馬凱碩天真 美國人應該告訴他們的政客

The American people need to speak out therefore and tell their politicians; that the US China issue is too important to be left to political grandstanding in that they should step back and ask what is in the long-term interest of the United States and stop just trying to score political points against China.

因此，美國人民需要大聲疾呼，告訴他們的政客，中美問題太重要了，不能淪為政治嘩眾取寵的對象；他們應該退一步，問問自己什麽才符合美國的長遠利益，而不要隻是試圖在政治上攻擊中國。

Thanks for your serious reply. But, you are harmed by democracy in granting Gov-power to social garbage.  澤倫斯基 is killer in killing own people, Please Google my articles by keywords below: creaders The origin of civilization & rescue from dooming creaders Human animal instincts dehumanized good democracy

I have sent above articles to Kishore and many others to save the world by adding a civil legislature as patch to make up for the flaw of Kishore, but all were useless; so that I believed them to talkatively sell their noble character of kindness as business.

馬凱碩：美是財閥政治不利與中國競爭 Kishore Mahbubani：The U.S. is plutocratic, not conducive to competing with China

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bVvSJFxfEw

美國國會議員在中美競爭問題上表現得非常不負責任，因為他們沒有試圖仔細分析整個情況，搞清楚美國的長期利益是什麽，以及如何推進美國的這些長期利益，這將是美國和中國內部競爭與合作的混合體，相反，他們純粹是為了在國內獲得政治分數，我認為如果你犧牲自己國家的利益，與中國建立一種清醒而瘋狂的關係，而是為了在國內獲得政治分數，以提升你的個人事業，那麽你的行為就是不負責任的，所以我認為美國人民需要站出來，告訴他們的政客，中美問題太重要了，不能留給政治嘩眾取寵，他們應該退一步，問問什麽才是美國的長期利益別再試圖在中國身上撈取政治利益了。我可以理解為什麽美國政客為了贏得美國人民的支持，會說這是民主和專製之間的較量，當然在英語中，民主總是好的，專製總是很糟糕，所以他們想把它描繪成一個簡單的黑白分明的東西。

我的書《中國贏了》已經被翻譯成中文，在中國賣得很好。我在第 7 章中解釋說，這不是民主和專製之間的較量，而是美國富豪統治之間的較量，美國的公共政策決策不是為了造福廣大民眾，而是為了造福一小部分人，即最富有的 10% 和最富有的 20%，這就是為什麽美國底層 50% 的人口的生活水平幾十年來都沒有提高，我認為富豪統治是在與中國的精英統治打交道時，美國處於競爭劣勢，因為在中國，領導人是根據他們的經驗和他們管理省份、城市等的能力來選拔的，因此，在這種競爭中，精英統治者非常努力地提高自己人民的生活水平，而富豪統治者隻關心提高最富有的 20% 人的福利，這是精英統治係統相對於富豪統治係統的競爭優勢。

美國人應該退一步反思一下，問問自己，這怎麽會在美國出現，你知道，當談到富豪統治時，美國有很多知識上的不誠實，因為美國人認為你應該直言不諱，如果你應該直言不諱，你就應該直言不諱財閥政治就是財閥政治，但這當然會違背政客的政治利益，因此，沒有一位美國政客敢說美國已經成為了財閥政治，因為從某種程度上來說，美國國會應該為財閥政治的形成負責，因為美國國會從富豪手中收錢，製定有利於富豪的政策，因此，由於美國國會是造成財閥政治的部分原因，因此他們不願意公開、清晰地討論這個問題，而這將使美國處於競爭劣勢。

the United States Congressman are behaving very irresponsibly on the US China
contest； because they instead of trying to carefully analyze the whole picture and figur out what are you what
are the long-term interests of the
United States and how to advance these
long-term interests in United States
which will be a mixture of
competition and cooperation within us
and China instead they purely engaged in
scoring political points
domestically and I think if you
sacrifice your country's national
interests in having a sober insane
relationship with China uh in favor of
scoring domestic political points for to
enhance your personal career you're
behaving irresponsibly so I think the American people need to speak out therefore and tell their
politicians that the US China issue is
too important to be left to political
grandstanding uh in that they they
should step back and ask what is in the
long-term interest of the United States
and stop just trying to score political
points against China  I can understand
why uh American politicians  in an effort to win over support of the American people uh say oh this is a contest between democracy and autocracy and of course in the English language democracy is always good
autocracy is always very bad so they
would like to portray it as a simple
black and white thing but in my book has
China won which has actually been
translated and sold very well in China I
explain in Chapter 7 that this is not a contest between
democracy and autocracy this is a contest between
plutocracy in the United States of
America where public policy decisions
are made not to benefit the population
at large but the public policy decisions
are made to benefit a small sector of
the population the top 10% top 20% and
that's why uh the standard of living of
the bottom 50% of the America's
population hasn't gone up in several
decades and I and I think a plutocracy is therefore at a competitive disadvantage when it has to deal with a
meritocracy in China because in China
the leaders are selected uh on the basis of their
experience and their ability uh to run provinces to run
cities and so on so forth so therefore
in in this sort of contest where the
meritocracy is working very hard to
improve the standard of living uh of his
own people whereas the plutocracy is
only interested in enhancing the uh
benefits for the top 20% this is a competitive Advantage for a meritocratic system over a plutocratic system and
Americans should step back and reflect
on this and ask themselves how did this
put Ry emerge in the United States of
America and as you know uh there is a lot of intellectual
dishonesty in America when it comes to
discussing the plutocracy because the
Americans believe that you should call a
spade a spade right and if you you
should call a spade a spade you should
call a plutocracy a plutocracy but of course this uh this
would go against the political interest
of the politician and therefore no
politician in America dares to suggest
that America has become a plutocracy
because in some ways it is the US
Congress that is responsible for the creation of a
plutocracy because the US Congress takes
money from very wealthy people to shape
policies that will benefit the very
wealthy people and so since the US
Congress is part of the problem in the
creation of plutocracy they are are
reluctant to discuss it clearly and
openly and that's going to be a competitive disadvantage for the United States