Author: Cameron Keegan

Pfizer Stock Hits A High After President Biden Screams “We Beat Pharma!”

Posted by Cameron Keegan | Sep 28, 2022 | Blue State Conservative |

body #gform_wrapper_2 {border-width: 0; border-style: solid;background-color:#f7f7f7;padding-left:15px;padding-right:15px;padding-top:15px;padding-bottom:15px;background-color:rgba(247,247,247,1);}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer .gform_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_previous_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_next_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gfield#field_submit .gform-button{border-style: solid;font-weight: normal; font-weight: bold; border-width: 0px;}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer .gform_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_previous_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_next_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gfield#field_submit .gform-button:hover {border-style: solid;border-style: solid;}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer button.mdc-button:hover {}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer,body #gform_wrapper_2 #field_submit.gfield {}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gfield_radio label {font-weight: normal; font-weight: bold; width: auto;}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_body .gform_fields .gfield .gfield_label {font-size:20px;}/* Styling for Tablets */@media only screen and ( max-width: 800px ) and ( min-width:481px ) {}/* Styling for phones */@media only screen and ( max-width: 480px ) {}/*Option to add custom CSS */
In early September, the sitting president of the United States yelled, “we beat Pharma this year!” during a Labor Day speech in Milwaukee. This announcement comes after the Biden administration enabled the pharmaceutical industry to profit billions in dollars by (until recently) enforcing “vaccine” mandates on federal employees and contractors.
Once again, Joe Biden, the appointed 46th president belted out during a speech in Pittsburgh: “I have been fighting Pharma for my entire career, my entire career, and we finally beat Pharma!”
Biden, who accepted $1 million from pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. for his inauguration, now claims “we finally beat Pharma.” In an attempt to read between the lines, we might want to note that Pfizer reported a record-high sales of $27.7 billion for the second quarter in late July—that’s an increase of 47 percent from the same period last year—by driving the COVID “vaccine” and antiviral drug Paxlovid.
Now let’s not forget that during this year’s State of the Union address, Biden called on Congress to give the federal health insurance program, Medicare, the authority to negotiate lowering drug prescription prices, as mentioned in the $1.8 trillion American Families Plan FACT-SHEET published by the White House in April 2021.
And then there’s the Ensuring Innovation Act, a law passed through the Senate with unanimous, bipartisan support. It was developed to help prevent pharmaceutical manufacturers from making minor adjustments to raise drug prices, and supportgeneric and biosimilar drugs instead of branded drugs.
A bill of higher implication for the pharmaceutical industry might be The Inflation Reduction Act, which was signed into law in mid-August. It now allows the U.S. government to negotiate prices on prescription drugs and place a cap at $2,000 per year for people on the Medicare program.
But all in all, it’s hard to imagine Big Pharma’s lobbying efforts diminishing. Indeed, according to a STAT analysis, “seventy-two senators and 302 members of the House of Representatives cashed a check from the pharmaceutical industry ahead of the 2020 election.” Such donations were divided between the Democratic and Republican party, with the former receiving $6.6 million and the latter obtaining $7.1 million.

“*” indicates required fields

Here’s what happened after Biden yelled “we beat Pharma”
Less than a day after the 46th president screamed “we beat Pharma” in multiple speeches on Labor Day, Pfizer’s stock price spiked. A leading authoritative source for stock market information, Stocks Register, reported that:
Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE) price is hovering higher on Tuesday, September 06, jumping 0.61% above its previous close…Staying with the analyst view, there is a consensus estimate of $100.41 billion for the company’s annual revenue in 2022. Per this projection, the revenue is forecast to grow 23.50% above that which the company brought in 2022.
Indeed, Biden’s announcement is bewildering, given the current administration’s efforts to inject nearly every American with the COVID “vaccines” developed by pharmaceutical giants Pfizer, Moderna, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson (J&J).

For instance, Moderna reportedly earned $12.2 billion net income in 2021, with the majority of this total driven by the COVID “vaccine” or “shot” production. According to the company’s report released in late February:
Total revenue was $18.5 billion for the full year 2021, compared to $803 million in 2020. Total revenue increased in 2021, primarily due to commercial sales of the Company’s COVID-19 vaccine. Product sales for the full year 2021 were $17.7 billion from sales of 807 million doses of the Company’s COVID-19 vaccine.
A Bloomberg analysis released in April showed that J&J’s Janssen sales for its COVID shots amounted to $23.4 billion, “narrowly missing the average estimate.” It adds that J&J maintained its “operational profit and sales forecast and boosted its quarterly dividend to $1.13 a share from $1.06.”

In fact, J&J’s Chief Financial Officer, Joseph Wolk, said that he hopes that suspending the 2022 “vaccine guidance” for the sales of its COVID shots will convince investors that the company’s COVID-related production isn’t central to the business.
So, business keeps chugging ahead. New infections. New diseases. New needs. New inoculations. How can such a business model fail to reproduce and reinvent itself?
Perhaps Biden can clarify what he meant by “we beat Pharma.”
Pharmaceutical profits and expenditure

On a different note, the United States is also leading in pharmaceutical expenditure compared to other nations that are part of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
According to an article published by Statista, a company specializing in consumer data, Americans spent, on average, up to $1,376 worth of medications in 2019. This cost is still 47 percent higher than its biggest spending competitor, Germany.
On insurance, the article continues to add:
Government and government-mandated insurance covered 55 percent of total pharmaceutical spending across OECD nations, with the share as high as 80 percent in Germany and France. That number was 70 percent in the United States.
If that weren’t enough, U.S. pharmaceutical giants are projected to make the following 2022 sales, starting with Pfizer at a swooping $67.4 billion, followed by blazing AbbVie ($58.4 billion), J&J ($55.2 billion), and of course, more modest earnings by Bristol-Myers Squibb ($49.1 billion) and Merck & Co. ($45.1 billion).
So yes, Biden should really clarify what he meant by “we beat Pharma.”
Sponsored by Big Pharma?
In mid-October 2021, investigative journalist Whitney Webb tweeted a compilation video highlighting several mainstream U.S. news channels such as CNN, CNBC, NBCand ABC as being sponsored by—Pfizer. In addition to Fox News, all these channels have pushed for Americans to receive the COVID shots, and the likes of CNN have even expressed support for mandates.
Just a few examples:

CNBC tweeted a news article praising Pfizer for its technological achievements concerning the COVID mRNA shots. However, at the end of the tweet, the caption reads, “Paid Post for @pfizer.”
A television skit delivered by late-night show host Jimmy Kimmel on the mRNA shots was sponsored by “@Moderna_tx #SponsoredByModerna.”

By funding entertainment and news programs, Big Pharma might have more intentions than simply increasing mass inoculation rates. But while the pharmaceutical industry pays mainstream news networks to receive favorable coverage for its products, it’s a very different case for those who have tried to raise awareness about potential “vaccine” injuries.
Consider the case of teenager Maddie de Garay, who experienced severe symptoms after receiving the second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech shot in a trial.
By October 2021, the Vaccine Safety Research Association had prepared an advertisement to raise awareness about de Garay’s injuries. It was initially accepted for broadcast by Comcast telecommunications conglomerate and was scheduled to air during the Saturday Night Live broadcast, and Meet the Press. But the 30-second video featuring de Gray was pulled just a day after its approval.
At this stage, is it surprising to learn that Comcast is the owner of NBCUniversal Media, L.L.C., which just so happens to be the parent company of NBC and CNBC?
Come again, President Biden?

California Takes the Lead in Electric Car Mandate—How Will the Rest of America Respond?

Posted by Cameron Keegan | Sep 21, 2022 | Blue State Conservative |

Study Reveals What Americans Really Think About “Sensitive” Topics in Private

Posted by Cameron Keegan | Sep 14, 2022 | Blue State Conservative |

body #gform_wrapper_2 {border-width: 0; border-style: solid;background-color:#f7f7f7;padding-left:15px;padding-right:15px;padding-top:15px;padding-bottom:15px;background-color:rgba(247,247,247,1);}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer .gform_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_previous_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_next_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gfield#field_submit .gform-button{border-style: solid;font-weight: normal; font-weight: bold; border-width: 0px;}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer .gform_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_previous_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_next_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gfield#field_submit .gform-button:hover {border-style: solid;border-style: solid;}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer button.mdc-button:hover {}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer,body #gform_wrapper_2 #field_submit.gfield {}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gfield_radio label {font-weight: normal; font-weight: bold; width: auto;}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_body .gform_fields .gfield .gfield_label {font-size:20px;}/* Styling for Tablets */@media only screen and ( max-width: 800px ) and ( min-width:481px ) {}/* Styling for phones */@media only screen and ( max-width: 480px ) {}/*Option to add custom CSS */
Picture yourself having a conversation at the workplace (or perhaps down the bar) with a group of colleagues (or friends.) Suddenly, one of them interrupts you and says, “Stop. You can’t say that.”
Whatever you said—whatever word or phrase slipped out, whether a figure of speech or a dispassionate statement—was viewed as “out of date” and, frankly, just wrong.
As such, a term or a collection of words tagged as “inappropriate” and/or “harmful” by self-appointed cultural overlords has streamed through mass communication systems, rippled into the corporate world, and now your well-meaning colleagues (or friends) and keeping you up-to-date.
(Mostly so you don’t get fired, and they don’t have to deal with the backlash of being associated with someone expressing what is definitely, absolutely not allowed.)
Moreover, specific ideas or beliefs may be viewed as “unpopular” based on the ample criticism from mainstream media, your respected news outlet, or your favorite talk show host or NFL on Fox commentator.
Yet, for all the nudging to avoid particular words so as not to cause offense, get sued or fired, what do Americans really think about “controversial” or “sensitive” issues?
Are Americans more conservative on certain issues than they let on?

World Economic Forum: “Chip Implants” Is Part of “Natural Evolution”

Posted by Cameron Keegan | Sep 12, 2022 | Blue State Conservative |

body #gform_wrapper_2 {border-width: 0; border-style: solid;background-color:#f7f7f7;padding-left:15px;padding-right:15px;padding-top:15px;padding-bottom:15px;background-color:rgba(247,247,247,1);}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer .gform_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_previous_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_next_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gfield#field_submit .gform-button{border-style: solid;font-weight: normal; font-weight: bold; border-width: 0px;}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer .gform_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_previous_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_next_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gfield#field_submit .gform-button:hover {border-style: solid;border-style: solid;}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer button.mdc-button:hover {}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer,body #gform_wrapper_2 #field_submit.gfield {}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gfield_radio label {font-weight: normal; font-weight: bold; width: auto;}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_body .gform_fields .gfield .gfield_label {font-size:20px;}/* Styling for Tablets */@media only screen and ( max-width: 800px ) and ( min-width:481px ) {}/* Styling for phones */@media only screen and ( max-width: 480px ) {}/*Option to add custom CSS */
“Are we moving towards a ‘brave new world’?” writes Karen Philips, Vice President R&D of the Interuniversity Microelectronics Center, in a recent World Economic Forum (WEF) article. “As scary as chip implants may sound, they form part of a natural evolution that wearables once underwent.”
Interesting.
Did Philips mention Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World because she knows that the 1932 novel examines a society where citizens are sorted to be part of a certain social class, and the idea of individuality is non-existent?
Did Philips mention a “brave new world” because she recognizes that normalizing the implant of an electronic component—a chip —into humans is the last nail in the coffin of personal autonomy and privacy in an increasingly surveillance-based America?
Selling the idea of chip implants for everyday people.
Objectively speaking, the essence of the article justifies using a technology called “augmentation” to improve the lives of ordinary people. The author claims that “compelling” arguments exist to interface our organic human self with chip implants.
For rationalization, Philips delivers a background of technology currently used for medical purposes. For example, electroceuticals produce electrical impulses to treat ailments and “interfacing with the brain using neural probes” to manage epilepsy.

