U.S. Oblivious to China's Nanotechnology

Friday, 07 Nov 2008 08:55 AM

By Lev Navrozov

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
|  A   A  
  Copy Shortlink

On Oct. 28, 2008, I received this e-mail from a Dr. Christian Chan in “Asia”: “While you are foolishly obsessed with the memory of Hitler and the Soviet Union, your USA is being taken over by a Black Nationalist Marxist!

"The USA’s most serious threat is internal and your nation has millions of leftist traitors and Americans who are consumed by greed and place money before God & country!”

Well, as an example of my “obsession,” let me recall that had Hitler begun his war with Stalin a couple of years later and continued to finance the German atomic project as generously as before, he would have possessed nuclear weapons before the United States and hence would have possibly possessed the world.

Also, President Roosevelt (a Democrat) could have been similarly called by Chan “a Dutch Nationalist Marxist” at the head of “millions of leftist traitors and Americans who are consumed by greed.”

But actually, even before Roosevelt took office in 1933, he had endorsed the Hoover administration’s refusal to recognize Japanese conquests in Manchuria. Roosevelt’s firmness led to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor — and to the unconditional surrender of Japan after the United States dropped two atom bombs on its cities.

Nor should Roosevelt’s role in the liquidation of the Great Depression be forgotten. Roosevelt was inaugurated to his first term in 1933, that is, in the year when Hitler’s Reichstag Party received a heavy majority of votes, and he became der Führer. Roosevelt and Hitler died in the same year, 1945 (18 days apart!).

How on earth could Hitler conquer the United States without first having atom bombs? He could not land his ground troops even in Great Britain because the latter had a large navy, created for the defense of the British Empire.

Hitler’s Germany did not produce a single new weapon (while Stalin’s Russia, considered by the West hopelessly backward, terrified the German troops very early in the war with Katyusha rocket launchers).

Roosevelt supplied England with whatever she needed to fight the war against Germany, which therefore declared war on the United States and thus unwittingly boosted the U.S. Manhattan Project, whose “atom bombs” would have finished off Germany had she not collapsed and had Hitler not committed suicide before the U.S. atomic bombs were ready.

Yes, Roosevelt also supplied Stalin’s Russia with what she needed for the war against Hitler’s Germany. If Stalin had attacked Germany, Roosevelt would have possibly helped Germany. It was vital to prevent the merging of the two countries into a single totalitarian giant. Hitler had told Mussolini that he did not trust Stalin, feared his surprise attack, and hence decided to attack him first.

Let us now turn from the Germany of 1933 to 1945 to the China of 2001 to 2010. The “five-year plan” was a Soviet phrase. The Soviet industry was planned and built as a single military machine.

Now, since 1999, the number of undergraduate and graduate students in China has been growing at approximately 30 percent per year, and the number of graduates at all levels of higher education in China has approximately quadrupled in the last six years.

In 2010 (the last year of the current “five-year plan”), there will be substantially more Ph.D. engineers and scientists in China than in the United States.

Let us recall that the population of China (1.3 billion) exceeds more than four times that of the United States, and is expected to be 300 million in 2010. Hence the above figures for China can be multiplied by four.

Also, the number of scientists and engineers in the United States largely depends on the customers’ demand for goods and services. In China, the number depends on the maximum growth of the war machine projected by the dictators for the current five years.

Besides, scientists and engineers in non-military fields constitute in China a tiny percentage, compared with those engaged in military fields.

In other words, not only will the Chinese war machine vastly surpass the relevant United States fields quantitatively, the United States may be tragically behind in the development of new weapons. But in contrast to the times of Roosevelt, the presidents, vice presidents, and most members of the Congress in the past decade could not care less.

Hitler never said (no more than did Napoleon) that the world should and would belong to him. Hitler called his teaching, “national socialism,” where the word “national” stresses its anti-Semitic orientation rather than its global scale.

Marxism-Leninism, socialism, and communism were spread by Soviet Russia as a global teaching. But today a quarter of French voters and a third of Italian voters do not vote communist — as they did between the end of World War II and the death of Stalin, followed by the debunking of him.

Therefore, Marxism-Leninism is being preached in China only domestically. But surely it sounds more global than national socialism. Neither Marx nor Lenin was Chinese, nor did they quote any Chinese as being the founder of their teaching or their leader.

The word “liberation” in the name “People’s Liberation Army” stresses the goal of Marxism-Leninism to “liberate” the world. Indeed, Russia was “liberated” by Lenin; that is, conquered as a whole, though it consisted of many different nations, conquered in different wars at different historical times, by different tsars.

New weapons? In 1986, Eric Drexler published his book about nanotechnology, introduced the word itself, and founded The Foresight Institute for the research.

In China, the book appeared on the Internet in English with Chinese extrapolations of especially difficult places. Let the young Chinese read become interested, and finally be Ph.D. scientists and engineers in the new field of weapons, superior according to Drexler, to nuclear weapons. My readers ask me how I know that the United States is not ahead of China in the development of nanoweapons.

No, I was not in China to watch their development. But I was in the United States. For the first 14 years since the publication of Drexler’s book, many regarded it as just an eccentricity.

Then the Congress was to give Drexler’s Foresight Institute allocations for research. By that time, Drexler’s word “nanotechnology” was generally known because nanotechnology had become useful in the production and use of many peaceful goods and services.

Some of their commercial producers succeeded in assuring the Congress that nanotechnology is worth congressional allocations only for civilian needs. Eric Drexler is no longer with the Foresight Institute, which he and his wife created in 1986.

As for the old-fashioned war in Iraq, started by President George W. Bush, a 100 percent pure American, and a staunch Republican at the head of millions of unselfish right-wing Americans, the war creates the impression that Iraq is not a “Third-World country” of 26 million people, only 32 percent to 37 percent of whom are Sunni, hostile to the invaders, but a giant, fighting the United States and its allies for five years, with the U.S. troops still there, waiting to be withdrawn.

You can e-mail me at navlev@cloud9.net.

© 2014 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
  Copy Shortlink
Around the Web
Join the Newsmax Community
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.
>> Register to share your comments with the community.
>> Login if you are already a member.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
Email:
Retype Email:
Country
Zip Code:
Privacy: We never share your email.
 
Hot Topics
Follow Newsmax
Like us
on Facebook
Follow us
on Twitter
Add us
on Google Plus
Around the Web
Top Stories
You May Also Like

Learning Russian in the Womb

Tuesday, 26 Feb 2013 15:44 PM

I recently saw an article posted on a website and couldn’t agree more with the author’s premise as some states , includi . . .

Welcome to Soviet America

Thursday, 29 Nov 2012 09:40 AM

“Lev, this is Julie. Do you remember me?” The voice on the phone sounded familiar. She went on: “Almost 40 years ago, I  . . .

Romney Won't Look at Russia with Rose-Colored Glasses

Tuesday, 30 Oct 2012 15:50 PM

I was watching Fox News, when an image of President Barack Obama delivering a message flashed on the screen for a mere s . . .

Most Commented

Newsmax, Moneynews, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, NewsmaxWorld, NewsmaxHealth, are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

 
NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
©  Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved