he prefers to conduct his Asian-bashing
on a subliminal level. But WND's Paul
Sperry isn't so subtle. In a story posted in January
of this year, Sperry quoted an anonymous source who said:
"'Chao's
father resides in New York City and, years ago, founded
a ship brokerage and agency business, Foremost Maritime
Corp. – a lucrative shipping firm that ships goods
from the U.S. to China and much of Asia. To do this would
require one having friends in high places,' or 'Guanxi'
(the Chinese term for political connections)', the source
told WorldNetDaily. 'The real story here is that Ms. Chao's
father – and most likely herself –
has been a family friend of the leaders of communist China
for practically all of her life.' When asked if Chao has
had any contact at all with Jiang, the expert said, 'Absolutely.'
And, the source added, 'it's kept very quiet, but it's
probably regular contact.' If confirmed, said the
Asia expert, 'she would come into [Bush's] Cabinet with
a more intimate relationship with the president of China
than with the president of the United States.'"
THE
ORANGE SMEAR
This
farrago of "probably" and "most likely" is really a thinly-disguised
variation on the old theme of dual loyalty, with which
anti-Semites used to excoriate Jews, and is now applied
to the Yellow Peril of Red China: we might call it the
Orange Smear. It consists of the unspoken but nonetheless
clear implication that Chinese-Americans, such as Elaine
Chao, are not really loyal Americans, and that
their first allegiance is to the Chinese motherland. Of
course, Sperry has it all mixed up, in that Chao and her
family were citizens of Taiwan, which is supposed
to be China's mortal enemy: but you know how these
Chinese are, don't you? They all stick together, now,
don't they? Of course, to point this out in any other
racial context would be a hate crime punishable by, say,
being stuck in a elevator with David Horowitz, but we
all know it's okay in the case of Asians, the "model minority,"
who apparently haven't been sufficiently "discriminated"
against to qualify as a Official Victim Group.
A
CHINESE MATA HARI
So
it is okay for WND to aver that Chao is "probably"
a bosom buddy of Jiang Zemin's, in spite of the fact that
they have zero evidence the two have ever met. It is also
okay for Judis to impart a dark and sinister air to Senator
Mitch McConnell's "pro-Beijing" (i.e. pro-free trade)
stance on China, and strongly imply that he is bought
and paid for by the Chinese Communist regime because some
of his campaign contributors are Chinese-Americans: he
is, after all, married to Elaine Chao, and that, in the
subliminally racist worldview of Judis and WND,
is in itself cause for suspicion. Chao raised money for
McConnell, and the two agree on the necessity of opening
China up to the West: this must mean she is a Chinese
Mata Hari, sent to woo and seduce the powerful Senator
from Kentucky into betraying his country. No, they don't
dare come out and say it, in so many words, but
that, when you boil down all the "maybes," the "probably's,"
and the "most likely's", is what they damn well mean.
THE
NEW McCARTHYISM
What
is really sickening is the McCarthyite flavor of
the Judis piece, which ends by demanding to know the corporate
contributors behind a nonprofit educational foundation
McConnell set up, the McConnell Center for Political Leadership,
which Judis strongly implies is a front for the Communist
Chinese. Are you or have you ever been . . . ?
Once again, these words are being heard in the land –
and they are coming from the Left! For all it's China-bashing
and warmongering, WorldNetDaily is far too libertarian
to go around demanding contributor lists: they were, after
all, targeted by the Clinton White House and forced to
answer for their views and activities, eventually having
to give up their nonprofit status. But the socialist Judis
has no such qualms about government intrusions on privacy
and violation of private property rights. . . .
GUANXI,
AMERICAN STYLE
What's
up with this, anyhow? I mean, why oh why is a leftie
like Judis getting in the middle of an intra-Republican
dispute? The reason, I should think, is fairly obvious.
The anti-China Left in this country consists, first and
foremost, of the AFL-CIO: the unions are the shock troops
of the "hate China" lobby. Their goal is simply to kill
off all trade with China, and force the American people
to pay outrageously high prices for items that, on the
world market, are quite naturally cheap. The union leaders
then live off the ill-gotten gains of their members, whose
standard of living is entirely the product of their political
pull in Washington – and a tariff wall high enough
to keep out the competition. It's Guanxi, American
style.
THE
LEFT REVIVAL
Now,
as a prominent Social Democrat – In These Times
is loosely affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of
America – Judis and his comrades have always wanted
a leadership position in the unions. Surely the former
editor of Socialist Revolution – perhaps in
his heart of hearts, in a dream vaguely remembered in
the morning – imagines that he will one day lead
American workers to their proletarian destiny. The radical
left has always targeted the unions as the cradle of the
socialist revolution, with varying degrees of success.
