Kind: captions
Language: en
China has done something extraordinary.
In just a few decades, they've lifted
hundreds of millions of people out of
poverty, mastered global manufacturing,
and positioned themselves as a true
superpower. But as they rise, the
question for the West isn't just how do
we compete, it's how do we live with
China without losing ourselves. Today's
guest is former CIA operations officer
Mike Baker, an expert in intelligence,
geopolitics, and the subtle forms of
power that most people never see. In
this episode, he breaks down how China
is reshaping the world, not with bombs,
but with data and influence, as well as
economic leverage. This isn't about
fear, but it is about understanding the
game that is actually being played so we
don't sleepwalk into a future that we
didn't choose or
control. Now, what do you think the real
threat is with China? Are there things
that they're doing that Americans might
not be aware of?
Well, if you'd asked me
that, you know, a handful of years ago,
two, three, four years ago, I'd say um
there's probably a lot that they're
doing that people aren't aware of, but
it's actually been in the news more. And
um look, you can hate Trump or like
Trump, doesn't matter, right? But one of
the things that that he's done is put a
spotlight on China. and whether that's
sort of their lack of transparency over
what happened during the pandemic um or
whether it's their theft of intellectual
property um their economic
espionage whether it's their
aggressiveness in the South China Sea
there's been more of a focus so I think
people people have become increasingly
aware and then there's the Tik Tok issue
and that's probably to answer your
question probably where the the shorter
term threat comes from with the Chinese
regime is their understanding of how to
influence opinion um through something
like Tik Tok and that that's
legitimately what they're doing, right?
I mean, they they they're very good.
They the Russians, you know, the
Iranians to some degree, anybody who's
got resources and motivation. They've
learned some time ago um the uh
importance of of manipulating opinion
through disinformation and
misinformation. Uh how easy are we to
influence? Most people aren't curious
enough to keep digging or they don't
have enough time to keep digging or they
just not motivated to keep digging and
say, "Well, where does that information
come from?" Right? Has this been
reported anywhere else? Right? Is it
credible? What was the actual source of
it? You ask those questions of the
things that you read and you're likely
to be less um siloed, right? But we tend
to just end up in a in kind of a one
swim lane that makes us feel good
because it affirms sort of our thought
process anyway. So yeah, they I think
the the Chinese certainly the Russians,
they they've figured out that we're
fairly easy to manipulate as a general
population. Yeah. Okay. So um of those
that's a full basket of things that I
think people should certainly be
thinking about. Which of those, like if
you had to rank order some of the top
ones, are you most worried about their
ability to influence us via Tik Tok and
sort of algorithmic control? Are you
more worried about economic problems,
the espionage, manipulation of opinion,
that's a top tier priority, right? The
theft of uh economic information,
research and development, intellectual
property, um that's a top tier concern,
right? It's it's hard to prioritize and
say this is worse than the other because
they're running on the same, you know,
time frame and it's all they they're
they're very good at multitasking,
right? Because in part the Chinese
regime has a very long view. So, you
know, whether it's it's those issues,
the the military concerns, right? This
this this concern over the invasion of
Taiwan, you know, and what that could
look like, uh their aggressiveness in
the South China Sea, those things are of
real concern. their um their development
of of new weapons technology. Um I run
the algorithm that we're for sure going
to deal with the cold wary stuff first.
So the espionage, the um the influence,
the economic warfare for sure. Do you
share that? Like if I had to sequence
them, I would say, okay, let's we know
that we're we're on the edge of between
China as a rival and China China as a
true adversary.
Hopefully, everybody wants to stay
rivals and not spill over to
adversaries. And I think the the best
way to do that is to if you got to lash
out at each other, do it at the Cold War
stage. But do you think that we have to
sort of parallel track the Cold War
stuff, the espionage, the influence with
the aggression uh kinetic side of
things? Yeah, I I think so. Um, look, a
a good friend of mine, uh, a China
expert, Gordon Chang, we've talked about
this a lot, right? And his point of view
is is always that China is on a war
footing, right? We just we just prefer
define that. Well, he says that they're
not not necessarily Connecticut, you
know, uh, event tomorrow or next month.
But in their minds, right, they don't
view us as a rival. They don't view us
as a economic competitor. They literally
view the the regime, I mean, not the
Chinese people, but the regime views um
the West, certainly the US at the top of
that heap um as the primary obstacle to
getting to the top of the food chain. I
was going to ask, so what is our goal in
all of this? Just to be number one. Be
number one, right? Globally or in the
region? Globally. But first of all, in
the region, right, they've always been
upset that since World War II that we've
kind of patrolled the seas. I mean,
that's that's always been which explains
kind of their behavior in building up
their navy and and creating artificial
islands and pushing themselves out.
They're now starting to develop uh
relationships with other countries to
develop ports uh for their navy. I mean,
that's is it's a slow creep, but it all
speaks to this idea that there's no
reason why China shouldn't be at the top
of the food chain. And they they have a
much longer view on things. We worry
about what's right in front of us,
right? Why do you think they care so
much about being at the top? I think
it's just I think from Xiinping's
perspective from all the way back to Mao
I think they just that's their
assumption. I mean, local Americans, you
know, we we talk about it all the time,
you know, don't get me wrong, I don't
want to give up the spot, right? Right.
