EVERY SPOKEN WORD
130 min read · 25,796 words- 0:00 – 0:27
Intro
- JMJamie Metzl
Let me just use this opportunity to condemn John Cena. John Cena, if you're listening to this podcast, you are a scoundrel. You're supposed to be a tough guy. That's your entire brand, and China criticizes you, and you get on your hands and knees and bark like a dog? Show some backbone. I challenge you, John Cena, to come on this podcast with me and let's have the conversation about China. (air whooshing)
- 0:27 – 12:44
Is the Lab Leak Theory Still Relevant?
- JMJamie Metzl
- CWChris Williamson
So you were one of the first guys to really get onto the lab leak story. Where are we at with that now, 18 months hence?
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah. So I'll start in the beginning. It was late January of last year. Like everybody else, I was deeply concerned about this emerging pandemic and thinking, "Well, where does this come from?" And like most people, I thought, "Well, it sounds pretty similar to the last SARS, uh, outbreak," which we knew happened, uh, and it came from nature through markets. But then in late January of last year, I saw, um, a report in The Lancet which showed that more than a third of the, uh, earliest people being infected, um, had no contact with that now infamous, uh, seafood market in, uh, in Wuhan. Um, and then I, I kind of had, I have two perspectives, one as a person who's deeply immersed in the world of science, and another, as the other part of my life deeply immersed in Asia and China and, and geopolitics. And so something just didn't feel right when the Chinese government, um, kept talking about a, a market origin, um, when it was pretty clear to me that the evidence suggested otherwise. And then I just started digging. I really, I dove in, and the more I learned, uh, the more questions were raised about the possibility of, of a lab incident origin. And it's still not 100% proven that that's where this pandemic, um, comes from. Um, but the circumstantial evidence is just incredibly strong, and everything we learn, at least it seems to me, that it's, uh, that it's getting stronger. So we, and we'll, we'll dig into the details of this, but where we are now, uh, is in my mind, there's a very strong but still circumstantial case suggesting a very likely, uh, but not certain lab incident origin of the, uh, pandemic. Uh, China and, is really just outrageously preventing any kind of, uh, investigation into the origins of the pandemic. They're still engaged in just a massive and outrageous coverup involving destroying samples, hiding records, imprisoning people in China for asking questions. They have a gag order preventing Chinese scientists from saying or writing anything about pandemic origins without prior, uh, government approval. Um, there are some efforts to dig deeper, but we need, we need a lot more.
- CWChris Williamson
Is that not likely to be potentially the most evidence that we get, the purely coincidental, anecdotal, this is what it seems? Because if the Chinese government continues to stonewall as effectively as it is at the moment, then maybe we're never actually going to find out anything that's concrete. It's all just going to be best-case scenarios.
- JMJamie Metzl
Well, that, that could be. That's one possibility. But we also have to think of how much we, and by we, I, I mean a bunch of wes. There's certainly our group, it's called the quote-unquote "the Paris Group," a group of about two dozen experts around the world who've been collaborating on this issue since, uh, last year. Uh, there's a-another group and, and there's some overlap between our, our two groups called DRASTIC, (clears throat) which is a group of, they're called internet sleuths, but they're, they're more than that, um, who've been digging. And, and we have uncovered, and this community, um, uh, more broadly has uncovered a lot of highly, highly relevant information that has told us a lot about this, this story. So yes, it would be better if China had complete transparency, but there's a lot that we can do. And most people, (clears throat) most people will be surprised that there's still no comprehensive international investigation into the origins of the pandemic. And what that means is if you're somebody in China, maybe a scientist who has highly relevant information, I'm sure you're scared for your life or, uh, right now, um, there's, and you wanted to share that information, there's not even an address. There's, there are no secure whistleblower, uh, uh, provisions. So there's much more that we can do. Will it work? Will it get us to 100% certainty? Maybe it will, maybe it won't, but we can't say it won't before we even try.
- CWChris Williamson
Why is there no investigation?
- JMJamie Metzl
It's been a political process. Um, and the main reason is that China has blocked it. Uh, last year in, in early 2020, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison called for a full investigation. Um, after he did that, the Chinese government punished Australia by imposing trade sanctions to try to deliver the message, uh, that if anybody who dares to ask questions will be punished. Um, he and, and the Australians brought that idea to the World Health Assembly, which is the governing board overseeing the World Health Organization in May of last year. And there was a jujitsu move by the, the Chinese, and the Europeans played a role in this as well. And so this idea for a full investigation, uh, uh, into the origins of the pandemic morphed into a Chinese-supported resolution, uh, which mandated essentially a Chinese-controlled joint international Chinese study, not into the origins of the, uh, pandemic, but into the single hypothesis of a natural origin not associated with a lab incident. So that, uh, led to the just the farce of this international joint study group, um, that then the international members, uh, went to Wuhan in, in January of 20, uh, 2021 this year.Uh, in early February, they held just a farcical press conference, um, where, in Wuhan, where they basically, uh, repeated Chinese propaganda lines. "It comes from nature. Maybe it comes from frozen food," they said, which was preposterous, and they were just later admitted they were just doing that as a favor to the Chinese. And then, um, the lead spokesman for this international, um, uh, ex- expert team, independent expert team, uh, he said, "We've concluded that a lab incident origin is extremely unlikely and doesn't merit further investigation." And it later turned out he admitted he was lying. That wasn't what he thought. He was just doing a, he had done a backroom horse-trading deal with the Chinese, who didn't want a lab incident mentioned at all. And so he said, "All right, well, I'll say it's extremely unlikely. I'll say, uh, it shouldn't be investigated. But is it okay if we just mention a lab incident?" And as I understand, um, that person is actually, uh, under investigation by the WHO for doing this kind of deal.
- CWChris Williamson
I was gonna say it's so crazy that there is no, uh, further level of authority that can look to try and impose on this particular group. When you talk about an entire global event, each individual nation state kind of looks after itself. But we don't... There's no, uh, what was that, Team America?
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah. (laughs)
- CWChris Williamson
There's no one that's like the global police that's flying around-
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah.
- CWChris Williamson
... and trying to enforce this stuff. And, um-
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah.
- CWChris Williamson
... yeah. I mean, you know, I'm not advocating for a new world order or a, a, you know, one nation state across the entire world, but we are seeing here that there is a, a lack of recourse when it's nation state versus nation state, because the only thing that you have to play with are like trade sanctions and threats of war and all sorts of stuff-
- JMJamie Metzl
Right.
- CWChris Williamson
... like that, which seems kind of primitive.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah. Uh, yeah. (coughs) That's 100% right, and, and really accurate. And so, um, the leadership of the World Health Organization, they're now trying to do as, as much as they can. Uh, they have created a group called SAGO, the Scientific Advisory Group, uh, for investigating the origins of novel pathogens. And that was kind of a, a really bold move by Dr. Tedros and the WHO leadership, uh, to supersede the mandate, um, that had been given to them by the, the World Health Assembly, who is basically their bosses of the, of the States. And so that's happening now. But China has essentially condemned, uh, the, Dr. Tedros and efforts to, to... and what he's called for a full audit of Wuhan labs and access to the raw data. Uh, and China has clearly said that they're not going to allow that, and, and, and their participation in a lot of these international organizations isn't designed to strengthen the organizations, but to blunt and, and block them. And that's, that's really, um, uh, really concerning. Uh, right now as we speak, uh, the, there's a special session of the World Health Assembly, uh, that is meeting to negotiate what, what will likely take many years, uh, which is a new pandemic treaty, uh, because it's just 100% clear that the institutions and structures that we have in place right now for responding to this kind of crisis are massively insufficient. When ironically, after the first SARS, uh, in the, in 2003, 2004, where China, uh, had a similar kind of coverup in the early stages, um, we had the same meetings, said, "We need to have stronger structures." We built them through the International Health, um, Regulations, and then it didn't make a, a difference. As a matter of fact, China's behavior this time is even worse. It's even more atrocious. And that leads to your broader question about just how the world i- is, uh, is organized. And, um, as you know, I'm the founder of an organization called One Shared World, and what we're trying to do is to address exactly what you said. There's a mismatch between the nature of the biggest problems that we face, which are global and common, and the absence, uh, of sufficient structures for addressing that entire category of problems. And that's pandemics, climate change, proliferating nuclear weapons, and, and lots of, uh, uh, of other things. Uh, and that's why, uh, China, in the name of national sovereignty, is able to do all these, these things that, that certainly I find, uh, despicable, not just covering up the origins of the pandemic, uh, but also committing mass human rights abuses in, in Xinjiang and Tibet and illegally seizing territory in the South China Sea and along the border with India, uh, and, and elsewhere. And that's why, um, we really, really need to think deeply about how do we build a safer structure for, uh, for the world. And if we don't do it, unfortunately, our world's going to become a much more, a much more dangerous place. So, that's why, uh, we need to start moving in that direction. And it's not just about what states can do. Everybody has a role.
