American Strategic Deception Bureau

　At that moment, another wave of ash rustled against the floor-to-ceiling windows, obscuring the terrifying, infernal scene on the street outside. The television screen switched again to the mayor's spokesperson, who used a Bayesian statistical model to calculate the proportion of responsibility for the wildfires: 12% for the military and police, 14.6% for the fire department, 21.2% for the water company, and the remainder for climate change and "historical issues"...

　Then, the TV signal was suddenly interrupted and turned into a snowy screen.

　The men in the living room couldn't help but fall silent, looking at each other, and the atmosphere was a little awkward for a moment.

　Finally, Father Patrick coughed dryly and spoke first. "Come to think of it, foreigners have always been happy to show kindness when faced with natural disasters like this. But now that the Los Angeles fire has been burning for so many days, why haven't other countries expressed sympathy or condolences? Or donated some relief supplies? To raise funds for the resettlement of fire victims, I've already received donations three times this week!"

　As a result, it would have been better if he didn't say anything. As soon as he opened his mouth, the people present felt even more embarrassed.

　After a moment, Fili coughed dryly and continued the conversation.

　"Father, the world now is completely different from what it was a year ago. Everyone has become colder, more selfish, and less compassionate.

　Let's not talk about the Red Countries across the Iron Curtain for now, as for the so-called "allies" on this side of the Iron Curtain... well, considering the nuclear bombs we just dropped on them, the Europeans and Japanese are already showing great restraint by not sending spies to burn Los Angeles!"

　From President Wilson, who advocated for "national self-determination," to President Roosevelt, who signed the Atlantic Charter, no matter how hollow their slogans were, or how much their actions were tainted by selfish agendas, they ultimately pushed the international order in a more civilized and humanitarian direction.

　Indeed, when it comes to the United States' "moral advantage" in the international arena, many people will scoff.

　Anti-Americans regard the United States as a hegemonic empire like Britain, and list all the brutal and evil deeds committed by the United States both internally and externally in history. They believe that the United States, as the epitome of capitalism, has always been unforgivable, with pus oozing from its feet and sores on its head. Where is the morality to speak of?

　Another group of pro-American social Darwinists, under the banner of "America First", believe that "morality is useless" and hope that the United States will quickly divest itself of all international moral responsibilities, completely let go of itself, and be selfish, and will do anything for its own interests.

　——Just like those European maritime and colonial pioneers who burned, killed, looted, cheated and deceived people all over the world during the Age of Exploration.

　But no matter how much these people criticize America from various angles, or how much they dismiss America's "moral superiority," the reality is that America's moral superiority internationally, from the early 20th century to the Cold War, has been the country's greatest diplomatic asset worldwide.

　Considering the various inhumane behaviors of Britain and France during the colonial era, the image of the United States was already pretty good at that time.

　——It is one thing to scalp Indians in the 19th century and another to raise the banner of anti-colonialism in the 20th century.

　As the drafter of the Atlantic Charter during World War II and the lead founder of the post-war United Nations order, as well as the leader of the Western camp during the Cold War, the reason why the United States has always been listened to after World War II is not just because of how many aircraft carriers and nuclear warheads it has, nor is it just because its economic strength is second to none in the world, but because after World War II, the United States became the "legislator" of at least the entire Western world.

　——To give an example, it is equivalent to the Zhou emperor in the pre-Qin period of China who established the ritual and music norms for the land of China!

　This is also the fundamental reason why some people regard the United States as the "beacon of human civilization."

　This cannot be explained by the instinct of admiration for strength in human nature. Many foreigners' faith in the United States has far exceeded the level of admiration for strength.

　Instead, they truly believe in the institutional and moral advantages of the United States, and regard the United States as a paradise on earth where their ideals and beliefs are placed!

　Then, this status of "legislator" and the resulting final right to interpret the international order benefited the United States greatly after World War II.

　Although this benefit may not be very obvious on the surface, or even invisible, it will benefit future generations. Just as the Zhou Dynasty used "rituals and laws" to define "what is China," the United States also created a universal consensus on civilization in the post-World War II world.