Right. It's a pretty good place to be,
right? And so, and it's not a community
of nations, so you can't share the top
spot, right, with with others. It just
doesn't I know a lot of people think,
you know, well, if we just stop being
aggressive, you know, we I spent way too
much time overseas to have that point of
view, right? It's not a community of
nations. We've got allies. Um, and most
of the time our allies share our same
particular interests or concerns.
sometimes not. So, you have to be
pragmatic about that. But, um it's not a
place where, you know, we're all going
to hold hands, right? And and and and
it's just it's not the way the world
works. It'd be lovely if it did, but it
doesn't. So, with China, I think you
have to you have to look at all these
things at the same time. If there's a
global conflict, if there's a kinetic
shooting match that goes on, all these
other things will come into play, right?
the the effort to influence the opinion
of of the American population, right?
The cyber attacks that will take place
on the home front, right? To shut down
our transportation and our water and our
power grids, um our ability to move
everything from food to fuel to
pharmaceuticals. All that's going to
come into play to bring the pain right
home as quickly as possible, right? And
also then to drive the thought process,
right? So, it all eventually kind of
comes into like the same pot. Yeah. And
I think you have to we have to be smart
enough to worry about all of it at the
same time. And sometimes we're not that
good at that, right? We tend to be a
little bit
too we get blinders on, right? And and
we think about one thing, you know, like
and so, you know, it's for what that's
worth. Is that a an American uh
temperament thing? What is it culturally
or systemically that leads us to get
myopic like that? You know, I Yeah, it's
I don't know if it's uniquely American
and certainly we've certainly taken it
to new levels. We've developed it. Um,
you know, and so we, you know, we're all
like a bunch of raccoons chasing a shiny
tinfoil ball and then we see something
else over there and we go chasing that,
right? And you you see that in other
parts. I mean, over in Europe, it it
there's a little bit of that. I think
they've got, if you just look at the
Russia Ukraine conflict, they've got a
different perspective, right? I mean,
we're we're acting as if right now, at
least the Trump administration is acting
as if, well, that's it. You know, if
they don't agree, then we're walking
away. Okay, what does that mean? What?
Walking away from what? The peace talks.
Walking away from Ukraine. Literally,
the peace talks. They actually didn't
attend. Yeah, they didn't attend. They
Marco Rubio said it was a logistical
issue. They couldn't make the meetings
in London. Um, so they had some
low-level discussions, but uh, you know,
we have to, and I think that, not to
disappear down there, but I think, you
know, the problem with the the the
Russia Ukraine negotiations is that
people are attacking it from a different
reason, right? Ukraine's looking at it
and Zilinski is looking at it. It's an
existential threat, right? It's a little
bit like how Israel looks at their
problems and then people don't
understand why Israel does the things
they do. Well, they it's an existential
threat. They're surrounded by enemies.
Ukraine looks at it and goes this is an
existential threat, right? Europe looks
at it from a, you know, a somewhat same
sort of traditional east west
perspective because they're right there,
right? You know, I think part of our
issue is the the the current
administration. They're looking at it
from a domestic politics perspective,
right? How does it play in in the US
with the voters? And, you know, we
talked about on the campaign trail,
we're going to end it quickly. So, we
just want a peace deal. So, we're going
to construct a peace deal that we think
will get across the table quickly, which
means we'll give Putin essentially what
he wants. We'll give him Crimea,
recognition of Crimea. We'll freeze the
battle front on the 20%, you know, that
he currently occupies. Um, no mention of
Russian withdrawal from those those
areas. Uh, we'll say that, you know,
Ukraine can never join NATO, which goes
counter to their uh their charter. Um
and uh essentially there if we draw up a
peace plan that gives Putin his key
demands, okay, we can get it across the
table and now we've done what we said we
did, you know, so good for us and the
voters will be happy. They're not
looking at it from a geopolitical
perspective, right? So, okay. So, I
definitely want to get back to Russia
and Ukraine, but um going back to China
for a second. So, I told you I would
disappear down rabbit holes, right?
Which I love because I'm going to I'm
going to connect all these dots cuz um I
think we think I'm glad you came cuz I
can't. A similar way. Here it is. Uh so
real politique I think is what draws us
all together. Now um I go live three
times a week and one of the things that
I constantly see in the community is ah
Tom is like got such a hard on for real
politique.
Uh I'm just saying that's how the world
is. Not that I like it or that I want it
to be that way. But if you want to be
functional, rule number one is deal with
the world the way that it is, not the
way you wish it were. Right? And now I'm
very open if somebody can convince me
that it actually isn't that way. But
when I walk through the just first
principles of it all, um I suppose if
you believe in God, you think that
there's something above it. But the
world that we live in from a
militaristic standpoint is
um you have an opening where the strong
will do as they will and the weak will
suffer as they must. Now, we have for
the last 70, 80 years, we've kept that
in check where everybody post World War
II just had kind of a same vibe, which
is at least in the West. We're not going
to tolerate somebody invading another
country. We had enough of that with
Hitler. Um, but what it feels like is
happening now is that collective um
understanding given that that generation
and the generation after it have died.
