Do you mean ‘things we don’t like’?

‘Soft resistance’ is to the Hong Kong authorities what ‘woke’ is to the MAGA/Fox News brigade – a mortal threat, even though no-one knows what it is. The Chief Executive is adamant that it exists…

Speaking during a weekly press conference on Tuesday, the chief executive said that “soft resistance is definitely here” and “it is lurking across different areas and different sectors.”

“Some are even disguised as righteous-sounding causes, but in fact, they carry an intention to endanger national security or commit destructive soft resistance,” Lee said in Cantonese.

…In recent days, in the lead-up to the fifth anniversary of the Beijing-imposed national security law next week, high-ranking officials have given media interviews addressing “soft resistance” in areas ranging from arts and culture to development and medicine.

…Lee said: “Of course, criticism of the government… is allowed in our society, as long as you do not have bad intentions… But we should not isolate things, because when we connect the dots, you know it could be part of a scheme of soft resistance.”

It’s everywhere. Rummage around those dusty neglected sectors you have lying around at home – and there it is, lurking. 

It seems every policy bureau head must have an interview with Wen Wei Po warning of the terror. Now it’s the turn of Secretary for Development Bernadette Linn…

Linn said the Development Bureau must “think from the national security perspective” in its work and make “timely clarifications” when misunderstandings about the government’s development plans arise.

She cited the San Tin Technopole development plan, which has drawn concerns from environmental groups over its impact on what they described as the largest remaining intact coastal wetland ecosystem in the Greater Bay Area.

The tech hub’s planning zone, which was expanded in May 2023 to over 600 hectares, involves wetlands, and thus the project would “easily provoke opposition” from environmentalists, Linn said.

“The process of development may easily stir up different emotions and opposition. Some objections are reasonable, some arise from misunderstandings, and some are deliberately manufactured with ill intent. We have to handle it carefully,” the minister said.

Linn went on to say that reclamation development in the city was often met with “soft resistance,” citing the amendment to the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance, which was passed by the city’s opposition-free legislature last month.

For fans of tea leaf-reading, Willy Wo-Lap Lam on Xi Jinping’s waning power, as inferred by reduced coverage in official media…

In the PRC’s most important diplomatic mission this year, Xi apparently failed to demonstrate strong leadership. Following negotiations with the Trump administration in Geneva on May 11–12 and then in London on June 10–11, neither Xi’s name nor Xi Jinping Thought was mentioned in comments from either the Foreign Ministry, the Commerce Ministry, or Vice-Premier He Lifeng (何立峰)—a close Xi ally and lead negotiator with the Americans

Commonplace magazine offers a useful ‘GDP and the trade deficit for dummies’

Rather than markets driving investment, China sets its annual GDP target every year and meets it by any investments necessary through government direction and intervention. This often means investment happens regardless of domestic demand and regardless of whether the underlying investments are profitable. In recent years, China has directed much of this investment toward supporting its export industries.

China’s model has allowed it to capture a larger world market share in several key industries, while the United States’ model has fueled unprecedented levels of household consumption. While these outcomes may serve the political objectives of leaders in both nations, neither model is sustainable and their benefits to the larger population of each nation remain questionable.

…trade deficits have created a drag on overall U.S. economic growth, which has failed to reach 3% since 2005 (with the exception of the government-spending-fueled COVID recovery in 2021). Of the growth the United States has seen, much has been sustained through consumption fueled by government deficit spending and loss of general wealth. To pay for the $1 trillion in goods it doesn’t produce, the United States must either issue debt or sell off assets. 

…Indirectly, the U.S. trade deficit has contributed to the $36 trillion national debt as political demand for consumption has outpaced private sector growth’s ability to sustain it for much of the middle class. That debt will continue to be a drag on GDP as interest payments continue to grow as a percentage of overall spending.

…If consumption in China represents only 39% of GDP versus 68% in the United States, and investment 41% of GDP in China versus only 18% in the United States, it is clear that China directs more of its economy toward production at the expense of consumers and households. This concentrates more power in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party and prevents the formation of a middle class in China capable of asserting its economic interests.

I’m off to Korea to get away from all the soft resistance lurking in our midst. Back in a week or so.