- CWChris Williamson
Yeah, there definitely needs to be more oversight. That's a really interesting way to actually look at concluding what's happened with the lab leak theory, whether it was zoonotic at a wet market, whether it was a lab leak, or whether it was something else, China is covering up the origin of the virus. It doesn't matter what side-
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah.
- CWChris Williamson
... of this debate you fall on, everybody can accept the fact that China, China isn't being transparent with the single biggest global health problem that we've had in the modern era. And that's-
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah.
- CWChris Williamson
... that blows my mind. There's no recourse for us to try and get those people back. It's, it's crazy.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah. It's m- it's, it's really terrible. And what China will say and does say about issues of Xinjiang and, and Tibet and others is, "Well, uh, the human rights of Chinese people, um, that's China's own business. Uh, the rest of the world isn't a, a stakeholder." Um, but the rest of the world is a stakeholder. The fact that the whistleblowers weren't able to speak out in the earliest days following the outbreak, whatever the origin o- of the outbreak. The, the fact that people, Chinese people who are asking questions are in prison. Uh, one of them, Zhang Zhan, is actually near death in, in prison.
- CWChris Williamson
Yeah.
- JMJamie Metzl
Uh...That's not just a Chinese issue. I mean, uh, economist estimates that the number of total dead is, uh, uh, due to COVID is between 15 and 16 million. I would venture to say that a ver- regardless of the, of the origin, a very significant percentage of those deaths are attributable, um, to the pathologies of the Chinese state and to this
- 12:44 – 20:08
New Evidence on the Origin of Covid-19
- JMJamie Metzl
cover-up.
- CWChris Williamson
So, what's been some of the new realizations that have come out? Has there been any data that's arrived recently, updates with regards to the origin of COVID?
- JMJamie Metzl
Oh, huge. And, and a lot has, has come out. And first, let me just lay on, on the table the two cases, the people who believe this has a natural origin. They will argue, um, that that's how most, uh, pandemics have happened in the past. Um, and n- uh, nature is, is very creative, and so we just can't say what, what will or will not show up. The counterargument, which is certainly what I, uh, believe is far more likely, um, is that we have a, an outbreak of a, um, of a bat with a horseshoe b- with, I'm sorry, with a virus with a horseshoe bat, uh, backbone. It happens not where the horseshoe bats are, but more than 1,000 miles away where they don't have this kind of horseshoe bats, but they have the, uh, the world's a- a- China's first and largest, uh, highest level, uh, virology institute high containment lab, um, with the world's largest collection of bat coronaviruses, where they were doing research not even at the highest level, at BSL-3 and 2, uh, levels, uh, designed, uh, to make these scary viruses even scarier. We'll leave the word gain-of-function aside for a moment. And then, uh, this, uh, virus shows up, and on day one, it's, uh, with no, uh, parent so far evolutionary history, it's ready, uh, to, uh, easily pass, uh, from human, uh, human to human. Um, and then they have the whole, the whole cover-up. Since the earliest days of the outbreak, we've had a lot more information, uh, people in drastic uncovered information that was being hidden by the Chinese about a copper mine in- in Yunnan in southern China. In 2012, six miners were sent down to clean out, uh, bat guano, bat manure. All of them got sick with what, uh, look today very much like SARs, like COVID-19 symptoms. Um, half of them died. Their blood samples were taken to the Wuhan Institute of, of Virology and elsewhere. Uh, multiple sampling trips, um, were sent to this, this same mine. Um, and in those sampling trips, uh, the, a number of, uh, many different viruses were collected, including, um, one that is among the most genetically similar to SARS-CoV-2. And because there's a lot of recombination in bat viruses, just have to assume, um, that similarity breeds similarity. So, it's quite likely that, that there are additional, uh, similar viruses in the, in the collection. Uh, then the Wuhan Institute of, of Virology's, uh, viral database with, um, 22,000 samples vanished. It first went offline and then vanished in late 2019. And that was also, uh, dug up. Uh, then we got, had access to th- this organization, EcoHealth Alliance, um, which was a funding partner to Wuhan Institute of Virology. Uh, and they, um, were engaged in all sorts of, of activities that certainly from the perspective of now seem, uh, seem questionable. Then, I could just go on forever, but I won't. Uh, then we just, uh, found out through a leak, and a leak that I think was a deliberate leak from the U.S. Defense Department that said, "Hey, we did the right thing." Um, but that in March of 2018, so a year and a half before, uh, the outbreak, uh, this organization, EcoHealth Alliance, along with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, um, applied for $14 million of DARPA funding. And one of the things that they wanted to do was to genetically engineer a furin cleavage site, which is part of the spike protein, basically how these viruses are able to in- best infect human cells, a furin cleavage site into, uh, the backbone of a SARS-like virus. And so the Wuhan Institute of Virology was going to collect the viruses, and they did collect viruses from Laos, Cambodia, southern China, and elsewhere. And this la- this work was supposed to be done at the University of North Carolina in the, the lab of Ralph Baric. Uh, DARPA correctly, um, rejected that, uh, proposal. But there's a real question is did the Chinese go forward anyway? I think it's actually quite likely, and that's basically in, in most fields of advanced science, that's what the Chinese are doing. They'll partner with international experts to learn as much as they need to learn, and then they'll just push forward doing that thing in China. That's why the first CRISPR babies were born in China and lots of, and lots of other things. So, we're, we're really learning a lot, and the more we learn, uh, the more this looks like, um, it's very likely a lab incident origin. And, and the reason why, uh, we have this pandemic, it's the origin probably, but not conclusively a lab incident origin. And then as we said, regardless of the origin, a criminal cover-up, um, was what exacerbated this crisis and brought it to scale.
- CWChris Williamson
Would you say that COVID helped China overall? Have they suffered more than other countries? How does that work out?
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah. So, I think relatively, uh, China is better off. China's relative power is stronger now. China is relatively stronger now than it was in the beginning. That doesn't mean it's been an en- enjoyable experience for them by, uh, by any means. Um, but to China's credit, um, they've managed the spread-... um, of the virus inside of, of China, certainly more than, than has any other big country. Some people s- uh, suggest, so that, eh, raises the question of could this have been deliberate. I don't think it is. I mean these are really smart people. It's like the dumbest thing ever would be to say, "All right, we're gonna release a dangerous, highly infectious, um, pathogen in our, in our, one of our big cities, um, with the goal of infecting our city first and then the rest of the world will do a better job of, of locking down." I don't think that's, that's very likely, uh, but I do think, uh, most likely there was some kind of accident followed by a criminal cover-up.
- CWChris Williamson
Yeah, that crosses the line from, uh, aggressive and sometimes negligent to malicious and mostly psychotic.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah. Yes.
