Coronavirus Is Communist China's Chernobyl

Last year, the popular HBO miniseries "Chernobyl," which recounted the eponymous 1986 nuclear disaster in Soviet Ukraine, enthralled audiences across America. The docudrama unsparingly portrayed the obfuscation and dissembling that characterized the Soviet Communist Party's response in the aftermath of the meltdown. In a deceitful attempt to save face before domestic and international audiences, the Soviet politburo risked untold lives.

Fast-forward to 2020. As the coronavirus pandemic grips the world, we are all paying the price for the Communist Party of China's own Chernobyl. The only difference is that the ChiComs' Chernobyl is on a global scale.

Start with the fact that the Chinese Communist Party was clearly warned of the dangers of continually operating its "wet markets," believed to be the virus's zoonotic provenance. In these wet markets, exotic animals, to which some in China ascribe superstitious belief, are bartered like routine commodities. But these wet markets also previously brought onto the world SARS, bird flu, Asian flu and swine fever. Chinese scientists had warned the Beijing politburo that continuing to operate the wet markets could easily lead to another epidemiological outbreak -- quite possibly a novel strain of coronavirus. Beijing paid no heed.

Failing to shut down the wet markets is bad enough. But even more disastrous was the Chinese Communist Party's initial handling of the metastasizing situation in and around Wuhan. The Chinese government arrested and silenced scientists, brutally suppressed truth-telling media coverage, and fabricated statistics for the World Health Organization to paint a rosier picture than the facts demonstrated. Overall, one popular study from Britain's University of Southampton concluded that proper early-stage Chinese government intervention might have reduced the virus's spread by as much as 95%. As Axios succinctly summarized, the Chinese Communist Party's "early actions led to the virus spreading around the globe."

Origin tales and blame games aside, we are in the throes of the coronavirus fight. For the time being, it is appropriate to focus on defeating this invisible and lethal enemy. But when we prevail on the other side, the United States must lead a global effort to punish the Chinese Communist Party for the Chernobyl that it has unleashed upon an unsuspecting world.

At this point, even the most doctrinaire free traders must recognize that liberalizing economic relations with China has had harmful consequences. Our liberalized economic supply chains have endangered us all by allowing our nonpareil geopolitical foe to control our pharmaceuticals, telecommunication infrastructure and even children's toys. Further, those whose fervent ideological predispositions assured them of a self-evident slide from economic liberalization to political liberalization are now belied by the reality that is the world's foremost authoritarian police state.

Free trade absolutists and those who aided China's bid to join the World Trade Organization ought to reassess their dogmatic prioritization of cheaper goods for consumers over our compelling national interests. America must do its best to coordinate the global imposition of crippling tariffs and mass sanctions upon this destructive foe. It is time to both fully divest from China and to affirmatively punish the ChiComs for their coronavirus recklessness.

Economics aside, China must pay a steep political price. Fully severing diplomatic relations and encouraging our allies to join us in shuttering embassies in China is likely a step too far. But intermediate measures can, and should, be taken to isolate China on the world stage. Multilateral organizations to which China is a party, such as the G-20, should internally censure China and, ideally, revoke its membership. Far-fetched though it may be, the United States should at least symbolically float the idea that China have its United Nations Security Council permanent member status rescinded. And crucially, the United States must also lead a coordinated effort among our allies to further ramp up naval asset deployment to the East and South China Seas. There is ultimately no power quite like hard power.

The Chernobyl nuclear disaster transpired at the tail end of the Soviet Union's lifespan. In the years ahead, America must do its best to ensure the ChiComs suffer the same fate as the Soviets.

our traitorous press needs to be called out every time they repeat a CCP talking point.

“called out” by whom???
I’ll tell you how ~~the press~~ the journalism cartel has to be “called out.” It must be sued into oblivion.

Q:wasn’t Sullivan unanimous, and doesn’t NY Times v. Sullivan prevent that?

Yes - unanimous by the Warren Court. And no - in the sense that Sullivan is bad law.
Sullivan justified itself with the claim that
". . . libel can claim no talismanic immunity from constitutional limitations. It must be measured by standards that satisfy the First Amendment” - Wm. Brennan
That sounds good, but on close inspection it is poppycock. As of 1963, no court had held that the First Amendment affected libel law - at all. Just as no court has held that pornography restriction was affected by the First Amendment.
And, to switch gears with a ludicrous comparison, no one in or out of a court has ever suggested that the RKBA protected by 2A affected laws against armed assault or murder.
The reason is that “the” freedom of the press - freedom as it existed in 1788 was noncontroversial, and controversy was precisely what the Federalists who created the Bill of Rights were desperate to delegitimate (they had won ratification of the Constitution only by promising the addition of a bill of rights to the Constitution by amendment). Freedom from armed assault on one’s person was a right, and freedom from “armed slander” (a.k.a., libel) was a right as well. Those rights weren’t “enumerated,” because no tyrant had ever claimed the right to suppress them. They fall under the Ninth Amendment,
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The above rationale (minus the 2A reference) was voiced by Antonin Scalia.
In addition, the wire services are continual virtual meetings of all major journalists and
People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. - Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations (1776)
From that alone it is naive to assume that wire service journalism is not a cartel. What does that cartel do? It defines “objectivity” as “the negative perspective of the ‘if it bleeds, it leads’ press. It also defines “liberal” and “progressive” as meaning the same as their definition of “objective” - but require that it be used only to fellow travelers, never to journalists in the cartel. “Liberals” go along and get along with the cartel, and thus never are libeled. So Sullivan enables the cartel to libel conservatives without fear of libel judgment.
So the way to “call out the media” is to sue the wire services and their members/subscribers for antitrust violations and for systematic libel of “conservatives.” The Warren Court no longer sits, and a majority of its justices knows that what I’ve said above is true. SUE!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.