Yeah. Um or at least boomers are
beginning to pass on. uh we don't have
the same level of like visceral
understanding of we don't want this to
happen, right? And given that you're
seeing now the reassertion of aggression
and to me it I look at it and I'm like,
yeah, this is real politique. It was
always real politique. You were just
living through a moment of peace brought
to you by fatigue. Um but the fatigue is
now worn off. We've gone through
political cycles where that appears to
be the case. you know, they they imagine
this lovely world that would be nice,
but it's not the one we live in. It's
the Saudis. That's a good example of
that, right? Um, you know, people are
sometimes, you know, horrified that we
have relations with the Saudis because
what they'll do is they'll point to
obviously to, you know, human rights
abuses or or treatment, hacking a guy,
right, Kosogi. And you think, yeah,
crazy. It was crazy. But my point being
is, okay, yeah, that's terrible, right?
But we're in this world, right? And
you're going to end up having
relationships with uh countries that
don't always share your values, but for
real uh solid reasons, you know, being
selfish for your own country's best
interests, you're going to need to deal
with them, right? You don't necessarily
need to like them all the time. You
know, it's like the politicians, right?
I don't need to like a politician. I
need to like their what it's going to
get, right? where we're going with with
either policy or the reason why there's
a there's a drive there for that
relationship with that country and the
Saudis are good example of that, right?
Um so yeah, I I
guess at the end of the day, we we don't
tend to do that very well here in the
US, right? I think most accept the
realities of the way the world works.
Yes. Yeah. And I and I think part of
that is
um because you know people
don't it does it's not particularly
satisfying right when you talk about
that when you say look this is the way
it is you got to deal with it right we
may not like them but we have to work
with them right we may not like that but
we have to work with that you know it
sounds better to say these are our hopes
and dreams and this is what we're going
to do we're going to build a community
of nations and we're going to that
sounds good right and I think it plays
well to people makes you feel better.
Um, but yeah, I'm I'm not one to I don't
like to sugarcoat the way the world
actually operates. Every country
operates according to its own best
interests, right? Although, again, in
the US, we we we seem to uh apologize
for it more often than not. And if we're
All right, help me remove the scales
from my eyes. So, I live in constant
fear that I'm becoming too paranoid
about China. And when I was preparing
for this episode, I first I wrote an
intro that was like basically
um this is how China could take over
without ever firing a shot. And you
could as I was writing the intro, I
could hear wolves howling in the
background. And I was like, oh god. Like
okay, hold on. Like I need to understand
that um my tone matters. How I set
things up to my audience matters. And
that we are easy to influence. And that
means if all I do is broadcast fear, my
fear is real. But if all I do is
broadcast the fear element of it, then
that's the bit of nudging influencing
that I do in the world. If I polyana it
and it's a lie, then I'm setting people
up to getting knocked off course. But if
I don't understand that there's a middle
ground, there is a you need to be
paranoid, but you also need to
understand that your paranoia can become
runaway and it will make you make bad
decisions. And now instead of working
with them, you're being antagonistic
towards them, which is making them be
more antagonistic towards you. Right? Uh
and so I people will have heard the
intro that I actually settled on by the
time they hear these words. But my hope
is that I struck that balance right of
uh China's done something extraordinary.
The I am hyperfamiliar with um China
under Mao and how dark things were. And
so China now um in the modern era under
Xiinping and using what I call red light
green light capitalism to pull people
out of poverty it's really been
extraordinary and in many ways I feel
like they're surpassing us in cultural
energy innovation like there there's a
real sense of we can do this we can
regain our uh what I would say if my
understanding of their culture is
accurate our rightful place as the
leaders in the world and if boys and
girls if you look back over the last
5,000 years of history, it's all us. And
we've had a hundred years of
humiliation. It's never going to happen
again. Uh and and this becomes their
hundred-year plan now and how they plan
to move forward. And so I it feel I feel
that energy coming off of them. And so
I'm like, "Okay, these guys are really
playing to win. I want to acknowledge
the extraordinary things that they've
done. I want to acknowledge that part of
my life is that they make things,
incredibly complex things, for very
cheap and we benefit from that. So, I
don't want to um I don't want to make
them out to be some dark evil
civilization. They're, I'm sure, just
flushed with incredible, lovely,
beautiful human beings creating
extraordinary things. So I don't want to
unnecessarily find myself battering
heads with them. But I'm so aware that
Thusidity's trap when you look back in
history says when you have a declining
power the US and a rising power China
they cannot help but collide. So I'm
like okay we are going to collide. And
so now how do we do that? Well
yeah. Um look I I agree my my daughter
uh great person. She lived and worked
over in China uh a couple of different
occasions. Uh it's a great place. People
are terrific. Culture is amazing. U
history is incredible. Um and
uh and that's and so that's all true,
right? It's also true that they've
gotten to where they are over the
decades um in part by the theft of
intellectual property. realizing that
the way they get there is to accelerate
that whole development process by
skipping the research and development
phase early on. It's you know it's been
less now as they've kind of made these
advances and now but they they went for
a while just kind of bypassing that you
know the idea that you're building
generations of engineers and innovative
thinkers and now they you know that's
I'm not saying they don't have them but
the initial goal was this is what we're
going to do. We're going to hoover up
everything that's available out there in
the west from everybody and we're going
to use that to jumpst start the process
and bypass the heavy lift of of of uh
research and development. So, okay, well
done them because they accomplished that
and they still do it from a variety of
ways, right? It's as innocuous as, you
know, attending academic conferences,
right? Maybe bumping into, you know, a
professor of interest or a researcher of
interest, right? Developing that
relationship. Maybe it's targeting first
or second generation Chinese Americans,
which they do all the time. Playing off
targeting in what way? Well, you know,
basically identifying and saying, you
know what, the leverage point here is
going to be uh ultimate loyalty to the
homeland, right? And so we're going to
play off of that. And so getting a
Chinese American to like, hey, just help
educate us. If you look at the counter
intelligence operations that have taken
place over the years where there have
been a successful result in terms of
identifying that we've got a threat that
we've got people who are passing uh
secrets uh or economic intelligence
whatever it might be then often times
you'll see that that's what they've
done. They've targeted because that's
that's natural, right? If you're doing
an operation like that you're you're
looking, you know, it's like a criminal
walking the streets. It's looking for a
soft target. So in their minds, you
know, it may not be true because, you
know, you may come across someone that's
that's that's that sees through that and
says, "No, my loyalty is actually here."