- CWChris Williamson
Yeah. Which-
- JMJamie Metzl
Well, yeah. I agree. I mean, I think, and, and so y- you, you start out at, uh, negligent, I mean certainly ambitious and, and negligent. Um, but then you get to the criminal cover-up, um, and that's, that's the thing. And the cover-up is malicious because lots of countries, uh, make mistakes. Uh, the United States, we had Union Carbide, we had Three Mile Island, we had the accidental bombing of the Beijing Embassy in, in, in Belgrade. Uh, recently there was a, a, a terrible, uh, seemingly accidental, uh, killing of, uh, of a family in, in Afghanistan. There was the whole Afghanistan debacle. Lots of countries make mistakes. I'm not pinpointing China as the only country to make a mistake, or as the only country to ever have a cover-up, but I, what I am saying, in this case, um, it's, it's th- uh, the consequences
- 20:08 – 24:11
China’s Current Goals for the Nation
- JMJamie Metzl
are pretty awful.
- CWChris Williamson
So, taking a broader view, what's China's overall goal at the moment for the nation? What do they want?
- JMJamie Metzl
Well, well I'll just put it in their terms. I mean, what the, the Chinese strategic documents have said is they're looking to have global leadership, uh, by the year 2049, which is the hundredth anniversary of the, uh, of the Chinese state, the R- the Chinese, uh, revolution. And-
- CWChris Williamson
What's glo- what's global leadership and why did they say this?
- JMJamie Metzl
So, right now, uh, du- historically, uh, China has seen itself as the middle kingdom. It's, it's certainly a, or, or one, maybe the great civilization of its region, and they had a relationship with the countries around it that was based on that understanding, which is very, very different from the principles of the post-war international order that were established by the United States and the UK and our allies in the aftermath of the, uh, of the second World War. And so China would like to have that freedom of maneuver. China sees, uh, the United States, um, I think as a country that's trying to keep China down, and sees that post-war liberal international order as something that is just a veiled threat. It, it's not something designed for the common good, but something designed to keep others down and, and, as they see it, keep, uh, the United States, um, in a, in a role of, uh, of primacy, and they wanna get outta that. And part of getting outta that, at least in my view, is, uh, deeply undermining this system, the alliance system, um, that emboldens, uh, countries, uh, like, uh, Japan and Korea and Australia to stand up to, uh, to China. That doesn't necessarily mean that China wants to militarily take over the world. China says they never take over, um, other entities, but that's just a bald-faced lie because you just have to have a, just a different view of ... Like if you, if, if I were to say, uh, America is the whole world, then America would never invade any other country, because I had just declared that all other countries are America. If China just says, "The entire South China Sea is China," then seizing territory in the South China Sea isn't aggression, it's just this is, th- this is ours. So they, they use kind of-
- CWChris Williamson
It's the, it's the big brother, little brother, stop hitting yourself thing all over again, isn't it?
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah.
- CWChris Williamson
Stop hitting yourself (laughs) .
- JMJamie Metzl
Well, y- it's something like that, but the thing is, for them, um, uh, yeah, I mean, th- for them, they're just making declarations. I mean, that, that's why, uh, for China, managing the information space is so important, because the idea is, well just, just declare some big crazy thing and then start defending that crazy thing, and then you act according to that principle, and then people will say, "Hey, you're wrong." And you say, "Oh, no, no. Um, we, we have a claim to the entire South China Sea, so this is just a, just a dispute. This isn't aggression. We're not seizing territory. We're not attacking India. Um, we're just, um, you know, part of this, uh, o- of this dispute. Um, w- we haven't, uh, I mean Xinjiang and, and, and Tibet, uh, Taiwan, uh, China has, uh, the, the, the, the government on mainland China, uh, has only controlled Taiwan for four years since 1895, um, and yet that claim, there are lots of other, uh, uh, countries that have a much stronger claim to other places that have let bygones be bygones, but, again, China, it, it asserts its reality, uh, and then tries to defend, um, the reality that it's, that it's created.
- CWChris Williamson
What is ... Can you explain what China's doing in the South China Sea with its little islandettes-
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah, yeah.
- CWChris Williamson
... and how it's expanding territory?
- JMJamie Metzl
Yes.
- 24:11 – 30:35
How China is Expanding its Territory
- JMJamie Metzl
Um, so, um, a big vulnerability that China has is that the United States Navy, uh, is-... uh, is still more advanced and stronger. And the South China Sea is one of the main thoroughfares for trade. It's na- it's natural resource, uh, res- uh, rich, not just fishing, but, uh, oil, and it's, it's critically important. China has made this just absurd, outlandish, and according to international law, illegal claim called the Nine-Dash Line, um, to essentially the entire South China Sea. And then what they did, um, is they claimed these, uh, these essential reefs in the middle of the South China Sea, seized them, and have built massive military installations, uh, on those islands. And what they're doing, so the United States has aircraft carrier battle groups, and if you've ever seen them, they are just unbelievably awesome displays of power. Um, but if you have military installations right in the middle of the South China Sea, that's like a huge aircraft carrier in one of the criti- most important places where you would have an aircraft carrier. And, uh, a l- if you have a land base, you can really do a lot. And the United States could neutralize those bases in a war scenario, I mean, th- they're just sitting there, so you could, you know, attack them in a war. But all- most of life, and hopefully all of life, happens outside of a war, uh, of a war scenario. So it's, again, the same thing China declares an imaginary reality and then starts acting as if the imaginary reality is r- is real. And then when people raise questions about it, attacks those, those people or those countries.
- CWChris Williamson
Isn't there a rule to do with a particular radius around the islands? It's a 90-mile radius or something, so by China-
- JMJamie Metzl
Sure.
- CWChris Williamson
... picking up these little reefs, they're slowly expanding that territory-
- JMJamie Metzl
Correct.
- CWChris Williamson
... because they all intersect?
- JMJamie Metzl
It's the convention of the Law of the Sea, and these little reefs, these little sunken, um, natural structures don't ha- I mean, one, the claims are totally illegal. Two, uh, even if they were legal, these reefs don't afford that kind of protection. But they take these reefs and then they're pouring cement and they're building structures on, o- on top of them and in order to make these, these claims. And, and what they're trying to do is just create realities on the ground, um, that will transform the, the conversation, because now they have these military installations and, and they're, they're telling every, uh, every other country, "What are you gonna do about it? Are you gonna, are you gonna force us to leave?" And, and China has built up its massive military. They're now investing hugely in hypersonic weapons, in nuclear weapons, in attack submarines, um, and so it's not even clear, uh, that if the United States were to challenge, uh, those, those islands, at least at this stage, and there were some kind of military confrontation, it's, it's not even clear who, uh, who would win. So what China's trying to do is just change the realities on the ground regardless of the, uh, of the legalities, regardless of what it does to any concept of a rules-based international order, and then just say, "Well, that's, that's the reality. Get used to it."
- CWChris Williamson
They're fucking about with anchoring bias and status quo bias and first-mover advantage better than anyone that I've ever seen. As you say-
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah.
- CWChris Williamson
... by proclaiming a particular situation and then matching reality to that situation, and then saying, "What do you mean? This, this huge concrete building has always been here on this island. It's always been our territory." Um, I mean, it's not the most subtle of strategies, but it definitely seems like it's being effective. And it's being rolled out, it's across everything, right? It's whether you're looking at controlling information, whether you're looking at the way that they are restricting dissident conversation. There's this new, uh, rule around algorithms as well. They've just made one of the most restrictive rules on algorithms ever. What, what's happened there?
