U.S. Establishment Admits Truth Of China’s Economic Superiority, But They Don’t Understand It

U.S. President, Donald Trump and Chinese President, Xi Jinping (courtesy of sutori.com)

April 7, 2025

Unintentionally, the rules-based international order not only reveals its weakness in regard to China, but also the failure of the U.S. economy due to its intrinsic flaws. If one knows the true history of the United States, as I do, Michael Froman’s Foreign Affairs article, China Has Already Remade the International System, exposes the strategic challenge-paradox the U.S. faces today. To compete with China, the U.S. would have to reindustrialize its economy, but that would run counter to the free-trade financial predatory nature of the rules-based order. The author discloses the complete absence of knowledge by the present day financial-political elites, of the scientific principles responsible for the creation of the formerly industrialized United States

We should not lose sight of the fact that Foreign Affairs is published by the Council on Foreign Relations, the century old British American policy institute that represents the thinking of the Anglo-American Establishment in the U.S.

The American System

President Trump, like his predecessors for the last sixty years, has no understanding of how the United States was created from thirteen colonies into a powerful industrial nation. It was accomplished under the guidance of Alexander Hamilton’s principles for economic growth, which later became known as the American System of Political Economy. While tariffs were one aspect of Hamilton’s policy, they are misunderstood and misapplied today. Hamilton and his followers; Fredrich List, Henry Carey, John Quincy Adams, Abraham Lincoln, William McKinley, and Franklin Roosevelt, rejected the free trade mentality that dominates conventional economic thought today. Read my article: Nations Must Study Alexander Hamilton’s Principles of Political Economy.

Architects of the American System of the Political Economy in the 18th and 19th centuries (courtesy of schillerinstitute.com)

Froman’s argument is: China was let into the Western world order, but then violated the rules to emerge from an undeveloped peasant based economy to a robust manufacturing industrialized economic power. China’s crimes, in the eyes of the rules-based order are: not allowing the so called markets to determine the future growth of its economy. As Hamilton and other more thoughtful founding fathers knew, Adam Smith’s theories, and the so called freedom of the marketplace, were always a fraud. The marketplace was never “free,” and it never resulted in the development of an economically sovereign nation. The United States, like every other modern nation that emerged in the last four hundred years, always entailed the intervention of the state, and the practice of dirigisme (state directed credit)  policies.

Historian Nancy Spannaus summarizes the core principles of the American System: That principle is the use of government-regulated credit to promote continuous scientific and technological progress through the constant upgrading of the productive powers (mental as well as physical) of the labor force. These principles conflict sharply with the laissez-faire ideas which most Americans have been told built our economic prosperity. americansystemnow.com

It is not mysterious to understand how China has transformed its economy in less than fifty years. Practitioners of the American System of Political Economy have done the same, when in charge of crafting U.S. economic policy. Tariffs or protectionism have not been historically applied simply to make money or as a political weapon against other nations, as many foolishly think today. The profitability of the American System that includes tariffs flows from a full throated commitment to industrialize the nation. This would include:

  • Increasing the productivity of the economy and workforce
  • Expanding the manufacturing sector
  • Modernizing the agricultural sector
  • Issuing low-interest public credit for investments in infrastructure
  • Promoting advances in science and technology
  • Upgrading educational standards
  • Providing quality healthcare
  • Formulating a vision for great infrastructure projects

The objective of such commitments is not to make money per se. It is to raise the standard of living of the nation’s citizens, eliminate poverty and increase the longevity of life. All of which China has accomplished in approximately two generations.

Paul Volker, Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1979-1987, ushered in the destruction of the U.S. manufacturing economy. (courtesy of jacobin.com)

U.S. Chooses Deindustrialization

In 1971, several years before China’s Deng Xiaoping launched the modernization of China, President Nixon removed the dollar from being a gold based currency. This began the process of transforming the financial system into a gigantic gambling casino, disconnected from the physical economy. Not only is the Western financial system bloated with trillions of dollars of debt, but it also contains almost two quadrillion dollars of derivatives, which are gambling bets. The truth, which Froman does not know or will not tell, is that the rules-based order is grounded on a predatory monetarist system, which exists to exploit its financial supremacy. Their objective is to obtain and maintain political power, not create wealth for the material improvement of people’s lives.

The United States and the West has been going in the wrong direction for decades, and now they are faced with the reality of what China has accomplished in becoming an industrialized and manufacturing powerhouse. The immediate conundrum for the United States is: 1) not understanding how China achieved their level of economic success; 2) not knowing how to apply or even knowledge of the principles of the American System; and 3) not having any intention of giving up their financial-predatory mindset.

The insanity of the U.S. elites, reflecting their opposition to expanding the industrial economy of the U.S., is best exemplified by their commitment to “deindustrialization” in the 1980s. Much of this was accomplished by Paul Volker, then head of the Federal Reserve, who raised interest rates to 20% in June of 1981, suffocating the economy in his pursuit of “controlled disintegration.” Volcker’s policy shut down industry, pauperized the American consumer, only helping banks, insurance companies, brokerage firms, and money managers to make higher profits.

The political-financial elites, who actually determine U.S. economic policy intended to transform the U.S. into a “post-industrial society.” Their fantasy ridden belief was that America no longer needed a strong manufacturing sector. They intended the U.S. to become a service economy and the center of the Western financial system, surviving by purchasing cheap products from around the world. They succeeded. Tourism replaced production. The U.S. has never recovered. We witnessed the effects of this dangerous policy during the Covid 19 crisis, when the US could not produce the essential products required for the health care of its citizens.

Compare China’s policy from the 1980s forward, to expand and industrialize their economy, to that of the U.S., to contract its industrial manufacturing base.

One example that typifies the drastic difference in orientation between China and the U.S. over the last two generations, is their transportation systems. China’s high-speed rail trains travel smoothly at 215 miles an hour, compared to the antiquated U.S. Amtrak trains which plod along at an average speed of 48 miles per hour. Think about the effect of that order of magnitude difference in speed has on the productivity of an economy?

China Rejected West’s Rue-Based Order

(Courtesy of statista.com)

Froman believes falsely that President Trump’s policies will succeed in rebuilding the U.S. economy. He bemoans the fact that Washington failed miserably to induce China into becoming a member of the rules-based order, refusing to submit to their free trade ideology diktats. He whines that China ignored Washington’s demands that the Chinese government stop subsidizing the production and exports of goods, which distorted the global marketplace.

He writes:

The U.S. strategy of engagement with China based on the premise that, if the United States incorporated China into the global rules-based system, China would become more like the United States…Instead of China coming to resemble the United States, the United States is behaving more like China (sic). Washington may have forged the open, liberal rules based order, but China has defined its next phase: protectionism, subsidization, restrictions on foreign investment, and industrial policy. To argue the United States must reassert its leadership to preserve the rules-based system it established is to miss the point. China’s nationalist state capitalism now dominates the international economic order.

Although Froman is acutely aware of China’s growth as an economic power in the 21st century, he has no idea how it happened. He appears clueless as to the effective policies that China employed to raise almost one billion people out of poverty, erroneously attributing the cause to globalization. China rejected the Western dictated norms of behavior, crushing the fantasies of the rules-based order that they would control China’s future.

China The New Model?

Froman continues:

The country’s [China’s] GDP grew from $34.77 billion in 1989, to $1.66 trillion by 2003, to $17.79 trillion in 2023. Hopes were high that integrating China into the rules based trading system would lead to a more peaceful and prosperous world… In 2004, China made-up 9% of the world’s manufacturing value added, leapfrogging to a massive 29% in 2023.

Over a period of 34 years, China’s GDP grew a whopping 500 times,  according to the World Bank.

Froman makes the laughable analysis that President Trump is now chosen the option of becoming like China. The problem is, that neither President Trump nor any of his advisors comprehend the strategy that China adopted to build its economy. Their difficulty is compounded by their failure to comprehend or have any knowledge, of the American System of Political Economy, as practiced over centuries in the United States.

Froman points out that the proportion of the U.S. labor force employed in manufacturing has been declining for decades. However, it will not be reversed simply through President Trump’s misguided tariff policy. Froman, displaying his ignorance of American history, asserts that China has pioneered a new economic model, characterized by protectionism, constraints on foreign investment, subsidies, and industrial policy–essentially nationalist state capitalism. These policies by the government of China parallel the measures enacted by the United States when it was employing the principles embedded in the American System of Political Economy.

