“200 Pounds” Heads to South America to Throw Money Around, Risking Domestic Unrest

On September 5, 2024, at the opening ceremony of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation, Xi Jinping announced $50 billion in aid to Africa. However, the African leaders seated behind Xi stared at him with this kind of look. (video screenshot)

[People News] On the 13th, the leader of the world’s proletarian party will shoulder “200 pounds of coins without switching shoulders” as he heads straight to South America to throw money around. According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, he will be gone for nine days, attending the APEC summit in Peru and the G20 summit in Brazil. It’s been over five years since he’s been abroad for this long. At this critical juncture, he has no choice but to go, as these two meetings are in neighboring countries in South America, and leaders like Biden will be there. This is America’s backyard—how could the leader of a party that claims international ambitions and wants to “liberate” and rule the world not attend?

It’s a critical moment because there’s smoke rising in his own backyard, even signs of fire. The reason? A group of unruly students who didn’t stay in their ivory towers—200,000 of them rode to Kaifeng without organization, leadership, or discipline. How could they act in unison at the same time? The problem worsened as campuses, roads, and bikes were locked down, yet Beijing and Hubei followed suit. How could this happen without malicious instigators and “foreign anti-China forces bent on our destruction” at play?

What? There are only anti-communist, not anti-China forces abroad? And what? Only the Communist Party itself is anti-China? Some are even saying that the student night rides were just for fun, and that the CCP’s fear of collective activities stems from knowing its rule is illegitimate? This sentiment has even appeared within the Party, with some comrades showing shockingly low Marxist understanding. Some claim that foreign forces live better than we do and wouldn’t want to seize our power. Ridiculous—too naive!

And even worse, some officials who enjoy the Party’s benefits have openly criticized it, claiming our rule is anti-China, anti-people, anti-republic, and anti-state! Did we establish this Party by importing Marxism from Europe easily? At the start, without championing internationalism, liberating all humanity, smashing idols on Parisian streets, orchestrating massacres in the Soviet Union, could we have gained the experience to contend with the Nationalists? When we first came to China, we relied on a few hundred rubles from our “old Soviet father,” engaged in banditry in the mountains, infiltrated the Nationalists to sow discord, and later strengthened ourselves during the Japanese invasion. Through campaigns like the Three Antis, Five Antis, Anti-Rightist Campaign, Cultural Revolution, 1989 crackdown on students, 1999 persecution of Falun Gong, and COVID-19 cover-up in 2019—without ruthlessness, we would have been overthrown long ago. Without all of this, would you now be enjoying the “prosperous” life you lead?

Our 5,000-year-old Chinese civilization—could we stand firm without fighting the heavens, smashing Buddhist statues, and enforcing thought reform? If we don’t throw some money in South America to display internationalism and win over southern countries, how can we compete against American imperialism? The new president of this so-called “anti-China” faction will soon take office. Shouldn’t we go into their backyard to disrupt things rather than always bow and scrape? Why should America always be the world’s leader?

Right now, troublemakers are already stirring up disorder within the Party’s backyard. There’s even a typhoon brewing in the CMC, with the Political Work Department Director and even the new Defense Minister facing investigation. It’s like having the headquarters of the bourgeoisie within the Party—everywhere you look, there are class enemies.

Even the 31st Army can’t be trusted. Officials like Qin Shengxiang, Director of the Military Reform Office appointed by Miao Hua, Navy Political Commissar Yuan Huazhi, and Army Political Commissar Qin Shudong all turned out to be two-faced. With such double-dealers, how can we feel secure? Can we really be away for nine days without worry? Do we risk another Kazan-like situation where we might need to rush back urgently?

It now seems that our constant emphasis on securing the safety and stability of top-level foreign visits—monitoring hostile forces, foreign media attacks, disturbances from petitioners abroad, and domestic security threats—was misguided. The real source of trouble lies within the Party and domestically, not with foreign forces.

“I” can’t shake a sense of foreboding. Even in South America, I will feel uneasy, fearing I might not be able to return to Beijing. If that’s the case, “I” might as well just dump my “200 pounds of coins” into the Pacific Ocean on the way and not return at all.