Trump says he’s allowing 600,000 Chinese students into the U.S. because “it’s very insulting to say students can’t come here…I like that their students come here…I like that other country’s students come here.”
For reference, that’s more than double the current number.
America: The country that has no self-respect. What a joke.
No need to be sorry. On the contrary, your comment is quite appropriate—we’re literally living in clown world. 
That’s only about 100 battalions. Although it seems to me from personal experience, that they somehow manage to bring family.
I never knew Trump cared about whether or not someone besides Trump was insulted.
Maybe it went down like this: China called Tim Cook and said no Chinese students, no Iphones. Tim replied maybe buy some of his shitcoin or better yet give him some of the gold you have been collecting. He loves gold. It won’t take much, I got an exemption on the tariffs for less than 100K.
By the way, I worked closely with Apple. They have a very strict policy on gifts. They won’t accept a cup of coffee. They know the psychological value of gifts.
The US government can give you five to ten for giving gifts in the health care industry.
It was probably more like this: Trump wanted to make a deal with China because he loves to say how great he is at making deals. China says, “Okay, we’ll make a deal but it’s gotta include more Chinese students at your universities.” Thus, Trump can announce what a great deal he made: “I make the best deals. This is the greatest deal in the history of deals.”
Given the state of American universities, maybe it’s not much of a loss to let them be invaded by Chinese students. I mean, what could happen? They might learn about the wonders of genderqueer intersectionality and diversity. Maybe they can take this new-found wisdom back home.
One cannot simultaneously argue that the universities are evil leftist indoctrination centers and also that it’s terrible to let ChiCom students into them. The only downside is that these universities get more money but is it any worse than the ChiComs keeping that money to use elsewhere?
I don’t think it is totally inconsistent. The good side, as you point out, is the spending of money within the US and the potential of China getting the mind virus. Although my guess is the immune system of Chinese is much better than the immune system from natives. It would be interesting to see the numbers on Chinese student enrollment in Women Studies and such.
There are at least two downsides. One is that excessive demand drives up prices. The Universities have to add more and more staff and facilities. The other downside is that it is unlikely that the total number of foreign students can be vetted. Another, pointed out by @CTLaw, is the number of foreign military aged people. On one hand we are told by TPTB that China is going to invade Taiwan and on the other hand we are told it is a good thing to have 600,000 students from China.
Come on, doc—you of all people should know better than this. If the majority of Chinese students were coming for film or gender studies, I’d say let’s throw all caution to the wind and increase the number to 6 million. The fact is that most of these students will be studying the “hard sciences”. We’re basically selling China the rope with which they will eventually hang are already hanging us.
This is just one of the many cognitive dissonances from the Trump administration that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that MAGA is a total scam. We were sold a bill of goods. We were had. Again. You gotta hand it to Trump—he (or whoever is handling him) has mastered the art of the confidence game.
Note to Self: The “Never Trumpers” were right…their TDS was totally justified.
If you think that the hard sciences are unaffected by wokery, broaden your information sources. A good start would be to read physicist Alessandro Strumia. He got canceled from CERN several years ago. Anecdotally, I can report that a physics grad student I knew at Berkeley quit there c. 2018 because it had gone woke. I unsuccessfully tried to persuade him to hang in there.
I fully expected to hear how those ChiComs would be studying engineering so it’s all fine. You’re about a decade or so behind the times. The universities are damaged beyond repair.
“fundamentals of astronomy concepts through readings in Black Studies … afrofuturist science fiction … theoreticians of color gain from turning toward cosmological reflection…|”
Pricing normal people out of these woke indoctrination centers is a feature, not a bug. In the end stages of this process, these struggle-session centers are only attended by kooky leftists and ChiComs: nostalgic for the Chinese students, I suppose. While the kooks and the ChiComs are yelling at each other about pronouns, the rest of us can get on with life in the arena.
Alternative institutions will arise and serious students will get their education elsewhere. This has happened before.
Besides the examples of wokery in the hard sciences I listed above, a few more came to mind. The professional societies have been taken over by kooks. Most of these are run by academics. For instance, the American Physical Society (APS) is fully engaged in DEI. They have policy statements on all kinds of political issues. It probably started with climate change. This particular statement, dating from 2007, caused a lot of controversy. I won’t review all the details but suffice it to say that any attempts to dispute the contents of this position statement were brutally suppressed. Nevertheless, an intrepid band of rebels (yours truly included) forced the leadership to modify the statement in 2010 (seen in the Commentary at the bottom of that page): a rambling, backpedalling addendum that is several times longer than the original statement. This controversy spurred Hal Lewis to send a scathing letter of resignation that detailed the causes and consequences of the trend.
Science journals are also compromised. The rot started in the social sciences but has progressed into the natural sciences. Once serious and prestigious such as Nature have turned into woke propaganda rags.
None of this happened overnight. It’s been almost two decades since the APS climate change controversy. Lewis’s letter was prescient inasmuch as he gives some reasons for the slide into darkness and the techniques used to suppress dissent that are used for other purposes now.
An example of such students:
There are lots of others as well.
“One of the task force’s major cases revealed how Sai Zhang, a Chinese student in California on a study visa, played a commanding role in orchestrating Sinaloa cartel fentanyl cash flows. But the system extended far beyond one trafficker, Im said, bridging into the architecture of China’s economic system itself.”
But what we need is 600,000 more Chinese students.
It’s worth avoiding the genetic fallacy – and narrowing down into how the selection process works. The problem is that the data isn’t pooled together by all different universities/colleges that take students, giving an advantage to centralized systems like CCP to threaten anyone who’s trying to integrate:
The Chinese Communist party has a range of tools at its fingertips for harassing dissidents overseas. On Monday, the US justice department announced charges against 40 officers from China’s ministry of public security, and four other officials, for allegedly running an internet troll operation against dissidents.
They making new fallacies up these days. Decisions of what to believe are a probability game. In a probability game, you would lose if you don’t utilize the genetic reality that someone thought should be called a fallacy.
The fact is that certain cultures that happen to align with certain races are not exceptionally trustworthy on average.
In particular, that site is a favorite of midwits who don’t have a real argument. Pointing and shrieking at a supposed logical fallacy is all they’ve got left.
Genetic fallacy: genes are a social construct
I asked Brave ai, here is one example:
A common example is arguing that the Volkswagen Beetle is a bad car because Hitler was involved in its development, which is irrelevant to the car’s actual quality.
Borrowing the vice president’s riposte:
I don’t give a shit what you call it.
Next time, try clicking through the hyperlink I provided.
Amusingly, Brave AI’s example was better. The “hyperlink I provided” gives a poor example inasmuch as an unreliable source is a valid reason to be skeptical. The definition of this ‘fallacy’ is given as
You judged something as either good or bad on the basis of where it comes from, or from whom it came.
Well now, where something comes from is relevant. It’s not dispositive but it is relevant.
This little exercise illustrates just how bogus and widwit-friendly that website is.