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah, so my friend Matt Pottinger has an editorial in The New York Times, uh, today on this, and basically, China has recognized, as many of us have, that data is the new oil of the, of the 21st century. And so what China... First, they have laws to capture, uh, the data of their own citizens, making it illegal to export that data. Uh, but now they're having laws to try to capture, uh, the, the data of all, of companies that are operating inside of, uh, of China. And so what China's doing is building these massive datasets of, uh, of everybody's information inside of China and outside, and there's lots of theft (clears throat) of, of records, including, um, assuming my records, because they hacked the, the White House, um, Office of Personnel, which has all of my, my former security clearances and, and ut- and other things. And then there're, uh, there's no doubt, um, that they're going to weaponize that information or certainly utilize to their advantage over, uh, over time. And so there's the data, there are the algorithms, and China is certainly playing for keeps. They have a might-makes-right mentality. That doesn't mean that their, that that approach is necessarily going to win, but it certainly means that those of us, um, in a- in elsewhere in the world who don't want to live in that kind of, of Sinocentric rule, uh, world, a world organized around those values, we need to organize ourselves. We need to manifest the kind of, uh, values, um, that we articulate. And when we look at what's happening here in the United States and what's happening in the UK and elsewhere, it doesn't really look like that. I mean, and so, yes, we, we can and should be critical of what China is doing and we have to fight back. Uh, but one of the ways, um, uh, fighting back has to be...... reinvesting in our own democracy, our own strength, our own, uh, strategic thinking about how do we make ourselves stronger and, uh, counter the, the challenges that we face, um,
- 30:35 – 36:58
Are Russia & China Gaslighting the West?
- JMJamie Metzl
globally.
- CWChris Williamson
How much do you think that the civil discontent in the West at the moment is legitimate, and how much do you think is sowed by foreign actors like the Internet Research Agency in Russia-
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah.
- CWChris Williamson
... or, or China?
- JMJamie Metzl
Well, we have these debates, we have these divisions, and they are mostly indigenous. Um, but I think that the Chinese and, and the Russians, uh, and maybe a few others, but certainly the Chinese and the Russians, they are throwing lighter fluid into this existing fire.
- CWChris Williamson
(laughs)
- JMJamie Metzl
And when you have these kind of critical turning points, um, like the, the election of, uh, of Donald Trump and, and, and certainly other experiences that we've experienced here in the United States, uh, around racial tensions and gun rights and abortion, um, they're just throwing this lighter fluid in- into the fire and it's exacerbating things. And that's, that's ... but there's a challenge because, uh, having a healthy debate, even sometimes uncomfortable, uh, debate is essential. Uh, and we have these, these new vehicles, uh, like Twitter, um, that give a lot of people voice who haven't had previously voice at this kind of, uh, uh, scale. But at the same time, we need to protect ourselves against malicious interference and malicious disinformation campaigns, um, sowed by, uh, foreign, uh, foreign government actors who are, are wishing us ill. And it's, it's really hard, uh, hard, uh, to do. And so we have to both fight those foreign actors, and I think we need to reinvest in building a culture of civility, a stronger culture of civility here in, in the United States. That doesn't mean that we can't have difference, uh, differences. We, we can, we should. It's natural for us to do them. Uh, but I think if we just get in this world where we're just breaking into these blocs, and everybody is just flinging firebombs over their wall at, at, at the other guy, um, I just think that's, that's not going to be healthy for anyone.
- CWChris Williamson
The problem is that-
- JMJamie Metzl
(laughs)
- CWChris Williamson
... the difference between, um, indigenously created conflict based on something that genuinely needs to be fixed and foreign actor-created problems that manifest to look like something that was created internally, tho- they're essentially impossible for us to work out. And a- another thing that I've been thinking about, I've been, I'm in Texas, I've been here for a couple of weeks, and although the atmosphere here is beautiful, from watching, uh, the U- the US from the UK over the last couple of years, the difference in the sort of environment and the sort of climate that's been in the US for the last 18 months, from what actually happened to the kind of environment that Russia or China would want the US to have if they were going to try and take this country down, it's, it's not that far away.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah.
- CWChris Williamson
You think about loss of national pride, hatred of the flag, uh, increased divisions, uh, lack of understanding around what truth means, lack of agreement around what truth means, lack of trust in news media, lack of trust in government and political officials, and all that sort of stuff. So there, to me, there's only two things that could be happening. One is that this is fundamentally being fueled by foreign actors, and they're patting each other on the back and saying, "Well done." The second one is that they're maybe throwing a little bit of lighter fluid on the fire, but looking at each other and going, "Was this, was this us?"
- JMJamie Metzl
Mm-hmm. (laughs)
- CWChris Williamson
"No?" And they're just clapping as America turns around and kicks the ball into its own goal over and over and over again.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah, I, I think the second is more likely. And you're right. It's, it's, it's hard to measure exactly what it is because there are a lot of things that are just changing in our, uh, in our societies, so I wouldn't ... I mean, it would be absurd to say that everything that's happening, all of these division, it's just China and Russia is making us do it. I mean, that would take away all of our agency and, and all of our, and all of our responsibilities. So I think that we have to very aggressively counter what China and Russia are doing. And very conveniently, both of them are blocking, uh, and protecting their own information spaces at home and public information spaces. Um, but again, we also need to reinvest in our own democracy. I think there are a lot of people who don't feel heard, um, here, and we need to make sure that we have, uh, that, that we create forums. And, and, and people, you know, we all interact within structures. We're not e- we don't exist in some kind of a, a vacuum. And, and part of those structures are algorithmic. I mean, I ... it's hard for me to measure this, uh, but I was telling this to, to somebody else, uh, the other day. Um, so I have different parts of my life, and certainly I focus, uh, some energy, a decent energy on pandemic origins, uh, and then part on, uh, thinking about the future of the genetics and biotech revolutions and part on one shared world, and how do we think about building a, a better world for everybody. When I, when I tweet things like, uh, we need to dig into the origins of the pandemic, China's engaged in an, an illegal cover-up responsible for millions of unnecessary deaths, we have to demand a, a full investigation, blah, blah, blah, that gets a lot of attention. If I tweet, um, we need to come together to build a safer world for everybody, it's like two people, my mother and-
- CWChris Williamson
No, it's not as fun.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah. Yeah.
- CWChris Williamson
It's not as exciting. Yeah.
- JMJamie Metzl
And, and, but I ... so it, it could be that, that people are just seeing it and saying, "Well, I don't care about building a safer world," or it could be that the algorithm is, is somehow weighting, uh, different things differently.And so I do- I do think that we need to think about the structures in which our communications are happening because the structures have inherent biases. And it's not that these are intentional biases. It's just that these- these biases play out over time and then have big implications.
- CWChris Williamson
Well, they're reflections of our mentality, right? And our psychology. The limbic hijack, the fact that if it bleeds, it leads, is something that catches our attention as opposed to some lovely, fluffy aphorism about one love. I- it's just not going to grab people's attention
- 36:58 – 42:06
China’s Anti-US Propaganda
- CWChris Williamson
in the same way. Another thing that I was looking at was anti-US propaganda. Have you done much research into this from China?