Froman and others, writing on behalf of the Washington Establishment, would better spend their time studying Alexander Hamilton, and his students, who understood the role of the state in nurturing industrial capitalism. They might also come to comprehend that the development of U.S. and China is not antithetical, rather both nations can expand their economies in a global system committed to economic progress.

Read my earlier posts below:

China & BRICS Choose Progress Over West’s Deindustrialization

China Not An Enemy of the US, Could Be A Partner For Global Economic Development

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for 35 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, consultant on Africa, and an analyst of global strategic relations. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com, also publishes on: lawrencefreeman.substack.com, “Freeman’s Africa and the World,” and on X @lkfreemansafrica

Anglo-American Elite Continue Threats to Break-up Ethiopia

Ethno-nationalism is Ethiopia’s most serious security threat (map courtesy of Wikipedia)

April 16, 2024

The publication of Alex da Waal’s article, Ethiopia Back on the Brink, in Foreign Affairs, on April 8, is a clear indication that the Anglo American Establishment intends to continue the destabilization of Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa. (Foreign Affairs/ Da Waal)

How Do I Know?

I come to this conclusion as one who comprehends strategic global dynamics, which elevates my thinking above those who live in the world of empiricism. It is elementary for me, who understands the world view of those indoctrinated in the “geopolitical zero-sum” ideology, to know what is intended for Ethiopia.

I know two crucial pieces of evidence.

One, Alex da Waal supported the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) in their treasonous endeavor to overthrow the government of Ethiopia. It was a military attempt at regime change in a destructive war that lasted for two years. He was an active supporter in the war to destroy the Ethiopian nation. When Da Waal writes or talks about Ethiopia, his hatred and rage against Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, gushes out.

Two, Foreign Affairs is a quarterly publication of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the most prominent and influential think tank in the United States that has direct impact on all branches of the United States  government.The CFR was founded in 1921, as the American branch of the British Royal Institute for International Affairs, otherwise known as Chatham House, which was created two years earlier. Chatham House was created by Lord Alfred Milner, then acting as Secretary of State for the British Empire’s colonies, through a vast trust funded by the estate of race-patriot Cecil Rhodes.

One should ask him or herself: why would the most prestigious U.S. establishment magazine publish an article on Ethiopia by someone who not only hates the current government of Ethiopia, but actively supported its attempted overthrow.

Da Waal is no ordinary academic. He is an advocate for the geopolitical establishment that believes they have the authority to decide who is an acceptable leader of a nation. That is, one that is acceptable to their rules-based international order, which does not respect the legitimacy of decisions made by the citizens of sovereign African nations.

The intent of the continuous destabilization of Ethiopia in the eighteen months following the negotiated end of the war in November 2022, is to produce a weakened, fractured, or balkanized nation. One can grasp the significance of the type of evidence I am presenting, providing one has not become a victim of ethno-nationalism ideology. Given Ethiopia’s political and economic dominance, along with its sheer size, if these efforts were to succeed, the Horn of Africa would be thrust into decades of war and chaos.

Before I was shunned by the Ethiopian diaspora, I was praised for my insightful assessment that the intent of the TPLF instigated war was regime change. Unfortunately, many of my former allies, who know well of Alex da Waal’s nefarious role in Ethiopia’s destructive war, reject my analysis today. Nor do I have any direct indication that leaders in Ethiopia understand who is waging war against Ethiopia, and why. However, it would serve the best interest of Ethiopia and the continent, for people to heed and understand my analysis.

Ethno-nationalism Weaponized

The Council on Foreign Relations, dominated by their geopolitical outlook that the world is composed of victors and victims, disregards the significance of the concept of a sovereign nation state. Instead, they see countries as mere pawns to be manipulated to accomplish their goal of western hegemony. Poor Alex da Waal is simply a tool whose erroneous academic analysis is used against African nations. He serves the interests of his master, the rules-based international order.

