This thing and there you see her, yep.
And as you point out, three times most recently in May,
the President said that we would support Taiwan militarily.
>> [SOUND] So House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi,
who knows that we have all sorts of human rights
issues here in our own country, has decided to travel to Taiwan.
And provoke all sorta issues that don't need to be provoked at the moment.
She wanted to show her support for Taiwan and
it is a grim reminder of the Biden administration's militaristic rhetoric.
Now, China of course, is opposed to Nancy Pelosi's visit.
China immediately condemned Pelosi's visit with the foreign ministry,
saying it seriously damages peace and stability in the Taiwan strait.
Has a severe impact on the political foundation of China- US relations and
seriously infringes upon China's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
In fact, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson says,
the People's Liberation Army of China will never sit idly by and
we will make a resolute response and take strong countermeasures to uphold
China's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
As for what measures, if she dares to go, then let's wait and see.
Look, Francesca, am I being harsh?
I just don't really understand why Pelosi is doing,
why are you doing this right now?
We don't need to move closer and closer to potential
militaristic action or war with China, terrible idea.
>> No, and this is again back to the war hawk stance of
centrist Democrats who do it better than Republicans do it.
And for the first time, Republicans they're laser focused on creating
a white ethno state where women are second class citizens in the United States.
That's their focus, that to me, and sorta our democracy
hanging in the balance feels like priority number one.
And then you've got centrist dams who are like no,
here's what we need to do, we need to provoke another superpower.
What, is this a priority?
So I'm on with you, why now look, this has nothing to do with my personal belief
that Taiwan has a right to its own sovereignty,
that China has been staking claim to, it has been bullying.
There's a lot of stuff I disagree with but I do not agree with
pursuing a militaristic war hawk stance towards China at all for
any reason and definitely not over Taiwan.
And especially after Ukraine and Russia and learning the lessons of,
hey maybe diplomacy is a good way to go.
Maybe we shouldn't start ratcheting up and
fearmongering and cuz Russia might actually do some stuff and
China might actually do some stuff might actually try to invade Taiwan.
What if that happens?
Are we really gonna commit more and more weaponry to defend Taiwan against China?
Or do we wanna stare down the barrel of what that's gonna do to the global
economy.
What that's gonna do to the supply chain and
to gas prices and no, no, we do not.
So yeah, we learn every wrong lesson.
>> No, we do.
And I think it's important to take a step back and understand, take a broader
look at what's happening with the United States and its relationship to China.
Because politicians in the United States are super salty
towards the fact that China is beating us in certain ways.
And the reason why they're beating us, economically speaking,
is because we empowered them to beat us.
We empowered US based corporations to send
American manufacturing jobs to places like China,
by the way along with their intellectual property.
And all of that sent to China because they wanted to exploit what, cheap labor,
that's what they wanted.
They wanted the cheap labor but now the chickens are doing what,
the chickens have come home to roost, okay.
And we have created this mess.
We are suffering the consequences of an incredibly vulnerable supply chain because
we don't manufacture the products we used to manufacture here on our own soil.
And so, when you take a look at the reasons why the United States is
willing to be super friendly with Saudi Arabia.
Regardless of how many Washington post journalists they dismember and
assassinate, it's because of a financial relationship, it's because of oil.
It's because of weapons that we get to sell to Saudi Arabia.
There's a transactional relationship there that the United States and
US based corporations get to benefit from.
On the other hand, with China,
the United States now sees China as a threat, economically speaking.
So that's the reason why there's all this focus on human rights abuses carried
out by China.
It's not because US officials certainly not people like Nancy Pelosi.
They don't care about human rights abuses, that's not their concern, okay.
Their concern is, hey, is this relationship benefiting us in any way?
And if it's not, then we now suddenly need to be super concerned about
human rights abuses and to be sure.
I believe that the human rights abuses exist.
But let's also be cognizant of the very real and
current human rights abuses that we're experiencing here on our own soil.
>> Yeah, you're you're taking a cold war, you're taking an economic war and
you're deliberately making it hot.
You're deliberately saying, yeah, what I'm gonna go provoke China just for
the hell of it.
Just to make me look strong in the eyes of who, Republicans who hate you anyway.
Who don't care anyway, who think you're soft on China,
who think you're a literal communist when you're not.
Who is this for, is the other question that I have, but it is again,
once again, we just dig ourselves into a hole with this.
And again, I'm like I shudder to think, do you think by the time
we're ready to engage in a hot war defending Taiwan against China.
Our supply chain, we're gonna have dismantled corporate oligopolies.
And a concentration of power and wealth and
our whole like shipping system is gonna be democratized.
