Published in 2007 by Viking was “The China Fantasy” by James Mann, a former Beijing bureau chief of the “Los Angeles Times.” According to the book, the West has made out of China a pleasant and profitable fantasy, and Chapter 2 of the book demonstrates how the Western governments and media have developed “The Lexicon of Dismissal” whereby they dismiss any criticism of their China fantasy: “China bashing,” “anti-Chinese,” “cold war mentality,” “provocative,” “troublemakers,” “ideological,” etc. “If we treat China as a threat, it will become a threat,”

The dictators of China can turn their country into any fantasy for Western consumption. For example, they can pretend that China does not exist. In pure geostrategic terms, this is the ideal. There is no China. And suddenly, out of nowhere, there will appear super weapons that will annihilate the West and turn its population into a fertilizer.

Hence the next best China fantasy has to be created by the dictators of China. Their China (in 2007) is the world’s most peaceful society. Well, like every country, it has to defend itself, right? Hence its defense. China has occupied Tibet because it is, allegedly, its own territory (like Alaska for the United States). The U.S. government made no dÈmarche. If China is sure that there will be no U.S. military resistance to her occupation of Taiwan, “its own territory,” China will occupy it as it did Tibet, and will remain, in the China fantasy, the world’s most peaceful country.

Indeed, what are the grounds to suppose that the dictators of China are not kind, gentle, nice (certainly so toward the West), but hatch some diabolical designs to annihilate the West?! This would be the worst “China bashing,” and “cold war mentality,” it would be suicidally “provocative” (see James Mann’s “Lexicon of Dismissal”).

But here is one historical observation. For thousands of years in Europe or in China, the top power was inherited by the emperor’s eldest son (or in the absence of such—in Europe or Russia by his eldest daughter). When Ivan the Terrible of Russia died in 1584, he left behind his three-year-old son Dmitri. But the boy was allegedly murdered when he was ten years old (in 1591) by men of Boris Godunov, who became the tsar in the absence of heirs. The grandiose opera “Boris Godunov” is all about this tragedy of Godunov: Was he an impostor, pretender, usurper?

In a dictatorship, such as the dictatorship of China, this tragedy is impossible since every one in power is an impostor, pretender, usurper. A domestic uprising like the Tiananmen Square revolt may sweep away all dictators in power because none of them has any more claims to power than anyone else. In a dictatorship, there is no legitimacy in power of any kind. Marx called his future social system “the dictatorship of the proletariat.” Lenin became the first dictator in Soviet Russia. But on what grounds? He was a son of “a tsarist official” and never was a proletarian, to say nothing of being the proletariat. Stalin could legitimize his power no more than did any of his rivals he killed.

The legitimacy of top power in the West today is based on elections. The only way for the China dictators to justify their power is to destroy—not Dmitry, but the West as the incarnation of legitimate power. How to do it?

The dictators of China cannot convince the West that China does not exist. Nor can they convince the West that the size of its population does not exceed that of the United States, for example. There are Chinese pre-1949 population data in the Western archives, and not even idiots, as some Western statesmen are, will believe in this sudden drop of China’s population to less than one quarter of what it should be according to the Western pre-1949 archives.

As of May 7, 2007, the population of the USA was 301,786,363, while the 2007 estimate for China is 1,317,000,000, that is more than 4.3 times larger. Let us assume that these are the only data we can learn about the China reality.

Today geostrategic wars are waged not by soldiers and officers in the field, but by armies of scientists and technologists in labs and development projects. With all other data being equal, China can produce an army of scientists and technologists exceeding that of the United States 4.3 times.

But the “other data” are not equal. In the United States, a student himself and commercial demand decide what to study. In China, the dictators can create conditions under which not 4.3, but 43 times more scientists and technologists will be graduated for the development of super weapons.

The ratio of the number of specialists of genius to that of average specialists can also be increased by the dictators of China. In the United States, $200,000 a year or so is the top for a scientist or technologist. On the other hand, an entertainer makes millions of dollars. The dictators of China can make the creativity of a genius in science and technology of geostrategic importance as remunerative as mass entertainment is in the United States.

As of May 7, 2007, the world population was 6,593,620,897. In the 1930s, owing to the Nazi anti-Semitism, the United States obtained German-Jewish nuclear physicists of genius and the Italian nuclear physicist of genius Fermi, whose wife was Jewish. The Chinese dictators will create such privileged conditions for scientists and technologists of genius that the field for the harvesting of geostrategic genius will be not just China, but the entire world, for there is no stigma attached to an American working in such a friendly, peaceful, and otherwise charming country as China (see “The Lexicon of Dismissal” of everything contradicting this).

How does the West resist China’s concentration of world science and technology, able to develop super weapons annihilating the West without Mutual Assured Destruction? The last war of the democratic West with a dictatorship occurred from 1939 to 1945. That was a collection of Hitler’s mistakes and his European conventions like the declaration of war on the United States in 1941, which certainly helped the Manhattan Project of development of nuclear weapons in the United States.

Then followed the Cold War against Stalin’s Russia, an extremely stupid policy since Stalin (or Gorbachev) were not, contrary to the CIA, planning a conventional attack on the West—instead they were developing super weapons, which the CIA refused to notice until Yeltsin opened in 1992 “to international inspection” the old Soviet development of some of them. Finally, the development of super weapons went over to China, with Putin’s Russia cooperating, as Stalin cooperated with Hitler in the hope to share the world between themselves.

What about the West? Business (and entertainment) as usual. There is no China as a geostrategic reality. There is only “the China fantasy” as James Mann described it in his book of 2007. I recall Lloyd George (a British Liberal, just as was Tony Blair) who said that he would be glad if an outstanding statesman like Hitler were at the head of the British government. A historic contest: which British Liberal is more stupid: Lloyd George, or Tony Blair with his mess in Iraq for more than four years and not a second of attention to the dictatorship of China in scientific and technological cooperation with Putin’s Russia, to say nothing of the scientific and technological flow of mankind into China, which the dictatorship of China cultivates.

I have mentioned no weapons. The lay discussion of them is a waste of time. Decisive super weapons can only be produced by the world’s largest assembly of scientists and technologists of genius in the field, and only they can judge the geostrategic impact of those weapons. Only such an assembly of nuclear scientists of genius in the United States (mostly Jews who had fled from anti-Semitism in Europe) could create nuclear weapons and understood their geostrategic impact. On the other hand, in Japan (by no means a militarily backward country) no one had ever heard of them until they struck two Japanese cities.