Da Waal shows his contempt for a unified sovereign nation of Ethiopia through his constant support of ethno-nationalism, which remains today, the most serious threat to the existence of the Ethiopian nation. He fails to understand that the most important objective of a “national dialogue” is to affirm the superiority of Ethiopian citizenship over ethno-nationalism. This will also require major alterations in the flawed Ethiopian constitution, rather than perpetuating it . He praises the decades of rule by the TPLF that is responsible for dividing the nation into ethnic conclaves, which he claims was undone by Prime Minister Abiy.

Ethiopia’s failed Constitution, which promotes ethno-nationalism, is in urgent need significant change.

Da Waal writes:     

Under the previous regime, Ethiopia’s various regions have been held together by a federal formula that aimed to maintain the country’s complete complicated ethnic mosaic…this federal system undergirded a quarter century of stability.

This “mosaic” that promoted ethnicity over citizenship of a nation, has made Ethiopia vulnerable to external intervention, and is the root cause of Ethiopia’s recent war and violent conflicts today.

Da Waal consciously refuses to acknowledge that the TPLF initiated the war with an armed attack on the nation’s military defense force in Mekelle, Tigray. He supports the legitimacy for a province to initiate armed conflict against the central government. (An act that President Lincoln did not tolerate). He can barely conceal his enthusiasm for the TPLF’s march to capture Addis Ababa, the nation’s capital, in 2021. He praises the existence of ethnic armies and complains that FANO was not given a seat at the peace talks in South Africa. Why should they be there? FANO, nor any ethnic militia does not represent the nation of Ethiopia and is not a substitute for the elected  government.

War Mongering in the Horn of Africa

Da Waal joins the war mongering chorus working overtime to instigate armed conflict in the Horn of Africa. Displaying his ignorance or disdain for physical economic growth, he dismisses Ethiopia’s need for port access to the Red Sea and Gulf of Eden. Da Waal shows no concern for improving the living standards of millions of people residing in the Horn of Africa. Insisting that Prime Minister Abiy is only interested in the prestige of building a navy. Similarly, he exposes his lack of concern for improving the lives of Ethiopians and its neighbors by demeaning the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). He complains that it is 95 percent complete, despite opposition from Egypt. What kind of an “Africanist” does not support the injection of 5,150 megawatts of power, generated by the GERD, into a continent dying from lack of electricity? Conspicuously, Da Waal never discusses the critical need for economic development of the region.

In his Foreign Affairs’ essay, Da Waal asserts without any evidence that “the standoff between Addis Ababa and Mogadishu threatens to develop into a larger conflagration. There will be no conflagration unless Da Waal and his ilk deliberately ignite one, intending to set the East African region ablaze.

Da Waal blames the crisis in the Horn of Africa on Prime Minister Abiy’s so called expansionist plans and predicts a future that would lead to the  disintegration of Ethiopia. His scenario includes the Sudanese armed forces threatening the GERD, while the insurgency in Amara escalates. Da Waal has fantasies of an uprising that will threaten Prime Minister Abiy’s control of Addis Ababa, this time succeeding, unlike the TPLF’s earlier failed attempt. He then predicts that: In the coming year, Ethiopians could also face food riots, mass hunger-induced migration, and a broader social and security breakdown. That is quite a prophecy or is it his aspiration for the future of Ethiopia. If any of Da Waal’s evil imagination were to become true, hundreds of millions of Africans living in Eastern Africa and across the continent would suffer unspeakable hardship.

We should judge this ominous prediction by da Waal, to be a desired outcome, or at the very least, a threat to Ethiopia and the existing government of Prime Minister Abiy.

Da Waal’s solution is having the rules-based international order intervene, to tell yet another African nation how to behave. According to him, the United States and its partners should curb Prime Minister Abiy’s authority and maintain the structure of zones of ethno-nationalism. This would ensure that Ethiopia will be permanently fractured, instead of becoming a unified nation-state. Thus, deliberately leaving the second most populace nation in Africa, open to future destabilizations.

Hence, the significance of the publication of this article by an institution such as Foreign Affairs.

Read all my earlier posts on Ethiopia: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com/analysis/Ethiopia/

Soon I will be publishing from lawrencefreeman.substack.com

Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for over 30 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, and consultant on Africa. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is also the creator of the blog:  lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com