- JMJamie Metzl
Well, certainly there's a lot of anti-US propa- I mean, I can't say I've done a huge amount of, uh, of research, but you look all around the world, I mean, what China is essentially trying to do is undermine the United States and highlight the- the very real failings of- of the United States. The United States didn't monumentally screw up in Afghanistan, uh, because of China. I mean, we did it ourselves. I mean, we have a lot of self-inflicted wounds. Uh, and what China is doing is, uh, is both highlighting those shortcomings and seeking to amplify, uh, the things that China actually does pretty well. I mean, we have to credit where credit's due. I mean, China has brought hundreds of millions of its own people out of abject poverty. They've done a great job of building physical, uh, hard infrastructure. There are a lot of things that China does pretty well, um, and so that's what ... that's China's game. Uh, and- and the United States needs to be cognizant of that, but also needs to be thoughtful and measured and strategic, uh, and inclusive in- in responding. I mean, the- the ... it can't be the United States versus China. It has to be a coalition of people all around the world who share a positive vision of what we'd like the future to look like. And then China has a choice to either join that vision or not. And that's why, um, for example, it was so tragic when Donald Trump, um, pulled the United States out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership in the earliest days of his presidency because that's what it was. It was a bunch of countries getting together and said, "Can we build a model of what we'd like trade between our countries to look like? And what are the standards?" Um, and then once we have that model, we'll have a lot of leverage to China. We'll say, "Either you meet this standard or not." And that was why I thought it was a great idea. Uh, n- there was a lot of pressure against it. Uh, Hillary Clinton, unfortunately, uh, during her campaign, even though, uh, negotiating this had been, according to her, one of her, uh ... the- the- the things she was proudest of, had, in my view, erroneously said, well, that she was no longer for it, and then Donald Trump withdrew. That was a huge victory for China. And so, um, yes, you know, China is trying to, to use your- your metaphor, you know, kicking a lot of balls at our goal, but we're also, uh, kicking balls into- into our own goal, and we've got to change that.
- CWChris Williamson
One thing I was thinking about to do with the popular media representation i- in China, let's say, in their cinema, of the sort of colonialists, imperialists, like, awful sort of classic Western depiction of Americans. I wonder whether that's ethically much different to how the US was portraying the classic evil Russian in a- a turtleneck and a black cap, you know, throughout the '80s, because that was part of the US's rhetoric then.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah. It was. I mean, certainly looking at who are the bad guys and how are they portrayed is- is part of just understanding how- how societies function. Um, and i- in many ways, I think China, which, I mean, again, talk- it's about shifting realities, uh, China's now accusing the United States of having a Cold War mentality. Uh, but China has had a Cold War mentality against, uh, the United States even from the earliest, uh, the earliest days. I'm just finishing a book called The Long Game by Rush Doshi. And it's pretty incredible, 'cause it looks at, um, the Chinese sources of how they were articulating what they were doing. And even at the height of US e- of efforts, when the United States was saying, "All right, we need to integrate China into the rules-based international order. We need to create a space for them," um, so that ... and that over time, their society will evolve, and we can work together. It was- I'm sure it wasn't so pure as- as that, but that's what the story that the United States leaders were- were telling ourselves, and I was in government then. But for the Chinese sources, it was like, these guys want to screw us. Um, we have to sneak in. Uh, we have to use their institutions to undermine them. I mean, really from day one, uh, according to Chinese sources, the goal was not to- to integrate into a- a global system for the- the mutual good. I mean, China thought that that was too beneficial to the United States, um, but to, uh, simulate engagement with those institutions in order to undermine and weaken them.
- CWChris Williamson
China is playing so much of a longer game, it would feel like, than, you know, it is the chess versus checkers analogy. Was there a, um, I feel like a sort of-
- JMJamie Metzl
I think go- go versus checkers.
- CWChris Williamson
Go versus checkers. (laughs) Yeah, yeah, good way to, good way to make it, uh, ethnically appropriate.
- 42:06 – 50:35
Why China Isn’t a Democracy
- CWChris Williamson
Did I see an interview where you mentioned that one of the ideas behind the US enabling Chinese trade was that by raising living standards and by raising, uh, bringing their population out of poverty, the presumption is that-... um, democracy kind of comes along for the ride, that you have this educated populous, they have better living standards, and then they start to... Once they've got food and water and heat-
- JMJamie Metzl
Right.
- CWChris Williamson
... and shelter, they start to look at these bigger questions. Uh, but what perhaps we hadn't accounted for was the power of a very authoritarian regime with technology to, uh, deploy its means.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah, that, that's exactly right. There were people like Tom Carruthers and others, um, who certainly in the, in the later... mid to later 90s were making this argument that once people get to be around... have around $7,000 in, in annual income, uh, they start to make demands, and it forces governments to change to meet the demands of those empowered publics. And in my mind, it, it, it's a little bit of the arrogance on our side to feel... And it was the same thing with the Francis Fukuyama argument about the end of history. Uh, they just assumed that there's just one path and we know it and we're on it, and we had that kind of arrogance. And, and frankly, that arrogance hurt us because we thought, "Well, all we need to do is help China get rich. We just need to open our systems, and we just need to have an open internet." Um, and then the pull, the structural pull of all these is going to be so transformative that there's nothing that the Chinese government can do. Bill Clinton had a famous, um, uh, line. He talked about the Chinese internet, it is trying to control the internet. It's trying to nail jello to the wall. Good luck with that. Well, China's nailed jello to the wall. They've done actually a, a great job. They've, they've gotten rich. Uh, their, their average income is, is above that level. Uh, and they've... They are, they are pioneering just a different model of organization. And in many ways, it's working in some ways for the people who are living in China, as I mentioned. You know, different estimates, 700 million people brought out of abject poverty. When you talk about realizing the sustainable development goals, most of that work has just been done by China, not because the United Nations declared these standards or Jeffrey Sachs, um, helped think, think them up because the Chinese government, for its own purposes, um, was doing what it wanted to do to improve the, the wellbeing and status of China and, and the people in, in, uh, in China. So, um, it w- it was, it's a... It was almost an arrogant view on our side. Um, and then... But, but, uh, so I don't think that democracy, liberal democracy, um, is in any way inevitable. But if we believe in it, if we believe in the rules-based international order, um, we need to think about, well, how do we grow it? How do we grow it in an, an inclusive way? And again, I'm, I'm, uh, American, and I'm certainly a, you know, patriotic in my way, uh, American, but, you know, it doesn't mean that I think America has done everything right. We certainly did a great job of helping win two world wars and, and organize the world after the, after the second and defended, uh, the free world for a long time, but massive flaws, massive shortcomings, massive selfishness in terms of our, our use of natural, natural resources. And there's a lot to criticize on all sides. Um, and I think we need to, we need to do that, and we need to articulate what's the kind of world that we would like to live in, uh, and then try to, to build the best path from here to there.
- CWChris Williamson
Here's the thing, man. It may end up being that a modern society really struggles to flourish under a democracy that the... I, I think about this all the time, that the principles of freedom genuinely might be some sort of old and worldly harkback thing that is really, really challenging to wrangle when you have technology and ubiquitous communication and all this sort of stuff. Now, I don't disagree that it makes for a more flourishing life. I think that that is how you can maximize, uh, a human's, uh, enjoyment of their days. But we're not talking about that here. We're not talking about enjoyment. We're talking about effectiveness, and it may end up being that an authoritarian regime like the CCP is so much more effective that without correct checks and balances, without correct sanctions, without correct, um, foresight and long-term planning, that it... They're so much more effective that you can't compete with them with a freedom-based society. You know, I mean, all of the time that's been spent with political infighting and divisions in the US, if all of that had been put toward moving in one direction as a unified front and going together, imagine how much more progress we would have made. Now, the problem that we have is, because it's a democracy and because people have freedom, they are free to disagree, which causes people to take one step forward and one step back. As opposed to in China, where if you want to disagree, you just go do forced labor. Like, you're, you're just unpersoned for a while. And that means that everybody is moving in the same direction. So yeah, I... That, that really concerns me, the fact that freedom may be fundamentally incompatible with a modern technologically advanced world when you have a CCP-like party there competing on a global scale.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah. So democracy is not an end in itself. It's a means to the end of good and accountable governance, and it's got to, to deliver. And certainly, the argument, uh, that you just made, we've heard it before. People were making that argument with the United States and the Soviet Union, and especially in the early years, how can we compete when they're all on the same line, uh, moving in the same direction with North and South Korea in the early days? Uh, North Korea was, it was developing faster than South Korea, and people were in South Korea were saying, "Well, how can we flourish with, um, with democracies?" And people have made that argument repeatedly. And economically, uh, when Japan was taking off-... and they had their famous, uh, MITI, Ministry of Industry and, and Technology. people were saying, "Well, how can we, with our, our messier, um, economy, uh, compete with Japan?" And in all of those cases, uh, democracy and open society flourished. And I still believe in, in open societies. But that doesn't mean, and connected to what I was saying before, uh, that that, that that success, um, is predetermined. We've gotta make it happen, and we've got to make sure that our open societies are able to deliver. And that when we talk about open societies, they really are open societies, and that's why we need to make sure, at least here in the United States, that our democracy functions. And, and that's also why it concerns me so much when I see that elements of the Republican Party, for example, um, seem to have a strategy of disenfranchisement, of kind of trying to reduce the electorate, um, in order, uh, to achieve a, a, a different goal. And, and I'm sure there'll, there'll be listeners to this podcast who, who disagree with that. Um, but we need to make sure our democracy works. We need to make sure that people feel it works, and we need to make sure that it's, that it's delivering. I talked about China ha- bringing 700 million people out of abject poverty. We don't have 700 m- million people here in the United States. Uh, but we have a lot of people who are living in abject poverty. We have a lot of people whose life prospects are way less than other people, and we can't afford to throw people away. Um, there are people now who are being born in terrible situations, slums, who have the potential to be Mozarts and Einsteins and John von Neumanns and Isaac Newtons, whatever, whatever, whatever you want. Uh, but we're not allowing those people the opportunity to contribute in the ways that we need them to. So, I, I know open societies can and hopefully will win in the end, uh, but it's not on autopilot. Every person has a role to play in realizing
- 50:35 – 55:26
Are Citizens Happy Under the CCP?