“*” indicates required fields

Moreover, the author refers to the growth of wearable technology, such as “augmented reality (AR) goggles,” that superimposes layers of extra information in real-time over users’ real-world scenes to “upgrade” their life experience.
The article coxes the reader to entertain the idea of the “natural evolution” of augmented technology, which implies normalizing the fusion of our God-given organic biology with manufactured devices, to chiefly enhance our lives and safety.

Philips reasons that:
“Augmentation can be defined as the extension of rehabilitation where technological aids such as glasses, cochlear implants or prosthetics are designed to restore a lost or impaired function.”

And that’s key: such implants serve niche medical purposes and aren’t normative in society. But that’s exactly what the author has in mind:
“Add it [augmentation] to completely healthy individuals and such technology can augment. Night goggles, exoskeletons and brain-computer interfaces build up the picture. The augmenting technology will help in all stages of life: children in a learning environment, professionals at work and ambitious senior citizens. There are many possibilities.”
And here’s what “many possibilities” might mean:

connect our brain to the Internet and “download” new information in an increasingly fast-paced society where we don’t have time to learn anymore
enable facial recognition without physical ID cards or passports because we can’t responsibly carry these around
perform financial transactions without the hassle of getting out our card or smartphone, which could obviously get lost or stolen
track our children’s whereabouts because we obviously can’t teach them to be vigilant, and we can’t trust them anymore because they’re bound to lose their smartphone.

For now, Americans generally appear hesitant about implants, in the brain at least. A Pew Research Center poll released in March showed that only 13 percent of surveyed 10,260 U.S. adults thought that chips implanted in the brain would be a good idea, despite the potential for faster and more accurate information processing.
But, pause for a moment if you’re wondering whether implanting chips into healthy people is a “thing” from an alternative dystopian universe.
Chip implants have already taken place in Sweden—and Wisconsin.
According to media pieces by the New York Post and NBC News, over 4,000 people in Sweden have had a “microchip” the size of a large grain of rice implanted in their hand.
Consequently, many Swedish people can use their hand to carry out everyday activities such as financial transactions. They can even scan their hand against their smartphone to access personal COVID-related data or monitor aspects of their health.
Make no mistake: here in the United States, microchipping has already taken place.
According to the DailyMail and CNBC News, around 80 of the 250 employees at software company Three Square Market in Wisconsin had a microchip inserted beneath the skin of their hand.
The microchip transmits data when scanned by an electronic reader, which can be used to access the Three Square Market’s building. As such, the microchips are connected to employee accounts, so they can purchase food and drinks by swiping the reader against their hand, and funds are automatically deducted to cover the cost of the purchase.
“It is really convenient having the chip in your hand with all the things it can do,” Three Square Market CEO Todd Westby said in an interview.
When asked about who owns the microchip, Westby clarified the company’s position:
“It was never designed to be our property. We decided to put it in employees as a form of convenience for them. When employees leave, we actually consider it an employee retention tool. We do not plan on taking it out. You know, it’s up to the employees.”
Well, for now. Essentially, it’s your choice if you want the convenience of not carrying a heavy stack of access cards and identification documents. That’s less responsibility and it’s just all so convenient.
Normalization starts with “individual choice” for adults restricted to a particular company or a niche group of microchip enthusiasts. But, before long, an implant becomes compulsory for all employees, and within years, the tech world of Silicon Valley will have embraced microchipping. Normalization needs to move fast before people have too much time to build opposition, and the next thing we know, schools are looking at microchipping our children for their “safety.”
It’s all about the little ones.
Philips actually begins the first paragraph of the WEF article with: “Superheroes have been dominating big and small screens for a while…”
Indeed, following the Great Depression in the 1930s, superhero characters with abilities beyond those of everyday people began to emerge in the form of Superman (1938) and Captain Marvel (1939), to name a few. This trend continued well into the 1960s with The Incredible Hulk, The X-Men and Iron Man, through the 1990s with Power Rangers and emerging female characters such as Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
Whether decades of superhero characters awash in children’s comic books and movies serve as predictive programming to normalize fusing their body with a chip, capable of reproducing a favorite superhero’s enhanced physical or cognitive skills, is a different subject matter altogether.
Nonetheless, the rest of Philips’ introductory statement is fantastic: “…but there’s a subtle change happening. Many children expect to develop superpowers themselves.”
Really? Since when?
My 7-year-old son might expect to develop flying powers or the ability to see in the dark, but he is pretending to have wings and he is pretending to possess night vision. Indeed, many children want to be superheroes, but they are pretending to possess superpowers of invisibility, 360-degree vision or teleportation.
“The limits on implants are going to be set by ethical arguments rather than scientific capacity,” writes Philips. “For example, should you implant a tracking chip in your child? There are solid, rational reasons for it, like safety. Would you actually do it? Is it a bridge too far?”
Ah, there goes that word. “Safety.” To protect ordinary people from a big, dangerous world where people are scamming one another, hijacking someone else’s identity and kidnapping their children. And unless they have a chip implant that tracks their location, no child ever will be safe.
But no, it’s never a bridge too far—for as long as the public allows it.
Like Brave New World, George Orwell’s novel, 1984, warns about the dangers of totalitarianism—a world governed by censorship and continual surveillance.
To quote Orwell’s final warning: “don’t let it happen. It depends on you.”
By: Cameron Keegan
Cameron Keegan is an independent researcher and writer on American politics, faith, and culture affecting young people through a conservative disposition. To learn more about Cameron’s work, visit https://ckeeganan.substack.com, and for comments or questions, send an email to ckeeganan@substack.com.
Featured image: Amal Graafstra, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