Communist influence in the labor union movement reached
a peak in the 1930's, waned in the postwar period and
went underground during the cold war. But with the end
of the Soviet Union, one of the great ironies is that
the Old Left – a coalition of old Communist Party
circles, made up mostly of aging ex-members who still
consider themselves left-activists, and Social Democrats
of the DSA-In These Times stamp – is making
something of a comeback. This impacts on the China question
in a curious way. . . .
AFL-CIO
– LEFTWARD, HO!
At
the 1997 AFL-CIO convention, held in Pittsburgh, the old
anti-Communist clause in the union constitution was amended
out of existence. The clause stipulated that anyone who
was "a member of the Communist party, any fascist organization,
or any totalitarian organization" was barred from serving
as a union official. George Meyers, head of the Labor
Commission of the Communist Party USA, hailed the "removal
of the vicious and illegal 'anti-communist' clause that
has befouled the AFL-CIO Constitution since its founding
in 1955." Meyers also tellingly remarked that the decision
to drop the anti-Communist clause was "a key to where
the 'new' AFL-CIO is going." You betcha!
PAYBACK
TIME
When
John Sweeney was elected AFL-CIO president he was hailed
by the People's Weekly World, Communist mouthpiece,
as well as by In These Times, the Social Democratic
organ. The latter went ballistic when the conservative
American Enterprise magazine exposed Sweeney's
membership in the Democratic Socialists of America. "Redbaiting!"
they whined. But they didn't deny it, and this intersection
of neo-communism and the labor movement is essential in
understanding the anti-China Left. For the most vehement
anti-China ideologues of them all are the old pro-Soviet
communists, the orthodox Marxists who hated the Chinese
after their split with the Kremlin. For the Chinese and
their American followers viciously attacked the Kremlin-loyal
Commies as traitors, "revisionists" who were worse
than the American "imperialists." In this they were merely
echoing the ideology of their iconic leader, Chairman
Mao, who in his "Theory of the Three Worlds," declared,
at the height of the Cultural Revolution, that the Soviet
Union and not the United States was the "principal enemy
of the world's peoples and the main threat to peace."
Now, it's payback time. The remnants of the Kremlin-loyal
Communists in the US, and their "democratic" socialist
coalition partners, having gained a significant foothold
in the declining union movement, have turned the tables
on China – and on American conservatives. Those old
commies hate the Chinese, whom they blame for destroying
the Soviet Union, and this union-led anti-China campaign
draped in "anti-Communist" colors is their ironic revenge.
WAR
DRUMS, LEFT AND RIGHT
The
Judis hit piece is, partially, payback for the devastating
revelations in "Labor's
Leftward Lurch," by Kenneth R. Weinstein, and August
Stofferahna, published as a Heritage Foundation "backgrounder"
– a fascinating account of how the Democratic Socialists
of America and the remnants of the Communist Party have
managed to carve out a significant niche in the post-cold
war American labor movement. More significantly, however
– and much more ominously – it is the beginning
of the war drums beating on the Left. As I pointed out
in my last column, left and right have at last found an
enemy they can agree on, each for their own reasons. And
so a new "Popular
Front" is born, in which John Judis can join hands
with John
Derbyshire, John Sweeney can join hands with Joe Farah,
and WorldNetDaily can join forces with the New
Republic and National Review. Now, isn't that
cozy?
TWIN
OBSESSIONS
Isn't
it funny, though, that Sinophobia and a fixation on Elaine
Chao aren't the only obsessions WorldNetDaily shares
with the New Republic? Last year, Farah evoked
the rage of his mostly Republican readers by refusing
to endorse George W. Bush, and [New Republic publisher]
Marty Peretz, of course, was rooting for his boy Al. But
a distaste for Bush and his administration isn't the only
common ground: both WND and the New Republic
stand out in their fanatical devotion to Israel, dutifully
(and often tortuously) justifying whatever brutality is
dished out to the Palestinians. So quit fighting, guys,
about who should take "credit" for the smears against
secretary Chao and her family. Working together, I'm sure
you can attain your goals: war with China, war with the
Palestinians – war, war, and more war. It's good
for the flagging economy (the unions will like that),
and good for the flagging conservative movement. Dr. Monteith's
conspiracy theories aren't nearly nourishing enough for
them, and they need stronger stuff: a Chinese conspiracy
involving prominent American capitalists and their Chinese-American
collaborators will get everybody high.