- JMJamie Metzl
that future.
- CWChris Williamson
Do you think that the Chinese citizens are happy where they are? Because I'm always struck by the resilience and the adaptability of our systems to wherever it is that we go. And very quickly, we just become acclimatized to whatever the environment is that we're in, whether that be political, cultural, uh, the temperature that we live in, the weather that we live in, uh, as I found coming from the UK out to Texas. And I wonder what just how differently people feel in China. You know, I mean, I l- I had read the other day that the Chinese government's got gait analysis technology-
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah. Yeah.
- CWChris Williamson
... that's 96% accurate. So, this means that a, a video camera can work out who you are with a 96% accuracy without seeing your face, simply by analyzing the biomechanics of how you walk.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yep.
- CWChris Williamson
I mean that is, and then social credit system, the tracking of internet, basically no state versus business, private, all of that stuff, right? Have you got any idea about what it's like to be a Chinese citizen living over there under this sort of regime and the happiness?
- JMJamie Metzl
Well, I mean, certainly I've visited China many, many times before I was condemned by the spokesman of the Chinese Foreign Ministry from, by name, from the podium in Beijing. So, I'm not sure if I can go back now or ever.
- CWChris Williamson
Ah.
- JMJamie Metzl
Um, but, um, it's hard to tell because you, on one hand, you know, up to 50 million people are dead as a result of Mao's disastrous policies and, and the Chinese Communist Party declares publicly all the time that they are the inheritors of Mao's legacy. And so that means most everybody in China has a relative who's dead because of Mao and, and the Chinese Communist Party. Everybody recognizes that you can't speak freely. But when they do opinion polls and there's an open question of whether people are c- can speak freely, people have a lot of confidence in their government. Uh, people in China recognize that their, uh, material, uh, wellbeing has ma- on average, has massively increased compared, uh, to their, uh, to their parents or certainly to their grandparents who, who were living in, in abject, um, in abject poverty. So yes, nobody, and I, I would say nobody likes to be surveilled to the extent that people are surveilled in China. China, as much as they're spending on national security, spends even more on domestic, uh, security, and we see people-
- CWChris Williamson
No way.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yes.
- CWChris Williamson
So they, they outspend-
- JMJamie Metzl
Yes.
- CWChris Williamson
... international security spending internally?
- JMJamie Metzl
Yes. Yes. Yeah, yeah. So-
- CWChris Williamson
That's crazy.
- JMJamie Metzl
All but factoring in all of those things, are Chinese people, on average, happier or less happy than people here in the United States? I don't know. I mean, certainly there are a lot of reasons for people in China to be happy and unhappy, and certainly there are a lot of reasons for people here in the United States to be happy and unhappy. And it sometimes feels, uh, that there's a lot of energy going into amplifying unhappiness and, and anger. And that's what, um, Steven Pinker, um, has been kind of the person who's, who's y- one of the people who's kind of carried this, this banner. It's like, hey, let's just look at things. We're more educated, healthier, living longer than ever before. I mean, things are really just getting better. We do live in an open society where we can constantly, and we do constantly, throw the bums out. And, and as angry as, you know, people on, uh, in the, uh, on the left were about Trump and now people are on the right are about Biden, at least, and I hope when we have a functioning democracy, there's a f- there's a feeling, "Well, I'm going to fight for it." But by fight, if fight means (clears throat) that we're gonna go attack the Capitol and smash the window and try to hang the vice president, like that's, that's what it looks like in, in banana republics, um, where you have, you know, forced coups or people manipulate the structures.... of the electoral system and, and the, uh, no, and people don't feel that governance is legitimate. It's a long way of saying I believe in open societies. If we want to keep ours, we have to invest in it because every morning that we wake up here in the United States, um, that's the new record for the longest democracy in human history. The longest... And so, we don't know how long democracies can, uh, can survive. Maybe there's some will learn in 1,000 years there's an inherent rule of democracies that they can only last 300 years, and it happens over and over. Or maybe we'll learn that democracy as a form, uh, can really succeed, but it'll have to
- 55:26 – 1:04:03
The Chinese Tennis Player Who Disappeared
- JMJamie Metzl
rejuvenate itself.
- CWChris Williamson
Talk to me about this tennis player that just got disappeared in China.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah. So, uh, Peng Shuai is a, is a very famous, uh, uh, Chinese tennis player. She's been in three Olympics and a real superstar. (clears throat) She then put out a message on, on social media essentially, uh, or, or accusing, uh, somebody who had actually had been her, her off and on lover for a decade, but who was a, a very, very senior, uh, Chinese official, of sexual assault. Um, and then she disappeared. Um, and so there, there's been a big international outcry. Uh, more recently, there was a call set up, uh, between her and the head of the International Olympic Committee, which didn't really ki- re- really resolve anything. So here's how I, uh, I see that issue. Um, uh, it's a big deal in China for a high profile celebrity, um, to make any kind of public claim that's not aligned with government interests, let alone, uh, to accuse a member of the, a former member of the Chinese Politburo of a, a sexual assault. Um, from the Chinese government perspective, I think the reason why they moved so aggressively to squash her and her message is I think they're afraid of a Me Too movement in China because in China, um, like in many other countries, I can give you a 100% guarantee that many senior members of the Chinese Communist Party have assaulted women over time and abused their power. There's 100% chance of that. It's not just in China. It happens in countries all around, uh, all around, uh, around the world. If there were a Me Too movement, as happened in the United States, in France, and in many other places, um, the Chinese government fears that could get out of hand. And it's exactly why with, uh, Falun Gong, which is kind of like a spiritual yoga club, and China attacked them and has imprisoned and killed many members of, uh, of Falun Gong. Uh, the Chinese Communist Party is afraid of any kind of social organization not sanctioned by them, and they're afraid of any person, uh, getting the ability to deliver a message contrary, uh, to the message of the Chinese Communist Party. So that's why Jack Ma, the richest man in China, he criticizes the Chinese government and he vanishes. Fan Bingbing, who's one of the lead actresses, uh, is accused of, of not playing by the rules, disappears, and has to come back, uh, much later groveling and asking for, uh, forgiveness. We've seen this story over and over and over, and the theme of it is the Chinese Communist Party will do anything, uh, to control its narrative, and that's the connection with the COVID origin. They have their story. They'll do whatever it takes to defend their story, and that's why with, with Peng Shuai, they're willing to crack down. They don't want to lose the Olympics. Uh, but it's great that there are people like Ines Kantor of the Boston Celtics who are, who are raising really important questions and, and challenging China. And on COVID origins, that's why we have to demand a full i- investigation, just like we have to demand, uh, that China, uh, be, uh, that if they want to host the Olympics, um, if they want, uh, to get this opportunity to be part of the international community, it comes with obligations. And that's why more broadly, um, I've called, uh, for every media organization that's covering the Olympics to spend 25% of their full media time covering issues of, uh, Tibet, Xinjiang, South China Sea, human rights in, in China. Every corporate sponsor, uh, that's spending on the, the, uh, the Beijing, uh, Olympics should spend 10% of its full spend supporting the victims of these atrocities, and whether they're Tibetans, Uyghurs, or are investing in, in supporting, uh, organizations fighting for democracy in Hong Kong and many other situations.