Or, "No, I'm not going to, you know,
provide this information." And it could
be a slow pull, right? It could be just
something as simple as, "Oh, you know,
you're working on that. It's so
interesting. You know, my my daughter,
as an example, I'm just saying my
daughter is writing a paper about that."
And you know, if you have anything, you
know, that that's of interest, right?
Maybe they just give you something
completely unclassified because they're
working at a a company of interest to
the Chinese service. Maybe just gives
you like a an article. Well, that's
good, you know, because it shows that
they were willing to listen and
accommodate to your request. So, they'll
work on that. That's a leverage point.
Then they'll start working and saying,
"Okay." And eventually they're saying,
"Well, what about this?" Right? And
they're looking to see how far they can
pull you along to see what level of
information you're willing to provide.
And eventually, you know, maybe you're
handing over something that, you know,
you shouldn't be, you know, and then at
that point they feel like they've set
the hook. So, again, I'm disappearing
down sort of operational, you know,
procedures. The deeper you go, it's so
that's that's um, you know, I there's
there's lots you can have conflicting
ideas or truths, you know, so wonderful
history, culture, etc., etc. You can
also have okay well the reality is
they've gotten you know they've
accomplished this magic of advancement
through in part this the theft of
intellectual property and using that to
jumpst start their own um uh sectors
whatever it may be aerospace or
communications
um and then you you you
you right you know if you accept the
idea that the US is a you know
civilization in decline right I'm I'm
not quite sure I'm there yet, you know,
I mean, we have our ups and downs. Um,
but and and that they're on the ascendy,
then sure. Yeah, there's going to be a,
you know, at some point there's going to
be a collision. Um, I think, you know,
if you just look in the immediate issues
of the trade war, as an example, right?
Um, that has recalibrated uh Xiinping's
thinking, right? Because he could read
uh Biden. he knew what to expect from
Biden as an example, right? I'm again I,
you know, I'm not talking partisan
politics or anything like that. I'm just
saying this is the way someone's going
to think. Then they look at Trump and
you know, again, love him or hate him,
um, he keeps people guessing, right? And
that's on purpose or is he a [ __ ] Um,
I don't know that it's on purpose,
right? Look, he's a tri-state property
developer, right? I mean, that's that
that that's the experience that he came
out of, right? So now when I hear
something like that, I I immediately go
to and I have no idea if this is true.
He's had to deal with unions, mob
bosses, like all kinds of like right
dicey [ __ ] And so this is just a guy
that knows how to keep people on their
toes. Well, or you get punched in the
nose and you punch someone back, right?
I mean, that's how you negotiate, right?
I mean, there's it creates a look, you
can't get away from your past, right?
And he had a long period of history as a
tri-state property developer working in
that business, right? And also, I mean,
obviously he had other properties around
the world, but but that's kind of where
he grew up, right? And what he learned
from that I should take this is a guy
that's not afraid to be tough. He's not
going to be easily intimidated. Like,
what's the short sentence that I take
away from that? You have to admit he's
done things that other politicians or
other people in that position haven't
been willing to do, right? And so either
he's just doing it because he doesn't
care about getting punched in the nose
or he's doing it because he 100% firmly
believes it's all the right thing to do.
