Responding to reporters at the White House, Donald Trump has made it crystal clear that if he deems the protests in Los Angeles an "insurrection," he won't hesitate to invoke the Insurrection Act to crush the L.A. "rebellion." He's even warned off any would-be demonstrators at the US Army's 250th-anniversary parade in Washington D.C., promising they "will be met with a very powerful force." The message couldn't be plainer.
Where’s the egg-and-wall metaphor now?
Upping the ante, Trump told soldiers at Fort Bragg that Los Angeles is being invaded by a "foreign enemy." After lambasting California Governor Gavin Newsom, he vowed he would not tolerate "this anarchy" or "allow federal personnel to be attacked," especially after seeing “rioters bearing foreign flags with the aim of continuing a foreign invasion” in Los Angeles. In his view, this is an all-out assault on American sovereignty, and for that reason, he needs to "liberate" the city. It’s quite the rhetorical escalation, isn't it?
Trump Flips the Script
Make no mistake, the White House's move to rebrand this as a "June Riot" is a game-changer. Those on the streets are no longer mere "illegal immigrants"; they're now participants in a "foreign invasion." As The New York Times notes, the Insurrection Act gives the military carte blanche to "suppress an insurrection." Suddenly, the playbook used for decades in other countries is being read aloud in the heart of the empire.
To put it bluntly, Trump is done with half-measures. He's not the one who will be shedding any tears; he's leaving that for the rebels. Given the context, it’s highly likely we'll see bloodshed on American streets this weekend. This is a confrontation between the egg and the high wall, and it's never pretty. Let's call it what it is: the brink of civil war.
Of course, the usual suspects online are piling on Trump, claiming the protests were perfectly manageable until he decided to bring in the military. But that fundamentally misunderstands his strategy. Trump is a devotee of "maximum pressure." Anyone who wrote him off as a paper tiger and called him TACO (Trump Always Chickens Out) is the real source of the trouble. Now the Democratic Party and the "anti-Trump" camp are forced into a high-stakes "Game of Chicken." The question is, are they willing to call his bluff?
Cutting Off the Head of the Snake
Here's the thing: Trump is holding a strong hand and has little to fear. While the United States is now bogged down in its very own "colour revolution," Trump had the foresight to dispatch Elon Musk to dismantle the "Global Colour Revolution Development Bureau"—what you and I know as USAID—the moment he took office. It's the ultimate irony.
As a result, while "rebellions" have flared up across American cities, there isn't a single US consulate on the ground to "pump in money," "coordinate" efforts, or "handle propaganda." Their impact has been severely blunted. The professional, black-clad activists on the front lines might be well-drilled, but once the Insurrection Act is triggered, the Marines won't be handing out flowers. The only outcome will be a panicked, disorderly retreat.
So long as the White House successfully quells this "rebellion," the so-called "civil war" everyone's panicking about will fizzle out. There's no role here for a latter-day Abraham Lincoln. So, relax. And here's another prediction: you'll see a lot of opportunists in America, much like Musk, rush to admit their mistakes and get back in line. I reckon America will be great again before you know it.
As for whether Sweden can bring itself to award Trump the Nobel Peace Prize this year – well, that’s story for another day.
The Politics of Eggs and Walls
On that note, have you ever wondered why the Japanese author Haruki Murakami seems destined never to win the Nobel Prize? My guess—and it's only a guess—is that the problem traces back to his 2009 speech in Jerusalem. With Gaza under relentless bombardment, he took a trip to Isreal, against the wish of many in Japan, to accept the Jerusalem Prize, a prestigious literary award. At the prize presentation ceremony, he gave his now-famous speech, declaring he would "always stand on the side of the egg" against the wall.
This is a lesson for the people of Hong Kong. Backed by our motherland, the city spent three years using its wisdom and courage to defeat a "colour revolution" of its own, moving from chaos to prosperity. But that's not enough to win a Nobel Peace Prize, because the primary currency for that award is a very specific brand of Western-approved "democracy and freedom." At the end of the day, both Murakami's egg and China's Hong Kong are standing on the wrong side of the wrong wall.
Perhaps the only sensible path forward for Hong Kong, then, is to simply double down on national and patriotic education.
Deep Blue
** 博客文章文責自負,不代表本公司立場 **