- CWChris Williamson
It is crazy that China can be a part of a global movement, which is the Olympics, sport, it's the Winter Olympics they've got next year, right?
- JMJamie Metzl
Yes.
- CWChris Williamson
And, um, and yet not play by the rules that the rest of the world adheres to or says is fair. There is something... Yeah, there's something icky about the entire China situation, which I guess is that we require them to keep the capitalist machine moving forward. There is also perverse incentives, people being monetized. We saw that ridiculous turnaround. Who was that wrestler that gave the, um-
- JMJamie Metzl
Oh my God. Um-
- CWChris Williamson
John Cena.
- JMJamie Metzl
It's John Cena. It was-
- CWChris Williamson
But-
- JMJamie Metzl
I actually tweeted against him. I mean, it is... Let me just use this opportunity to condemn John Cena. John Cena, if you're listening to this podcast, you are a scoundrel. You're supposed to be a tough guy. That's your entire brand, and China criticizes you, and you get on your hands and knees and bark like a dog? Show some backbone.Talk to Ines Kantor. That's what courage looks like, standing up for things, standing up for people, and standing up for human rights. And I challenge you, John Cena, to come on this podcast with me and let's have the conversation about China. If you think that the Chinese Communist Party is doing such a great job, if they are supporting human rights so much that you'll do everything you can to support them, come and, and make that case and let's have a conversation.
- CWChris Williamson
You heard her, John Cena. Uh, yeah, I mean, it's ... Man, it's so, it's, it makes me feel so icky. It makes me feel so uncomfortable, generally, the, the, the whole situation around China. Going back to, uh, Peng Shui a- and the other people that kind of get disappeared for a while, what do you think happens? Do you think, I mean, are they being taken away and tortured? Are they being-
- JMJamie Metzl
No, no, no.
- CWChris Williamson
... taken away and-
- JMJamie Metzl
I don't-
- CWChris Williamson
What, what is it that, that occurs to them?
- JMJamie Metzl
Not taken away interest. So, so the Chinese government is very sophisticated. I don't think that Peng Shui or Jack Ma or Fan Bingbing, none of them were, uh, were tortured. As a matter of fact, I'm, I'm certain of it. But the Chinese government has a lot of levers over people like that. They can destroy their lives. Uh, they can imprison their relatives. They can take away their means of making a living, of communicating, um, with their, uh, with their fans. So they, they really have a lot of, uh, of leverage. And they're fully willing to use that leverage when they feel it's, it's necessary, including against other members of the Chinese, uh, Communist Party, um, who get on the, on the wrong side, um, like, uh, uh, well, I mean, like many of, of them. And so that's what they're, that's what they're doing. And that's frankly why, uh, the many scientists, who I believe almost certainly have a lot of relevant information of the origins of the pandemic, they don't dare speak. I mean, certainly they've been threatened by the Chinese government. There are laws preventing them from speaking. Um, but if they speak, even if they make a run for it and, and get outside of the country and speak, uh, their families will be in very significant danger. So this is, this is a, a very thorough control mechanism.
- CWChris Williamson
When you saw the first photos of Peng Shui and she was surrounded by animals.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yep.
- CWChris Williamson
People can Google this if they want to try and see it. I think she posted it on WeChat-
- JMJamie Metzl
Right.
- CWChris Williamson
... which is kind of like Ch- Chinese Facebook. And, um, it's the most sinister looking room for somebody that's been missing for a long time to arrive in. It has all of these weird children's toys on a shelf behind her, and then there's a selfie of her holding one of them. It's proper horror movie shit.
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah, and so I have no idea whether that's actually her room or it's a-
- CWChris Williamson
What the fuck?
- JMJamie Metzl
... it's a mo- it's a movie set. But regardless, let's just say that that is her room. Let's, and we'll give China the benefit of the doubt. Some crew from the Chinese propaganda department came there and set up that shot.
- CWChris Williamson
There's a photo shoot with you and-
- JMJamie Metzl
Exactly, so-
- CWChris Williamson
... all of your soft toys.
- JMJamie Metzl
No, it's, it's, it's just sinister and it's gross. And we have to be honest about it. We have to condemn it, and we have to hold China accountable.
- 1:04:03 – 1:11:06
How China Aims to Increase Masculinity
- JMJamie Metzl
- CWChris Williamson
Did you see this new ruling that they've brought in to do with video games for teenagers?
- JMJamie Metzl
No.
- CWChris Williamson
Oh, man.
- JMJamie Metzl
Oh, yeah. No, I, uh, no, I did, I did see that.
- CWChris Williamson
Yeah.
- JMJamie Metzl
I did see that. And, and so what I, what I will say is that China looks at other countries around the region and around the world, like, and we'll use Korea as an example, and then says, "Well, here's what we would like to be like, and here's what we don't want to be like." And so what we don't want, um, according to China, is a bunch of kids spending their life playing video games. And we don't want a bunch of young people modeling themselves after what, what we, from a Chinese perspective, uh, see as effeminate, uh, Korean movie stars. And so what China does is pass rules. This is the way it should be. Men should act like men. Kids should not watch video games. And, and y- every parent in the world faces this kind of thing. Like, when your kid is on playing video games or on social media all day, or they, you know, start wearing funky clothes or whatever, every parent says, "Well, maybe we should have a rule." And I just think that with China, their whole thing is everything, I mean, it's a, it's a country largely ruled by engineers. They have an engineering phili- government has an engineering philosophy of life. Social engineering, environmental engineering, the Three Gorges Dam, and the South-to-North Water Diversion Project, and all of these other things. Everything can be engineered according to them. And again, that's why those of us who believe in open societies, and I do, we just need to really invest our energy in making sure that our open societies can function.
- CWChris Williamson
What does this masculinizing, this m- manlying of the Chinese population look like? They're just trying to create a, a breed of alpha, alpha males walking around. What's going on there?
- JMJamie Metzl
Yeah, it looks like it. I mean, when you ... So I, I think it's a contrast. What they're trying to do is contrast, uh, at least their perception of Korean and Japanese men. Um, and there's just a, a popular kind of way of looking of, for, uh, Korean movie, (clears throat) movie stars, male movie stars, uh, and K-pop, um, that I think China has a lot of disdain for in Japan, which had kind of an overemphasized vision of kind of aggressive masculinity in the '30s and the first, first half of the '40s. Now there's a, there's a popular model. I can't remember the exact word, but it's something like vegetarian men who are these-
- CWChris Williamson
(laughs)
- JMJamie Metzl
... who are perceived, and I would love to vegetarians, who are perceived as these kind of wimpy men-
- CWChris Williamson
Yeah.