　Specifically, these principles include gender equality, racial equality, religious freedom, free markets, the prohibition of large nations from invading or annexing smaller nations, and the inability to arbitrarily change national borders. Violating these principles won't necessarily lead to national demise, but it will inevitably lead to marginalization from the "civilized world."

　When the United States was still a beacon of humanity, the further away from the "beacon", the darker and more barbaric it became, and the more discriminated against it internationally.

　The emergence, formation, and deepening of this consensus means that most countries are unwilling and afraid to challenge the existing international order unless absolutely necessary. This is because they all anticipate that the United States will inevitably take decisive action to make any defiant challenger pay the price.

　Indeed, in order to maintain this international order, the United States must pay a lot of price - it must not only play the role of world policeman, bring its own food and send troops to beat up all kinds of troublemakers and "rogue states", but also act as a philanthropist, spending astronomical amounts of money every year to send various humanitarian aid and economic support all over the world, and send money, food and arms to those "frontline countries" and countries where humanitarian disasters have broken out.

　Judging from the accounts alone, these international actions can only earn fame and face at most, but they will definitely result in economic losses.

　Not to mention, in the early days of the Cold War, the United States, while confronting the Soviet Union, pursued global military hegemony. Therefore, it did not allow the existence of any regional superpower, and tried every means to suppress China and the Soviet Union. It was even extremely unfriendly to India, supporting Pakistan for a long time and repeatedly trying to dismantle India.

　Despite the massive aid of weapons and ammunition from Europe and the United States when the Sino-Indian conflict broke out, by the time these weapons arrived, the Himalayas were already covered in snow, and any potential fighting had already ended. The Indian army simply did not have the capacity to cross the world's highest mountains and actively attack the plateau.

　This kind of strategy of squandering national strength and launching global attacks is simply terrifying in terms of the consumption of national strength and wealth.

　Fortunately, the United States was still the world's first industrial country at the time, and it also controlled the dollar hegemony, so its foundation was strong enough that it was able to hold on.

　But such a practice of throwing money and shedding blood all over the world obviously makes ordinary American citizens feel uncomfortable.

　Moreover, in the process of maintaining the post-World War II international order, due to the lack of experience in handling international affairs and the serious interference of domestic party struggles in diplomacy, the United States has repeatedly spent too much money and became a scapegoat, being fleeced by some cunning small countries and organizations.

　——Compared to the Age of Exploration, when British, Dutch, Spanish, and Portuguese adventurers burned, killed, and looted all over the world, and brought back shiploads of treasures and spices, the United States' world hegemony

　, but on the surface it became sending money and supplies all over the world and bringing one's own food to fight!

　And what's the point? Just to "protect a free country"? When did we American cowboys become so compassionate?

　Just being a big idiot!

　We also want to rob things all over the world and bring back women and treasures, instead of returning home empty-handed and bruised!

　In short, at first glance, such a loss-making national policy really makes many Americans who are accustomed to thriftiness feel angry. They even feel that Japan and Western Europe are not allies that help the United States maintain its hegemonic order, but parasites that rely on the generosity of the United States to survive.

　For these burdens and encumbrances, the United States has paid too much but gained too little, and the other side is not grateful at all, but instead often makes small moves.

　As a result, many American rednecks with limited knowledge feel that the United States has paid too much to govern the world but has gained too little benefit.

　But the cost of all this is actually worth it. Just like in ancient China, the emperor of the Central Plains often used the national treasury to reward barbarians. When faced with tribute from foreign nations, he also adhered to the principle of "receiving less and giving more", allowing those envoys who came to pay tribute to earn huge profits, just for the false reputation of "all nations coming to pay tribute".

　In addition, the emperor of the Central Plains often had to help the weak and suppress the strong in vassal states, just like the Ming Dynasty Wanli Emperor sent troops to Korea. He would send troops at his own expense to protect vassal states, and even do such thankless tasks - he worked hard and shed blood and sweat to save the people, but the people not only did not appreciate it, but instead were aggressive and made the emperor feel as if he had humiliated himself, which was really infuriating.

