The January 14, 2011, Glenn Beck show on TV featured two guests - David Buckner and Jim Rogers. Buckner is a previous guest who teaches at Columbia University. Rogers is an billionaire businessman who lives in China and whose children are schooled in China. Rogers can be safely labeled a globalist proponent of free trade – an ex-patriot in spirit who maintains his credibility by paying US taxes.
The title of the show was “The fall of the US and the rise of China.” Beck and his guests amply demonstrated that the US is losing and China is winning. The US was shown as falling behind in several crucial areas because of our government’s entrepreneurially unfriendly restrictiveness, overspending (both governmental and personal), and tremendous indebtedness. China was shown as making tremendous strides because it has adopted free market principles and has become a more frugal lender nation, not a spender/borrower nation.
We can generally agree with these facts. What I had difficulty with was the portrayal of globalist Rogers as a spokesman for what is wrong with America and what is right with China. He was used by Beck as a primary resource for the goodness of China and the badness of America. America does have its problems and we should not dismiss indicators of our failures. However, I have to question the validity of opinions coming from an “American citizen” who lives in China, who schools his children in China, whose best advice is that our children and grandchildren learn Mandarin Chinese, and who makes his millions developing Chinese business.
These facts make it appear that Rogers’ allegiance is more with China than the US. I submit that the likes of Rogers is more of a liability than an asset to the US – more of a detriment than a benefit – in fact, more of a cause of the problems we face than a cause for our success.
Why do I believe this? Progressives and free trade worshippers may consider my views excessively nationalistic, but US citizens whose life’s work is building up the economies of nations who are burying the US economically borders on treason. In this case, Rogers is proud of his work in building up the Chinese economy, at one point acting defensive at Beck’s question about his allegiance.
For decades our businesses and universities have been working diligently building up the economies, and technological, and managerial capacities of dozens of countries around the world. Free trade and more efficient world production was the objective and primary benefit. The (I assume) unintended consequence is competition that is out-producing the US and foreign economies that are growing at a rate to the point of being an existential threat to our own. We must ask “is there a point where building the economies of other nations threatens our own and becomes a threat to our nation security and well-being?”
I had mixed feelings about the content of this show. While I agree with the facts that don’t bode well for our economy, the “respect” shown to an individual who is profiting by facilitating the success of a virulently competing Communist cum “free market” nation is somewhat troubling. And Beck “admires” this man?