He he's doing it in part because he
knows that's what the people voted for,
you know, at least the people that voted
for him. Um I don't know. I'm not in his
inner circle, so I I can't read his
mind. But I will say that if you're
Xiinping
um or you're Putin or you're Nicholas
Maduro in Venezuela or whoever and
you're looking at this, there is an
element of unease. You're not quite sure
what he's going to do next, right? And
so therefore, you you have to spend a
little bit more time, you know, kind of
thinking through your strategy. So they
looked at as an example the Chinese
regime has been watching what we've been
doing in Ukraine uh for all these years
now the three plus years of the conflict
there trying to understand and interpret
okay what does that tell us about how
they would act if we moved on Taiwan
what what do we believe well they've got
to set their playbook aside a little bit
right now and think okay well now what
do we think is going to happen if we
invade Taiwan I don't frankly believe we
we're ever going to put boots on the
ground there So, you know, they their
assumption is probably we'll provide
material support um and a lot of angry
memos in the UN, but they probably
believe at the end of the day they'll
accomplish their goal because we're not
interested in getting into a shooting
match whether it's a Trump
administration, Biden administration,
anybody. Um so, yeah, it's just
um yeah, again, I I what I guess I'm
saying is sort of the
um the disruption of the current
administration, the US administration,
the what appears to be chaos on the
surface. I don't know whether sometimes
it's it's designed chaos or whether it's
just chaos, but I, you know, I'm more
interested in how it plays out in the
halls of power overseas with countries
that we need to be concerned about from
a national security perspective. We'll
get back to the show in a moment, but
first, let's talk about something that
stops most people from starting an
online business. Overwhelm. When you're
staring at a blank screen wondering how
you'll create product descriptions, set
up payment systems, and figure out
shipping, that's when most people give
up. But with Shopify's AI tools, you
don't have to figure it all out on your
own. Entrepreneurs with zero technical
skills can launch successful stores
because Shopify handles the hard parts.
Their AI assistant, Shopify Magic,
writes compelling product descriptions
from just a few keywords. It creates
personalized FAQs for your customers and
even helps craft email campaigns that
actually convert. From firsttime sellers
to household names like Mattel and Gym
Shark, they give you everything you need
to succeed with awardwinning support
every step of the way. Turn your big
business idea into with Shopify on your
side. Sign up for a $1 per month trial
period at
shopify.com/impact all lowercase. Go to
shopify.com/impact now to grow your
business no matter what stage you're in.
Now, let's get back to the show. When it
comes to the chaos, uh my gut read is
that he is somebody that uh understands
that there is utility in chaos if you
can figure out how to capitalize on it,
but that it's not like a clear-cut thing
because chaos by its very nature, you
don't know what's going to be on the
other side of it. So, I think he just
thinks you have to shake up the way that
people where wherever they're
entrenched, you've got to shake that up
to get them off that position so that
you can get them hopefully to a new
position that you want to be on. Yeah.
For some reason, whenever I say that,
people think that that's me defending
it. I'm just I am trying to map what is
actually happening. Yeah. And there's
one way to map Trump, which is he's just
dumb and doesn't can't anticipate the
amount of chaos that he's creating. Uh,
another way to map Trump would be that
he understands that if you can get
somebody off their position, now you've
got a chance to move them. Whether you
can end up moving them to the right
place or not comes down to your belief
in yourself. Trump's self-belief is off
the charts. I think it's ludicrous. I
think he believes in himself way too
much. Yeah, there's a lot of confidence
there there. I would say he's now in
pure delusion territory. But in terms of
um understanding the cause and effect of
what you get when you elect Trump is
that he is um he believes that there's
utility in chaos and so he doesn't mind.
Not only does he not mind it it's like
step one. Yeah. Um well this chaos
opportunity right I mean you see this
again I you I always fall back on what I
know best. Um, from an operational
perspective, you know, movement often
creates opportunity, right? And so
you'll you'll do something just to to
shake things up to see what the other
side you talking about a terrorist
operation or you're whomever a cartel
operation and you sometimes just
creating uh a scenario where they've got
to react or they they've got to move in
some fashion, it can create opportunity,
sometimes unexpected opportunities,
sometimes, you know, it's not
necessarily an upside. Uh but I I I I do
think that sometimes the current White
House, the Trump administration,
uh probably has that in the back of
their mind. Let's do this and see what
happens. Let's let's tack on another 50%
on the tariffs and see what they do,
right? Um China's interesting because
they got to a certain point. Look,
China's not going to get bullied like,
you know, most other countries out
there, right? They're not even though
they're completely export dependent,
right? That's not their mindset, right?
They're not going to say, "Okay, well,
let's go to the table, right? You have
to figure out a way to get out of this
now so that they um save face
basically." And you know, they can sell
that. Um so I
think you know, but the idea of imposing
additional tariffs in part on China. Um
you there was an probably an element.