- JMJamie Metzl
... who, who go to these, uh, these, uh, whatever, whatever they're called, mistress cafes or, or whatever, and remain virgins until they're 600 years old or what- whatever the, the stereotype is.And I think China is trying to say, "Well, that's not what we want." I mean our model are- are these, you know, rugged, um, uh, people, rugged, uh, founders of the state who were engaged in The Long March. And again, because China's history, uh, the Chinese Communist Party's history is in many ways a fabrication. Um, they have to over-invest in that fabrication. And that's why China, every year, uh, they have these, uh, massive, uh, World War II victory parades. Um, and it's true that- that Chinese people fought in the second World War, but the Chinese Communist Party played a very minimal role in fighting the Japanese. As a matter of fact-
- CWChris Williamson
Hang on, Jamie. Roll it- roll it back for a second. China has a World War II victory party every year?
- JMJamie Metzl
Yes.
- CWChris Williamson
What the fuck?
- JMJamie Metzl
It's a commemora- ... No, no. Well, I mean, lots of countries do that. I mean, the United States has it, the ... But the thing is, the Chinese entity that spent a lot of its time and energy fighting the Japanese was the government under the nationalists of Chiang Kai-shek. The communists under Mao hardly fought the Japanese, and what their mission was to- was to maintain, uh, their power so they could fight the communists, which they did, particularly after the- the second World War. So, it's preposterous that the Chinese Communist Party is celebrating this victory over the Japanese, that they didn't play a significant role in- in bringing about. But again, it's this point where China has this kind of imaginary view, and then they work to- to try to make it real. And again, like when China, when the Chinese Communist Party talks about, well, China has this ancient civilization, which is absolutely true. Um, but they hardly mention that during the Cultural, uh, Revolution, uh, China was destroying its own history. It was burning and destroying its own manuscripts, smashing its greatest art, um, and- and so in many ways, and then murdering, uh, so many people representing, uh, the older, uh, the older systems. And so in some ways, China is really a startup nation, uh, and there are benefits to being a- a s- a, uh, startup nation. But again, China has these fake mythologies, and then the government just invests enormous resources into turning these fabrications into things that people feel are real. And maybe every country does that, but China does it at an industrial scale.
- CWChris Williamson
Isn't there a concern about if China was to invade Taiwan, that there's quite a lot of Chinese historical artifacts, museums, uh, that would then be part of this destruction? Is that right?
- JMJamie Metzl
I don't know if they'd be part of this destruction, but, um, when Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalists, uh, retreated to Taiwan in 1949, after they'd lost the- the Chinese Civil War, they took the treasures, the greatest treasures, of Chinese civilization with them, which are now part of this incredible museum in, uh, in Taipei.
- CWChris Williamson
Have you been?
- JMJamie Metzl
Um, I have been. It's- it's spectacular. And, um, and so China, which, again, under Mao, destroyed its own history. I mean, there was a lot of great stuff that was left and- and the, again, the manuscripts were- were, uh, burned. The- the treasures of art were smashed. Uh, the- the people who carried those cultural legacies were ostracized or- or even killed. Um, and so yeah, absolutely. So, China is now claiming all of those artworks and masterpieces from Taiwan. Ironically, if T- if the ... Chiang Kai-shek, and lots of problems with Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalists, hadn't taken those masterpieces with them, uh, most of them would certainly have been destroyed.
- CWChris Williamson
Fuck, man. I don't know. It's, um
- 1:11:06 – 1:15:06
How We Can Move Forward
- CWChris Williamson
... Roll the clock forward for me then. Roll the clock forward over the next sort of 10 to 20 years. I know that you're not able to bring out your clairvoyant crystals or see-
- JMJamie Metzl
Well, I got, I have some. I- I have a little of it. Yeah, yeah.
- CWChris Williamson
... what's happening. What do you reckon is gonna happen?
- JMJamie Metzl
So, I don't know what's going to happen, but there are- there are some different options. Um, and there's some bad options and there are some good options. Here's a bad option. Uh, China continues its efforts to undermine the rules-based international order, uh, the rest of the world doesn't do a sufficient job of fighting back and standing up for the principles that we believe in, including by making our own societies stronger, uh, and better. And we live in a world, um, that looks much more like, uh, history, yeah, where there is a- a kind of a central power, a colonial power, that's exerting its influence over, uh, over everybody, uh, everybody else. We've seen this story over and over. The British did it, the Mongols did it, the Romans did it. And that doesn't mean it's all terrible. Um, but it means it undermines this, again, this post-war liberal international order that I actually believe in. So, that's one. There's another, uh, uh, story where the rest of the world really reinvests in ope- in our open societies. Um, we come together, we exert a lot of influence, and we have enough pressure and influence and unity to give a message to China, "You have two options. Either to play a more constructive role in the world, or you're just going to be more and more isolated, even though you're- you're a big country." And then China has a- a strategic choice. There's a third option, um, which is a very real, uh, possibility, which is war. I think war and military conflict is, uh, is on the horizon. You can't have countries building-... all of the tools for a massive world war and just assume it's never going to happen. We're, we're, we're moving in that, uh, in that, uh, in that direction. And then there's the fourth, and it's the utopian, uh, One Shared World, uh, view is that we all realize that, that there's just a better way to do things, um, that our human society has evolved, and that we, that, uh, we need to find a way to balance our narrower interests as citizens of single countries and consumers of products made by single corporations, and our broader interests as humans sharing the same planet, where our fates, as the pandemic and climate change and other things have showed us, are so intimately intertwined. Um, so I don't think that's gonna happen in 10 or, or, or 20 years, but I certainly hope. And that's why I and we founded, uh, One Shared World, that there's just a lot of energy of existing movements, like the Greta Thunberg and the climate movement and all sorts of movement. And we think there's a unifying principle, uh, which is a recognition of the mutual r- responsibilities of our deep global interdependence. And that if we can all, all of these groups and all these people around the world rally behind those principles, if we can create a strong enough magnetic field, um, to draw people in China, who are wonderful people, I mean, I think everybody in, in China, uh, most everybody in China would like to be part of the world in a constructive way. There's just an issue of, of governance and government. Uh, then I think that that's a, a more utopian version. It's gonna be harder to achieve. But if we don't articulate, um, where we'd like to be, we'll never get there. I mean, uh, Henry David Thoreau has a quote that I use all the time, and embarrassingly, it was in my high school yearbook in Kansas City, uh, which is, uh, "If you've w- if you've built castles in the sky, uh, your work need not be lost. That is where they should be. Now build the foundations under them."
- 1:15:06 – 1:16:09
Where to Find Jamie
- JMJamie Metzl
- CWChris Williamson
Where should people go if they wanna read more about the work that you do?
- JMJamie Metzl
Oh, so I hope they'll go to my website, jamiemetzl.com. J-A-M-I-E M-E-T-Z-L.com. There, there's links to, I have a, if you print it out, it's 50 pages on pandemic origins. I've written five books, and you can learn about them there. My most recent is Hacking Darwin: Genetic Engineering and the, uh, and the Future of, of Humanity. But what I, uh, you can, well, I had a, a short story, a, a visit to Weizenbaum that was made into a film, and you can watch that short film. It's only 15 minutes, on my, uh, on my website. But, uh, jamiemetzl.com is the key to everything else.
- CWChris Williamson
Jami Metzl, ladies and gentlemen. Jami, thank you so much for today. It's been awesome.
- JMJamie Metzl
Thanks so much, Chris. Really my pleasure.
- CWChris Williamson
What's happening, people? Thank you very much for tuning in. If you enjoyed that episode, then press here for a selection of the best clips from the podcast over the last few weeks. And don't forget to subscribe. Peace.
Episode duration: 1:16:10
Install uListen for AI-powered chat & search across the full episode — Get Full Transcript
Transcript of episode LpcmuM-otHU
Get more out of YouTube videos.
High quality summaries for YouTube videos. Accurate transcripts to search & find moments. Powered by ChatGPT & Claude AI.
Add to Chrome