No, we're still screwed and then what, are we gonna be sold?
We gotta dig more.
I'm sorry, we have to dig in your home, we're gonna drill for
oil here, right where you live.
The whole thing is just hilarious to me.
>> It's just absolute insanity, it's unnecessary.
And I think Pelosi's timing is even pretty terrible here, right?
Out of nowhere, let's go ahead and provoke even more hostility even more of
this terrible relationship between the United States and China.
And we're not even talking about how much this type of hostility sets
us back in doing anything real and substantive about climate change.
Because responding to the climate emergency is
not something the United States can effectively do unilaterally.
You need to do it through diplomacy.
You need to do it by working with other hegemonic powers, there I say it.
And they're just unwilling to do that,
they continue to engage in counterproductive efforts.
It doesn't put anyone in any type of advantage other
than possibly military contractors.
>> And the last thing I was just gonna say,
I think Biden absolutely knew about this and probably directed it.
I don't see how Pelosi does this on her own, correct?
>> Yeah, I agree.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah, I totally agree with you on that.
All right and as we wrap up this story,
I just want you guys to get a better sense of the US relationship with China.
Why it is the way it is and someone who did really great reporting on that and
analysis on that prior to passing away was Michael Brooks.
So all of his content on China is still available on YouTube,
where you can watch it in its entirety.
But here are a few snippets that I think will give you some context that's
important to understand.
>> Why are we here today?
And what does it have to do going back to the Obama administration's pivot to Asia?
Let's talk about a couple of different elements of this in terms
of wide spread changes in the global economy and China's role in it.
For a very long time,
there was a stable relationship built on a very simple exchange.
Which is that the United States would get cheap goods manufactured
in by cheap labor in China brought back to the United States to fuel
a consumer base that would buy its necessities from Walmart as an example.
That cheap consumer goods could keep the American consumer going
even as inequality skyrocketed and reel rages were stagnant.
China in turn could develop its own economy but
not in a way that it really posed any systemic challenge
to US global hegemony in a post cold war world.
This has started to change over the last several years.
There's also very importantly the global arms-market project 2049 Institute.
A think tank that since launching in 2008 has released reports arguing for
harder diplomatic approach that China and increased military sales to
East Asian states with which China has geopolitical disputes.
The site lists, quote again, the site lists amongst its funders,
several major defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin,
north of roman as well as several branches.
As well as branches of East Asian governments and
embassies such as such as the embassy of the Japan and
the Taiwan Ministry of Defense.
>> Always follow the money and what I think Michael Brooks
did that no one else was really doing at the time,
was perfect analysis demonstrating how and
why the United States relationship with China devolved the way that it did.
And you always wanna follow the financial incentives that are really playing a big
role in the background and before I go to you Francesca for final word on this.
Donald Trump shockingly had the right take on Nancy Pelosi's visit.
I wanna give you that graphic here.
His wording is obviously probably not the way we would communicate but
I'm still amused by it.
Why is Nancy Pelosi getting involved with China and Taiwan other than to make
trouble and more money possibly involving insider trading and information for
her cheating husband.
Good reference there.
Everything she touches turns to chaos, disruption and crap.
Same could be said about him by the way.
Her second big Congress flop happening now and
the China mess is the last thing she should be involved in.
She will only make it worse.
Crazy Nancy just inserts herself and causes great friction and hatred.
She is such a mess.
Now again, a lot of what he's saying there can be applied to him but
the heart of his point there, I think is accurate.
What she's doing is unnecessary and it is causing a mess.
>> Well and this is the thing that we have to ask ourselves is,
what role does the United States play in the world?
Under Trump, its Xi Jinping is amazing and I love him and I wanna be just like him.
And I'm gonna go meet with North Korea,
Kim Jong-un with no preconditions whatsoever, just give them a total win.
Like fell in love.
We just relieve you from love at first sight.
Let's enable strong men around the world to suppress
their own populations and buy as much weapons as they want.
Now, I think in their hopes and dreams, Democrats do not
believe in that same rubric but what are they putting forward?
They're not putting forward much of anything.
It's still either you're with us or against us,
we're still the Hageman even though we're actually totally not.
And so the question is, how do you project an internationalism but
also a strength and a sorta pro democracy leadership in the world?
And you're absolutely right that the climate crisis is a perfect
opportunity for us to do that.
But no one in this administration and
of course not on the other side of the aisle, no one's doing that.
I mean, Bernie was kinda the first person to lay out a different way of thinking.
He criticized Henry Kissinger on a national stage and
roasted Clinton for her involvement with him.
Amazing, I wish we could get back to that.
>> Yes, could not agree more.