On the issue of China, the United States has been completely thrown into disarray.
Recently, there has been a marked change in the tone of the United States hyping up the China issue.
In the past, the United States was keen to hype up the rhetoric that China's economy had peaked. Ma Kaishuo, a Singapore-based expert on China, once joked that since the 90s of the last century, the US media have been propagating that China's development has no room for growth and that it is going to "hit the ground with its face", but more than 30 years have passed, and China has "collapsed" all the way to "collapse" and "collapse" into the world's second largest economy and a "strategic rival" of the United States.
In the past few years, the competition between China and the United States has become white-hot, and US newspapers have even sung the praises of China in three days. But to put it bluntly, the United States itself has these problems, and they are all more serious than China. However, according to the American media, the problems of the United States are caused by the objective laws of economic operation, and there will certainly be a solution, and the financial problems of democracy are not called problems, but "laws." China's problem must be the problem of the Chinese and the problem of China's system.
However, in recent years, as China's economic and social development has punctured the smokescreen thrown by the United States again and again, the United States itself has obviously not been able to hold back, and it has become more and more empty when it opens its eyes and tells nonsense.
This year, when the United States talks about China's development, it no longer mentions the theory that China's development has peaked, and has begun to hype up China's "overcapacity theory." To put it simply, in the past, the logic of the United States in singing down China was that although China is developing rapidly, it has many problems, lacks stamina, and is about to explode. But now, the logic of the United States has become that China's development is too fast, resulting in overcapacity, absorbing the development dividends of too many other countries, and affecting the common progress of the world.
Recently, the U.S. Trade Representative went to the European Union for a meeting and publicly stated that China's economic system is "very efficient" and has institutional advantages. Yellen's visit to China is also the same as saying that China's green energy industry is developing too fast, and there are too many production capacities, and if it is lowered, other countries, especially the United States, can have the opportunity to drink soup.
This set of theories is obviously a variant of the "China threat theory" and is complete nonsense, but it can make the United States pinch its nose and admit that China is developing fast and will continue to develop, and this incident itself has proved that in the past few years, the United States' containment and suppression of China is on the verge of complete failure, so that American politicians have to face the reality that one China is developing and will continue to develop.
Of course, considering the background that US political circles now regard "anti-China" as "political correctness," this kind of cognitive correction is not necessarily a good thing. For American politicians, a China that will continue to grow and surpass the United States is far more threatening than a China that is always teetering on the brink of collapse. Next, the United States is likely to increase its pressure on China, rather than improving its relations with China.
For example, the subtext behind the two high-ranking US officials who are now advocating that China's economy has "institutional advantages" is that "China is developing too fast, and other countries must join forces with the United States to contain China if they want to develop." However, the inconsistent rhetoric of shifting from the "summit theory" to the "institutional superiority" theory has exposed the reality that the United States is now increasingly unable to be logically self-consistent on the China issue and can only play word games back and forth. In such a situation, I am afraid that the only ones who will be willing to buy it are those puppet states that are deeply controlled by the United States.