China’s Rise As An Economic Power Has Been Driven By Leftist Democrats In America

Posted by Cameron Keegan | Aug 24, 2022 | Blue State Conservative |

body #gform_wrapper_2 {border-width: 0; border-style: solid;background-color:#f7f7f7;padding-left:15px;padding-right:15px;padding-top:15px;padding-bottom:15px;background-color:rgba(247,247,247,1);}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer .gform_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_previous_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_next_button,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gfield#field_submit .gform-button{border-style: solid;font-weight: normal; font-weight: bold; border-width: 0px;}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer .gform_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_previous_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer .gform_next_button:hover,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gfield#field_submit .gform-button:hover {border-style: solid;border-style: solid;}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer button.mdc-button:hover {}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_footer,body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_page_footer,body #gform_wrapper_2 #field_submit.gfield {}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gfield_radio label {font-weight: normal; font-weight: bold; width: auto;}body #gform_wrapper_2 .gform_body .gform_fields .gfield .gfield_label {font-size:20px;}/* Styling for Tablets */@media only screen and ( max-width: 800px ) and ( min-width:481px ) {}/* Styling for phones */@media only screen and ( max-width: 480px ) {}/*Option to add custom CSS */
From Hollywood to Silicon Valley: how American investments have aided China’s economic boom and its stake in America…
In the world of investment and trading, Ray Dalio is a leading American pioneer: he is the founder of the world’s most prominent hedge fund firm, Bridgewater Associates, which manages $154 billion. The 72-year-old is also a philanthropist, husband, and father who has never shied away from vocalizing his concerns about civil unrest and the nation’s economic future.
Dalio is the author of the bestselling 2017 book, Principles: Life & Work and the recent, The Changing World Order, which connects the billionaire’s interpretation of empires in world history with present-day corporate management and investment philosophy.
In a recent podcast interview, Dalio was careful with his choice of words about China:
China will be a ‘comparable power’ let’s call it, stronger in some ways, less strong in other ways, and that it is likely that it will pass the United States—but not certain. It’ll all depends on how strong the United States is by taking care of itself.
The avid reader added that since 1984, China’s per capita income has increased by 26 times and that “we’re going to have that great power conflict.”
Indeed, China’s economic growth over the past four decades has arguably been aided by the Clinton administration awarding China permanent normal trade relations in 2000, effectively backing its bid to join the World Trade Organization; and American investments in Hollywood and cutting-edge technologies.
China has also steadily exerted power as an ‘influencer’ after acquiring top U.S. movie theater chain and film production companies. Consequently, many Hollywood screenplays have been flattering to China in an attempt to be accepted for distribution under the nation’s ruling Communist Party.

“*” indicates required fields

To better understand China’s eagerness for a stake in the United States, let us explore the history books.
China’s history and relationship with the West

The Chinese empire under the era of the Qing dynasty surged as an economic power throughout the 18th century due to their widely sought exports of silk, precious stones, porcelain, tea and spices. Early commerce with the United States shortly after the Revolutionary War included the maritime fur trade and the indirect sales of opium, which spanned between the late 18th and mid-19th centuries.

China’s history does not reveal European-style colonization on non-Asian continents—but that doesn’t rule out a desire to exert economic control and influence perception over its biggest competitor.
China now has the most companies on the Fortune 500 list

While much of America went into lockdown in 2020, China kept bustling ahead, further outdoing the U.S. for the highest number of Global 500 companies since the 2018 fiscal year. And for the fourth consecutive year, China (including Hong Kong and Taiwan) topped this year’s list with 145 enterprises. The U.S. and Japan followed with 124 and 47 businesses, respectively.

One noticeable feature is that 87 companies from mainland China are majority or entirely state-owned. The steel maker Ansteel Group is reportedly the fastest-growing business on this year’s list: the company saw a 92.5 percent increase in revenue and a 341.2 percent increase in profit compared to last year.
Conversely, only three U.S.-based companies match a similar description on the Global 500 list. The Postal Service is an independent agency of the federal government’s executive branch, and the Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage are government-sponsored enterprises.
American companies aid China’s innovation in technology

The People’s Liberation Army [of China] now has an increasingly credible capability to undermine our missile defenses and threaten the American homeland with both conventional and nuclear strikes. Even more disturbing is the fact that American technology has contributed to the [People’s Liberation Army] hypersonic missile program.
China’s missile weapon relies upon leading U.S. technology. Though history does not show a Chinese military invasion in the West, a perception of military strength often serves as a deterrent to warfare.
(Though the Opium Wars in the mid-19th century against Great Britain and France resulted from China’s attempt to suppress the illegal opium trade and prevent additional commercial privileges in China, these military wars were fought in China.)
For at least a decade, U.S.-technology firms have been infatuated with their Chinese counterparts. According to an investigation published by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), American venture capital firms and technology businesses made 58 investments between 2017 and 2020 in China’s semiconductor sector—an industry that provides vital electronic components called “chips” for smartphones, refrigerators, medical scanners and weapons.
A San Francisco-based venture capital firm made 25 investments, and Chinese affiliates of multiple U.S. firms reportedly made at least 67 investments in Chinese chip-sector companies. Meanwhile, Intel—the world’s largest semiconductor manufacturer—is backing China’s Primarius Technologies, which specializes in chip-designing software tools that U.S. companies currently lead in development. Indeed, the semiconductor industry in China has been thriving, with at least 24,000 new companies reportedly registered in 2020 and the first two months of 2021.
According to the WSJ, U.S. companies have become attracted to significant tax reliefs created by China’s State Council in August 2020, thereby boosting financial incentives to develop software tools for designing and testing chips.
U.S. companies are also backing China’s growth in artificial intelligence (AI)—a technology currently revolutionizing different business sectors worldwide, including (but not limited to) banking and finance, such as fraud prevention projects; transportation such as self-driving cars; healthcare such as telediagnosis; and cybersecurity and warfare systems in the military.
For example, the U.S.-based Synopsys set up a $100 million strategic fund in 2017 for the Chinese market “to collaborate with local companies and venture capital” particularly in the areas of chip design and AI.
Meanwhile, according to a 2019 report published by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, Chinese firms invested in at least 51 AI startups in America between 2010 and 2016. Yet, the report states that “analysis of Chinese investment in the United States generally underestimates the real level of Chinese economic activity in the United States.”
China’s hand in Hollywood

Interestingly enough, Wanda’s founder, business magnate and investor, Wang Jianlin, served in the “People’s Liberation Army” between 1970 and 1986 and as a deputy to the 17th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party.
There has never been a shortage of eagerness at Wanda. In 2016, the conglomerate agreed to acquire Legendary Pictures, the U.S. film production and mass media company behind the Dark Knight trilogy, for $3.5 billion. Despite a minority stake in Legendary being sold to Apollo in January 2022, Wanda remains the majority owner.
Well, it’s not surprising to learn that Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios’ 2012 Red Dawn remake replaced Chinese soldiers invading an American town with North Koreans. As film producer Peter Shiao explained, “[Chinese diplomats] were not interested in their country being perceived as a violent military threat to the lives of the average American.”
There’s an emerging pattern.
The 2014 Transformers: Age of Extinction, which premiered in Hong Kong, reportedly portrayed the U.S. government as “either ridiculous or diabolical, but China’s is assured and effective.”
Consider the 2015 movie The Martian, which begins with an American exploratory mission gone wrong, where astronaut Mark Watney is left for dead on Mars. NASA works overtime to rescue Watney, yet their efforts fail miserably. Then, lo and behold, the Chinese National Space Administration decide to support NASA in the interests of international scientific cooperation and offer their booster rocket—ultimately saving the Americans from themselves. The Martian was a success; it grossed a total of $630.6 million, of which $228.4 million came from the U.S. & Canada and $95 million from China alone.
China only allows 34 foreign films into its lucrative market of moviegoers every year. The China Film Administration is a state-owned body that oversees film approvals and enforces media censorship in compliance with its government.
Marvel Studios’ 2019 Avengers: Endgame made over $2.8 billion at the global box office, with over $600 million coming from China alone. Yet, the company’s Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings and Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness have been banned over the past few years. The movie Spider-Man: No Way Home was also rejected because Sony Pictures declined to remove scenes that included New York’s Statue of Liberty.
This year, Universal Pictures’ Minions: The Rise of Gru was given the thumbs-up: it takes the audience on Felonius Gru’s childhood journey to becoming a supervillain. Yet, when Gru’s plans are thrown off course, the minions save him through the guidance of Master Chow’s kung fu teachings during the Chinese New Year celebrations in San Francisco’s Chinatown.
All in all, China must be portrayed as sole supreme and a bearer of benevolence in the world.
In 2020 and 2021, China became the world’s biggest box-office, with a revenue of $7.3 billion last year. However, as of late June this year, the country’s COVID-related lockdowns plunged China’s box office revenue to $2.45 billion.
According to Stanley Rosen, a professor of Chinese politics and film at the University of Southern California, any dependency of Hollywood on China for direct film investments and access to the nation’s audience means that “Hollywood has a lot more to lose than China.”
What did the President of the People’s Republic of China tell President Biden about “owning” America?

When President Biden addressed service members at a Virginia military base last year, he said to have spent more time with President Xi Jinping of China “than any world leader has—for 24 hours of private meetings with him with just an interpreter; 17,000 miles traveling with him.” Biden added that President Xi Jinping “firmly believes that China, before the year [20]30, ’35, is going to own America because autocracies can make quick decisions.”
Furthermore, National security advisor Jake Sullivan remarked last year that the Biden administration was “looking at the impact of outbound U.S. investment flows” that could otherwise “enhance the technological capacity of our competitors in ways that harm our national security.”
Biden did not explain what was meant by “own America,” but in June of this year, Politico.com reported that a bipartisan set of House and Senate lawmakers is proposing a new “compromise for government screening” of American investments in China. The bill would provide the authority to review new investments in specific Chinese sectors, such as the semiconductor field.
Seven lawmakers, Sens. Bob Casey (D-Pa.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), and Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-N.J.), Michael McCaul (R-Texas), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.) released a statement:
Creating an outbound investment review mechanism is a critical tool as Congress works to provide guardrails on taxpayer funds and safeguards our supply chains from countries of concern, including the People’s Republic of China.
China’s stake in American companies