　The United States's deployment of troops to Korea after World War II, its financial support for France's return to Vietnam, and its own deployment of troops to Vietnam all followed a similar trajectory: Washington spent countless sums of money and supplies, but received only endless complaints and even hatred.

　But the problem is, if you want to be the emperor, if you want "rituals, music, conquests and wars to be decided by the emperor", then you have to assume the responsibilities of the emperor!

　As the saying goes, "He who wears the crown must bear its weight." Since the United States wants to be the world hegemon and establish a stable world order dominated by itself, it must, to a certain extent, demonstrate to the world its kindness and generosity, as well as its martial virtues and loyalty.

　Just like after the establishment of the Soviet Union, with the breaking of the bond of the Romanov dynasty, if the Russians wanted to continue to allow Moscow to rule one-sixth of the world's land, they had to turn Russia into an ATM and make continuous transfer payments to the various republics.

　——Developed regions must provide economic transfusions and support to backward regions in order to maintain the existence of a unified country in the long term.

　Otherwise, the manpower and resources of backward areas will be drained away by the siphon effect, eventually leading to the collapse of the political structure.

　For example, after the founding of the People's Republic of China, in order to coordinate national development, Shanghai, as the largest industrial and commercial city at the time, had been responsible for supporting the inland areas, paying huge taxes to the central government every year and providing massive transfer payments to the underdeveloped central and western regions.

　However, how could Shanghai, the Pearl of the Orient, develop without the vast inland area behind it?

　This is true within a country and also within an international system. Rich countries must assist poor countries in order to maintain long-term stability.

　Then, for the United States, this decades-long foreign aid and generous contribution has not been without sufficient benefits.

　A world system dominated by the United States, a financial system in which the whole world uses the US dollar, an opportunity for the United States to become the center of global civilization, for American culture to break through the barriers of language, ethnicity, religion and region, and become the world's top trend... Isn't this enough for the White House to donate generously?

　Why do you think the Confucian scholars in ancient China always regarded "educating the barbarians" as a merit that would last forever?

　Of course, it is because trying to promote one's own culture and values ​​to other ethnic groups and assimilate and integrate them is really a hard job!

　Not to mention, a backward country that was originally in the low point of civilization wants to turn the tide in just a few decades, rise up, and teach the whole world like a mentor... What kind of great luck does it need to have?

　You have to remember that before World War II, the United States was not a "city on a hill," but rather a barbaric land despised by Europe: uncouth, unsophisticated, lacking in culture, style, and taste. America's wealthy were vulgar nouveau riche, and its technology was largely stolen.

　As a result, there was a big reversal in just a few decades: American best-selling books were circulated around the world, Hollywood movies became global hits, and even the junk food of American fast food became a delicacy for people in the third world, far more famous than the so-called French cuisine!

　In just twenty years, the United States went from being a marginal player in the international community to being admired by the whole world!

　The rapid rise of the United States in military, economy, and culture is rare in the entire history of human civilization.

　In order to seize this opportunity that may not come once in a century, no matter what the price is, it is worth it!

　But now, in order to fill the huge hole buried by a series of chaotic and evil policies in the 1960s, President Nixon pinched his nose and killed the goose that laid the golden eggs. He no longer acted according to the original rules, but went against the grain and personally destroyed the "civilized world order" created by the United States.

　On the surface, it seems that there are indeed huge profits in the short term. The United States has stopped

　Most of the overseas wars and international aid closed a lot of bloodletting channels, while at the same time extorting a huge amount of oil from Europe and Japan, deepening the control over them both economically and politically.

　In other words, in order to recover as quickly as possible, the United States further colonized its allies by relying on brutal force.

　This does help the United States extract more benefits from its allies and reap considerable economic and financial benefits.

　But what's the cost?