I'm not saying that everybody's playing
3D chess over at the White House, but
I'm saying there's probably an element
there of saying let's let's see what
this does out of curiosity because we
know we have to rebalance to some
degree, right? And that's that trade
imbalance is never going to, you know,
right? I mean, we're number one consumer
out there, right? So, it's never going
to we're never going to balance trade
between countries, but there certainly
could be some advantages here to
shifting the dynamics between the US and
China. And I think that's what they're
that's what they're ultimately after. U
but you know, China turned around and
said, "Okay, fine." You know, you want
these sort of reactions. We're not going
to up the tariffs anymore past whatever
125% on US goods. But how about we shut
down export of, you know, rare earth
minerals. Well, that's a problem. That's
a long-term problem. Yeah. Um because we
once again we were so busy whether it
was Gwa whether it was the global war on
terror or it was something else we were
so busy looking in this direction that
for the past 15 or 20 years we didn't
watch China out there signing up
minerals deals all around the world and
then building up a monopoly on refining
of minerals in you know in China control
maybe 90% of that. So, we were focused
over here doing something else and
they're over busy doing that because
they they had a longer view and now
they're trying to say, well, that's, you
know, in part a benefit of our longer
view. We've got this as leverage. I
think it's going to backfire on them to
some degree. How would it? Well, I think
I mean already you're getting um
regulatory changes here in the US. I
mean, just in a short order, right? Ever
since the the Chinese announced that
they're going to stop exports of rare
earth minerals. Um, and look, you keep
you you got to have these minerals,
right? You're building everything from
uh I was about to say spaceships. I
don't know if we build
spaceships, everything from the
aerospace industry and military
hardware, uh semiconductors, uh
smartphones, you know, pretty much
anything clever that you're using. Um,
but I think it, you know, already in the
US, the uh the White House is saying
fine, you know, let's let's fasttrack um
mining operations here in the US. uh the
ability to refine those minerals. I mean
that's been part of the problem for
years, right? And one of the reasons why
we've given that ability to China is
because over here environmental policies
and you know regulatory concerns, we we
mine almost nothing, right? Because it's
so goddamn difficult to get a mine
approved and well you you're going to
pay for that eventually. And we've been
happy to look the other way and let [ __ ]
get mined in in Africa, right? Where
I've been to some of these, it's awful,
right? You want to talk about
environmental impact, but hey, you know,
we're not looking at it, so fine. Let
somebody else do the dirty work and we
can act all self-righteous about our,
you know, environmental policies. And so
it hurts the environment and it hurts
our national security interests. So
we're now fasttracking the ability to do
that. I don't think Xi Jinping factored
that in. The EU is also doing the same
thing. Can you imagine Europe saying
we're going to we're going to open up
mining and refining, you know, policies
here in in the EU as in response so that
we're not dependent on China. Um, so
that's what I mean by I think it it
might be backfiring on them because I
don't think they they imagined that
would be one of those uh results. It's
interesting. Uh I don't know if I
imagine they didn't imagine it. I have a
feeling that this moment is all about
the inevitability of the way that the
human mind works. Uh, and what I mean by
that is they just can't stop themselves.
So, if my on both sides, we can't stop
ourselves from from electing a populist
president because we're in a populist
moment because of debt, because of what
debt does to asset prices, which what
that does to the difference between the
rich and the poor. All of that's just
like the way that people are going to
react to those moments is entirely
predictable. And the only question mark
for me is did we numb out young men to
the point where they just aren't going
to fight back the way that they have
always historically in moments like
this. Uh so we'll see about that. But um
the what do you what do you think in
terms of how we numb them out? Yeah. No,
I think given the swing to the right on
the youth vote, I have a feeling that
we're reawakening that and if we
actually do target health things, I
think uh a rise in testosterone will
overcome some of those other things and
people will get the I'm mad as hell and
I'm not going to take it anymore. Um I
think what we just lived through is
people believed the way to have their um
their oh god, what does Jordan Peterson
call it? doesn't call it their Christ
moment, but that kind of thing where
like I'm doing something that really
matters and I'm sacrificing and I'm
sacrificing in the name of something
that uh is really important. Messiah
moment. I think that's what he calls it.
I would call it a come to Jesus moment,
but that's just well that when you're
having if somebody is going the wrong
direction and you want to help them have
their Messiah moment, yes, you have them
come to Jesus. Uh but that was um that
moment was all about basically neutering
uh the aggressive male instinct. And so
the righteous thing to do was to be woke
to um really lean into a beautiful thing
that the left has like I'm a I don't you
don't know me well enough to know my
stance on this but like I really believe
you want tension between the left and
the right. They they are both critically
necessary. Uh and so unfortunately
humans tend to swing from one side to
the other and that's what we're
witnessing now. But so you had this
moment where the left went pathological
and they were overindexing on uh
compassion and all those things which
are beautiful but they can go too far.
And now we're about to see the swing
back. Will it go pathological on this
side? Yet to be seen, but it's certainly
the thing that we should be looking out
for. But I have a feeling that no, we'll
reawaken that beast with the onetwo
punch of they now have a new thing to
focus on, which is don't let America die
on the vine culturally. Uh, and if it's
actually happening at the same time that
we're rectifying health concerns that
hopefully impact testosterone levels,
it's that's a super oversimplification,
but directionally correct. I don't know
that there's going to be a
a a moment on the left side where they
think, uh, look what, you know, we we
overstepped, right? Now we've got to now
we've got to recalibrate. I I don't know
that that's going to be the case. It
doesn't seem to be the case right now.
It's never the case. No one ever lets
go. They have to be smashed in the
mouth. Yeah. Yeah. It's Yeah. I think
you have to find the the bottom before
you you change, you know. It's sort of
that we've already done that on the
Well, I don't think so really. They seem
to be look I mean they're I think
they're searching right now on the left.