General Electric Company (GE)
Smithfield Foods
International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) personal computer (PC) division
Hilton Hotels

We’re not talking chump change here.
GE is a conglomerate founded in the late 19th century, incorporated in New York state and headquartered in Boston. In 2016, Haier Group, a Chinese multinational home appliances and consumer electronics company, acquired GE’s appliance division for $5.4 billion. Therefore, while GE products might be manufactured in the United States, several key decisions are made in China.
Smithfield Foods, the largest pork-producing company in the world, was founded in the 1930s and based in Virginia. In 2013, WH Group, the largest meat producer in China, announced the purchase of Smithfield for $4.72 billion. Once the U.S. government approved the purchase, the deal was valued at around $7.1 billion with debt, which included 146,000 acres of land, making WH Group one of the largest foreign owners of U.S. farmland.
Besides being famous for selling PCs and other computer hardware, IBM is known for inventing the ATM for cash withdrawal. Founded in the early 19th century, IBM is headquartered in New York. In 2005, the Chinese computer manufacturer Lenovo Group completed its $1.75 billion purchase of IBM’s PC division, creating the third-largest PC maker in the world at the time. Then, in 2014, IBM sold two server brands to Lenovo for $2.3 billion.
The luxury Hilton Hotels, founded in the mid-19th century, is a U.S. hospitality magnate. In 2016, China’s aviation and shipping conglomerate HNA Group acquired a 25 percent stake in Hilton Worldwide Holdings for $6.5 billion. In fact, earlier that year, HNA bought the hotel division of the U.S. travel management company Carlson (now known as Radisson Hotel Group) for an undisclosed sum.
A drive toward investing in America

For instance, Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway agreed to buy a 10 percent stake in BYD Company Limited, a China-based manufacturer focused on electric cars and rechargeable batteries, for around $230 million in 2008. Amid plummeting BYD shares in mid-July, financial media outlets started speculating on Buffet’s decision-making, but thus far, the value of the stake sits at $8.3 billion. Not bad.
Yet Buffet has continued to firmly believe in America’s economic progress, despite lockdown-related setbacks over the last two years. In a released 2021 letter to shareholders, the investor gently boasted that Berkshire Hathaway owns the most considerable amount of U.S. assets than any other company in the United States. And in doing so, he praised the emergence of America’s railroad industry after “150 years or so of frenzied construction, skullduggery, overbuilding, bankruptcies, reorganizations and mergers.”
The 91-year-old business magnate, in his writing, is looking at America as a young nation buzzing with grit and optimism—a view that many continue to hold and a view that many want to regain:
Since our country’s birth, individuals with an idea, ambition and often just a pittance of capital have succeeded beyond their dreams by creating something new or by improving the customer’s experience with something old…In its brief 232 years of existence…there has been no incubator for unleashing human potential like America. Despite some severe interruptions, our country’s economic progress has been breathtaking.
“Our unwavering conclusion,” he added, “Never bet against America.”
By Cameron Keegan
Cameron Keegan is an independent researcher and writer on American politics, faith, and culture affecting young people through a conservative disposition. Having worked with children, teenagers, and young adults to support their learning and development, Cameron cares deeply about the trajectory of the United States. To learn more about Cameron’s work, visit https://ckeeganan.substack.com, and for comments or questions, send an email to ckeeganan@substack.com.
Enjoy HUGE savings at My Pillow with promo code BSC.Follow The Blue State Conservative on Facebook and be sure to sign up to our Email List.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Blue State Conservative. The BSC is not responsible for, and does not verify the accuracy of, any information presented.
Notice: This article may contain commentary that reflects the author’s opinion.
Photo by Christian Lue on Unsplash