　The price was equivalent to the "Emperor's Rebellion" in Chinese feudal society, which destroyed the contract between the monarch and his subjects, as well as the tacit understanding between the suzerain and the vassal state from the top.

　From then on, Western society collapsed and the United States jumped down from the position of emperor and became the largest prince.

　With the brazen US nuclear bombing of Paris and Frankfurt, the civilized order established by the Western world after World War II, which at least appeared superficially warm and compassionate, crumbled and came to an end. White Europeans and Americans tore off the veneer of humanitarianism, equality, and progress, returning the world to the law of the jungle where the strong prey on the weak.

　However, in this new era of the law of the jungle, the United States has taken the largest share of benefits and will naturally become the target of public criticism.

　Even though they are afraid of the United States' nuclear arsenal, which is still the largest in the world, other countries dare not speak or act rashly, nor do they have the courage to join forces to attack the United States.

　However, various soft and hard anti-American ideas will inevitably become the unspoken political correctness of everyone in the world...

　If the United States wants to maintain its global interests in the future, it can only rely on military intimidation, and the cost will inevitably rise!

　-

　"Compared to a year ago, the world order is completely different now. Humanitarianism, liberalism, and human rights have become a joke. The spirit of mutual assistance among nations has vanished, leaving only gloating over each other's misfortunes."

　In the living room of the Kim family's old house, Firi drank coffee and said with some regret, "In the past, although European allies and the Japanese were dissatisfied with the US's behavior, they generally still had a certain degree of trust in the US.

　Britain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, Denmark and West Germany all believed that the United States would protect them. As long as they stayed under the wings of the United States, they would not need to maintain an expensive military mobilization system and an independent military production system and could enjoy long-term peace.

　Japan and South Korea are in a similar situation. Even though they have established their own armies, they still safely rely on the US military production system for wartime command, as well as the supply of a considerable number of fighter jets, warships, missiles, tanks, and weapons and ammunition.

　In this way, no matter how large their armies are, they can only be vassals of the United States because they rely on the United States for weapons and ammunition.

　But they still choose to do so voluntarily because they believe in the credibility and civility of the United States.

　But now, after being taught a lesson by the US nuclear bomb, the Allies have realized that they are just advanced colonies..."

　“After discovering that they were actually colonized, the next step was definitely the rise of anti-colonial movements in various countries.”

　Brother Bernard sighed and continued, "Who's to blame for the international trend since World War II? People of color now think they're equals to white people, not to mention those arrogant old white Europeans... In a few years, it will be the 200th anniversary of the founding of the United States. Will history repeat itself by then, with a reverse war of independence for Europe to break free from American control?"

　"Ah, don't worry about that. Times have changed. Old Europe can't escape American control."

　Firi shrugged. "First, they're too rich. They don't have the courage to burn their homes to ashes like the Vietnamese did, abandoning modern life for independence. Second, they're too small. Their population isn't large enough to build an independent industrial system and establish a separate presence from the US and the Soviet Union..."

　It's just the protection money from the gangsters and the ransom note from the kidnappers, okay?

　Moreover, they are the worst type of extremely irresponsible gangsters who not only do not do their job after receiving protection money, but also continue to find trouble.

　Thus, the Western countries united to resist the Soviet Union's moral legitimacy, and the spiritual cohesion under the banner of freedom came to an end.

　At present, Washington is relying entirely on fear and violence to barely maintain a world system called an alliance, but in reality a system of sovereign states and colonies.

　However, it is well known that even if not 100%, at least 90% of the colonies are always thinking about independence.

　So, next, will European countries work hard in secret to govern themselves, prepare for war, and prepare to resist the US military occupation?

　This... the idea of ​​independence is very good, and it's also good to dream about it, after all, dreams can bring you everything.

　But if we really want to put it into action, there is no need to do so - because the old Europe today simply cannot do it!

　After entering the 20th century, if a country wanted to break free from the occupation and control of a superpower, it would have to make huge sacrifices, turning the entire country into ruins and scorched earth, and relying on at least ten years of guerrilla warfare and unyielding will to wear down and exhaust the enemy.