I think they're searching for uh some
some solutions, some leadership. Yeah.
But they're record low like approval.
Record low. So the leadership might be
deranged, but I don't think culturally I
think we bounced off the bottom anyway.
That's Yeah. Yeah. I I I'm I'm not sure.
I think that they'll they'll view this
as I mean there's obviously you can't
paint them all with the same brush, but
so like Gavin Newsome I think read the
tea leaves and said, "Okay, I've got to
I've got to drift a little bit towards
the center without offending everybody
on the left." And so he's trying to to
position himself that way. I think even
Pritsker in Illinois is trying to
pretend as if he's not, you know, hard
left. And so there will be some, but I
think there's still a a a fairly sizable
portion on the left that feels like no,
we just we didn't get our point across
enough, right? So and and maybe the
population just wasn't smart enough. Uh
so if anything, we've got to figure out
how do we message the same message, but
you know, reach more stupid people in in
their minds. I So, you know, I I think
look, I'm I I tend to be a I'm a
centrist, right? I think, you know, you
got to be willing to listen to to
everybody and without throwing a hand
grenade um and then say, "Okay, well,
those ideas are just batshit crazy and
those over there are and so let's find
something that that means it." But, you
know, compromise has kind of become a
bad word, I think, over Yeah. So uh but
I don't think that I think there was
unwarranted confidence on the right
after the election that somehow we are
in a new golden age meaning in their
minds anyway that it's always going to
be this way. I think, you know, there's
every chance that
um what people sometimes can perceive as
chaos from the White House with the
Trump administration or how a a portion
of the media drives it that way in terms
of a narrative could influence the
midterms and suddenly, you know, you're
back to inertia uh in Congress because,
you know, that flips, maybe they keep
the Senate, but um I would never be
overconfident. I think we're we're at
the stage where to your point about, you
know, bouncing from one side to the
next. I
think the the the the time frame within
that happening is is has lessened. So,
we're going to see more of that
short-term like shifts from left to
right. And, you know, I don't think
we're, you know, I guess what I'm saying
is I don't think we're looking at a a
stable long-term period of politics
here. I definitely don't think that. Um
the thing I was trying to address
specifically is traditionally in a
moment like this where you get populism
rising, you get the um the people rise
up and just say we're we're not going to
take this anymore. It can break bad or
it can break good and you get uh one way
or the other you get on the other side
of that inequality. It tends to uh come
at the end of a whole lot of bloodshed
and fatigue. Um but at least you get to
the other side of it. I mean, I think we
we've gotten Yeah, I I would agree that
we've gotten better at calling things
out, right? I mean, like
um the idea that you you're okay with,
you know, boys and girls sports, right?
I mean, I'm a simple individual. I'm
thinking, well, I'm not a big fan of
that. You want to do that, create a
trans league. If it's that big of an
issue, you know, for the left, then
fine. Promote a trans league and say
that's where we're going with this. But
having raised three boys in in
competitive sports,
um there are just differences, right? I
mean, I you know, that's it. So, I'm a
firm believer in the whole idea. You got
boys and girls. Maybe you're a boy who
feels differently and and you believe
yourself to be something different.
That's great. You do whatever you
goddamn want to do. I don't care, right?
I mean, people should be allowed to
think the way they want to think as long
as it doesn't hurt anybody. But don't
try to alter science to say we got, you
know, something other than what we have
when you've been, you know, as an
example during a pandemic, screaming at
people to believe the science, right?
Well, you know, turns out we probably
should have listened to a lot of
different opinions, right? And just
admitted that we're doing the best we
can, right? But not that this is a 100%
tied down solution, right? How about you
just do that as a government? How about
you say, "Look, this we're following
what we think is the best advice, right?
But we're not going to, you know, we're
not going to put you in prison camps if
you don't go along with us, right? So, I
think, you know, not to say we're going
to learn anything from the pandemic when
the next pandemic hits, but look, I my
my my boys are a good example. I again,
you kind of base your opinions on your
immediate orbit. And so, I look at at
what they went through in their public
schools, right? And the way that schools
changed a little bit during the course,
right? I've got 17 all the way down to
13. The 13-year-old boy was squarely has
been squarely in that sort of
DEI, you know, trans um you want to
believe you're a cat and dress like a
cat at school, god damn it, we're going
to support you, right? All these things,
right? So, he was squarely in that. The
17-year-old kind of missed it, right? He
got a got further ahead and or it wasn't
quite taking hold. He wasn't like, well,
it hadn't really taken hold firmly,
right? And then and so uh and the middle
boy, he's just like all about
basketball. He's like, I you know what?
You guys do whatever you want to. I'm
I'm busy getting my shots up. And so,
but the youngest one, you know, if
anything, it's it's made him more
conservative, right? Because he's looked
around and thought, "What? Well, you're
not a cat, right? Or you know, and he's
not rude about it. It's not like he
walks around and confronts people, but
you know, you talk to this kid and he's
like, "No, it has, if anything, it's
it's reinforced in him the idea that um
you know, he he'll he he'll come back
and say, how was your what was the game
like or whatever?" And he'll go, "Well,
early days it was like um you know, they
they stopped keeping score because we
were winning." And so, you know, and
then we had to give them the ball so
that they you know, like they're playing
believe that shit's real. I've heard you
go on the playgrounds and oh my god, you
go on the playgrounds and it's just
like, well, you can't, you know, you
don't want to you don't want to make
people feel bad by winning. I'm
thinking, well, I'm okay. I'm sorry, but
someone's got to lose. Someone's got to
win, right? And and you want to be on
the win side as far as I'm concerned.