　Either build a strong national defense and an independent industrial system, and use your strength to squeeze out the tentacles of foreign powers.

　But unfortunately, today's Europeans lack the will to persist in long-term guerrilla warfare, nor the courage to destroy their homeland. When faced with the conquest of Nazi Germany, whether it was the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, or France, they all surrendered in seconds. Now, facing the United States, their performance will only be worse.

　After all, the people of old European countries live too well to be willing to live a hard life for the sake of political slogans.

　At the same time, the tragic lessons of the two world wars also deeply imprinted the war-weariness ideology into their bones.

　All Europeans have fully realized that war can bring them no benefits, only poverty and death.

　Ordinary people have developed PTSD from the war, and feel that being fooled by politicians into going to the battlefield to be cannon fodder and die is the most stupid thing in the world; the rich and powerful do not have the courage to mobilize the people who are lying down collectively - if a nuclear war really breaks out, all their industries will be destroyed.

　Since everyone from top to bottom has no will to perish together, and life is not so miserable that we cannot survive, then we should just make do with it. Why do we still have to fight?

　Next, it will be impossible for Europeans to break free from the control of the United States and develop their own independent industry and defense.

　After all, the size of each of these countries is too small.

　Although old Europe had done such things before and was even a pioneer in the Industrial Revolution, times have changed now.

　This is no longer the era of the First Industrial Revolution over a hundred years ago. Even Belgium could build its own industrial system!

　——The development trend of modern industry is that the division of labor becomes more and more detailed, the products become more and more complex, and the number of basic parts and components increases.

　To ensure the normal operation of the industry, it is not feasible to lock the process in a library and expect to find it when needed - this will quickly lead to its disappearance. Even if you can find the sealed information, practical application is another matter, not to mention how to carry out secondary development based on the knowledge you do not understand.

　This requires a sufficient number of educated people to be stuffed into various industrial sectors in order for the huge industrial system to operate smoothly.

　Generally speaking, any country that wants to build an independent industrial system needs a population roughly 10 times the number of basic components, and at least 5 times. This is because core industries alone cannot constitute a complete society; they also require the support of tertiary industries such as construction, transportation, commerce, services, administration, military, and social security, as well as the labor force of primary industries such as mining and agriculture.

　Only when these people are fully staffed can the entire industrial system operate smoothly. Otherwise, it will fall into a dilemma due to labor shortage.

　During the first industrial revolution in the 19th century, the industrial system had only one power source: the steam engine. The most complex industrial product at that time was an ironclad ship, which had hundreds of thousands of parts. Therefore, only a population of millions was needed to create an independent industrial system.

　Even a small country like Belgium, with a population of only 400 million, could become an independent industrial country in the steam age.

　However, after the Second Industrial Revolution, marked by electricity, the number of basic components required for the industrial system multiplied several times over, requiring a workforce of at least tens of millions to maintain it. During World War I, France, with a population of only 4000 million, was unable to maintain a complete industrial system, while Germany, with a population of over 6000 million, was able to operate independently, even persevering for four years under global siege.

　By the time of World War II, the industrial system had become even more complex, and even Germany's population found it difficult to maintain the entire industrial chain. The only two countries left in the world were the United States and the Soviet Union, each with a population of over 100 million. They each had a complete industrial system, which supported them to crush Europe and become post-war superpowers.

　In the post-World War II Cold War era, with the advent of a new round of industrial upgrading, a complete and advanced full-industry chain industrial system already needed to be composed of tens of millions of basic industrial components. This determined that only industrial countries with a population of over 100 million, namely the United States and the Soviet Union, were qualified to become world-class. Other industrial countries with insufficient populations could only be vassals at best, becoming a component in the industrial chain of superpowers.

　Pieces.

　Therefore, even though Britain and France are both permanent members of the UN Security Council and possess strategic nuclear weapons, they can only face the fate of declining power.