So, you want people to learn how to lose
properly and lose graciously and be kind
and empathetic and all those things. But
we really took it. I mean, I' I'd
watched team sports for youth where,
yeah, literally they wouldn't keep
score, but you know who was keeping
score was the kids. They knew exactly
what the hell was going on, right? So, I
don't know. Again, I'm uh disappearing
down some rabbit hole that I don't know
where it leads. Uh let's bring it back
to the very thing that worries me about
all of this is while China is um playing
to win. We've had such an extended
period of things being great being
peaceful at least on the homeland that
we were able to have these luxury
beliefs where we don't have to teach
people to be competitive. we can um I I
think that many people really don't
understand that the world is such that
uh the strong will do as they will and
the weak will suffer as they must
because they've been protected from it
for so long. But then eventually that
protection wears out because you get a
China who's just at a different cultural
moment where they are playing to win.
They don't give a [ __ ] if you want them
to hand you the ball. They're not going
to do it. They have a totally different
cultural lens, right? uh and so
I am very worried that given the
importance from a day-to-day life
perspective of being the reserve
currency of being the dominant world
power that we're going to lose that and
people do not first of all they don't
give up that easily. Uh and so this is
the whole idea of thusidity strap for
anybody that's hearing this for the
first time. Thusidity trap was something
from ancient Greece where they realized
when you have a declining power and a
rising power, the declining power does
not want to acknowledge that they're no
longer as strong as they once were. And
so they expect the rising power to still
show them difference. The rising power
is like, "Hold on a second. I'm now your
peer or maybe even surpassing you in
some ways. And I expect you to
acknowledge me as such." And they're
both incapable of negotiating that.
Well, and so they almost always end up
in a kinetic war. And that's the part
where I'm like because I'm looking back
at history, I just can't shake off that
this moment matters. Yeah. No, I I again
I I agree with the the notion u maybe
I'm one of those people that doesn't
recognize that we're in decline like you
just pointed out because I'm quite sure.
But I will say what markers do you look
at to decide whether we're in decline or
not? Yeah. Um well again being fairly
simplistic one of the things that I do
believe is that and this probably you
know is why I say like I'm not
completely convinced that we're a nation
in decline rather than saying oh we're
not in decline or you know moving
towards a new golden age is because I
think it's just on a very simplistic
level it's human nature right and stick
with me on this is that you want things
better for your kids right so my parents
uh born uh quite some time ago. They're
deceased now. Great people, wonderful
people. Um 1919, 1920, right? So, you
know, they there was some hardship in
the way they grew up, right? They did
not grow up in in easy environments. Um
and they wanted it better for us, right?
My grandparents, they came even out of
more difficult um settings, right? And
um they but they wanted it better for
for my my parents. I want it better for
my kids. Right? If you have that
perception, right, you do reach a point
where we're not spending our days
searching for clean water and food,
right? We've got more and more free
time. We've got we've developed more
comfortable lives. A certain point, you
get to diminishing returns. I'm
certainly willing to believe that,
right? And so things become softer,
become easier, and that's absolutely
true. And so I think you get the more
time you have to sit around and and and
get all angsty and and worry about
little things, right? Um yeah, the
softer you become. I'm sitting here
talking myself into god damn it, we're
in decline. Well, here's the thing. I
would say uh pick the KPIs. Like so I'll
give you my handful of things that I
look at. Uh okay, what's your GDP? So
that's going to matter. um what is the
uh cultural energy that you have in your
country and most importantly what is
your debt that is a big part of this and
so even just looking at those three
things but you can certainly add more
military readiness um looking at those
things it seems self-evident to me that
we're in trouble our our debt is it it
is the thing that animates me. So when I
think about it's oversimplified, I'll be
the first to acknowledge that. But if
you were going to say what's the only
thing that matters. In fact, as we were
my producer and I were prepping for this
episode, uh one of the questions I
considered asking you was what what is
the biggest threat facing the US? And so
he asked me what do you think the
biggest threat is facing the US? And I
said debt. And so um we're here talking
about China, but honestly the thing that
I worry the most about is debt. It is
because of debt that I think that we're
having the collision now that we're
having with China. If we weren't in the
kind of precarious situation that we
were in and we still had the ability to
leverage leverage debt in order to bring
back manufacturing here so that we could
compete with China. And if anybody
thinks that I'm crazy about China out
manufacturing us, they make boats,
ships, not all military, but this is
manufacturing capabilities
232 times right more than we make. Yeah.
So whoever controls the seas controls
the world. So hey, when your pure
competitor, perhaps adversary,
outproduces you on the seas, the most
important thing by
232x, you've got a problem. Yeah. Our
shi