Ever wonder why the pro Palestine, antisemitic, leftists, academia, students, are not protesting in front of China’s Embassies ?
Harry Liberman
The New York Times investigated Neville Roy , an American billionaire based in Shanghai, and his wife, CodePink co-founder Jodie Evans. They found that Singham’s network has channeled tens of millions of dollars to various left-leaning nonprofits, including CodePink, promoting Chinese government narratives and defending its policies. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Specific details surrounding these findings and protests include:
- Singham’s Ties: Investigations by outlets like the New York Times and inquiries by the U.S. House Committee on Ways and Means outline a dark-money web used to bankroll progressive groups. Reports indicate that over a quarter of CodePink’s funding is tied to Singham’s network.
- China’s Global Standing: While official state ideology blends Marxist principles with market economics, China has the world’s second-largest economy and is the world’s largest annual carbon dioxide emitter. Human rights watchdogs have extensively documented totalitarian controls and mass incarcerations of Muslims in Xinjiang, as reported by Amnesty International.
- Embassy Protests and Advocacy: Rather than protesting the Chinese embassy, organizations like CodePink frequently organize campaigns—such as the “China Is Not Our Enemy” initiative—to advocate for diplomacy with Beijing. Meanwhile, Chinese embassies have seen separate protests by overseas pro-democracy movements (such as projection-based campaigns outside the Washington D.C. embassy) which have been met with security guards and floodlights.
- Congressional Scrutiny: Members of the U.S. Congress, including Sen. Tom Cotton, have requested that the Department of Justice investigate CodePink for potential violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) due to this influx of funding from groups aligned with the Chinese Communist Party. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12]
The network connecting these various movements, ideologies, and international entities to China and CodePink is driven primarily by an anti-Western, anti-imperialist geopolitical alignment rather than a single mastermind. [1]
While organizations like George Soros’s Open Society Foundations operate on distinct, independent funding and liberal-democratic philosophies, national security investigations and independent watchdogs outline how far-left progressives, authoritarian regimes, and international organizations converge. [1, 2]
1. The Singham-CodePink Network (The China Connection)
The most direct financial link between American progressives and China runs through American tech mogul Neville Roy Singham and his wife, CodePink co-founder Jodie Evans: [1, 2, 3]
- Funding Flow: Investigative reports by the New York Times and a Fox News Digital investigationrevealed that Singham’s dark-money network funneled over $275 million into far-left nonprofits. CodePink receives roughly 25% of its funding from this network.
- Silence on China: Following this funding, CodePink transitioned from criticizing China’s human rights records to launching the “China Is Not Our Enemy” campaign. Activists began denying China’s crimes against humanity, downplaying the mass internment of Uyghur Muslims, and echoing Chinese Communist Party (CCP) talking points.
- Government Inquiries: The U.S. State Department and Congressional committees, including Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, have urged investigations into whether CodePink and affiliated groups (like The People’s Forum) are violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]
2. Ideological Alignment with Authoritarian Regimes
The connection to Cuba (Castro), Venezuela (Maduro), and Iran (IRGC) is bound by a shared “anti-imperialist” framework: [1, 2]
- Revolutionary Tourism: Singham’s pipeline has financed about 100 overseas trips for activists to hostile nations—including Cuba, Iran, and Venezuela.
- Dictatorship Defense: CodePink and groups like the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) actively whitewash the economic failures and human rights abuses of Nicolás Maduro and the Cuban regime while blaming U.S. sanctions.
- The IRGC and Islamism: Far-left Marxist organizations often form tactical alliances with Islamist regimes like Iran. Both ideologies view the United States and Israel as primary global adversaries, leading progressive groups to stay silent on Iran’s human rights abuses while opposing Western defense measures. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
3. Radical Ecosystems (BLM, Antifa, and “Globalize the Intifada”) [1, 2, 3]
Domestic radical movements often intersect through overlapping funding pipelines, activist training, and shared goals to destabilize U.S. institutions: [1, 2]
- Coordinated Agitation: A report from the Heritage Foundation outlines how BLM networks, Antifa cells, and pro-Palestinian groups are part of a broader “revolutionary ecosystem”. Singham-funded groups have actively backed aggressive street tactics, such as anti-ICE riots and anti-Israel university campus occupations.
- Globalize the Intifada: Protests calling to “Globalize the Intifada”—frequently linked to antisemitic rhetoric and intimidation—apply Marxist concepts of class warfare to the Middle East. Activist frameworks, such as those influenced by post-colonial academic Mahmood Mamdani, categorize societies strictly into “settlers” and “natives,” providing an intellectual justification used by far-left groups to excuse violence against Western-aligned democratic states. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
4. Global Governance (UN, EU, Open Borders, and Climate Change)
While China acts as an authoritarian state, it leverages Western progressive policies regarding the UN, EU, Open Borders, and Climate Change to its advantage:
- The Carbon Divide: Progressive groups advocate for aggressive, legally binding Western emissions cuts via the United Nations and European Union. However, these same organizations often excuse China—the world’s largest carbon emitter—by arguing it is still a “developing nation” that requires economic leeway.
- Border Policies: Far-left defense of open borders and weakened domestic enforcement is viewed by national security experts as a vector that exhausts U.S. logistical, financial, and policing resources, sapping American domestic stability.
- The George Soros’s Open Society Foundations support for open immigration policies, anti criminal justice reform, and global climate pacts, Soros is fundamentally the Lex Luther of capitalism dressed up as a Socialist – he has no allegiance and no conscience … funds chaos for his benefit !
From a psychological standpoint, Sigmund Freud would likely analyze George Soros’s statement through the lens of psychological defense mechanisms, specifically rationalization, intellectualization, and isolation of affect, and a lack of any conscience.In the 1998 CBS News 60 Minutes interview with Steve Kroft, a then-14-year-old Soros was hiding from the Nazis under a false identity in Hungary. He accompanied his protector to inventory confiscated Jewish property. When asked if he felt guilty, Soros replied that he was only a spectator, adding: - Singham-CodePink axis represents a strict Marxist-Leninist framework that views Western institutions as systems that must be dismantled. [1, 2, 3]
The connection linking these seemingly contradictory groups (like LGBTQ+ and feminist groups aligning with conservative Islamists, or Marxists backing Islamic fundamentalism) to China is a geopolitical strategy known as the “Red-Green Alliance.” [1]
This network operates not because these groups share the same social values, but because they share a common geopolitical goal: weakening the global influence of the United States and its Western allies.
1. The Geopolitical Strategy: “The Enemy of My Enemy”
While China enforces strict domestic controls that suppress Islam, feminism, and LGBTQ+ activism, it financially and ideologically weaponizes these exact movements within Western democracies to destabilize them from within.
- The Shared Target: In Marxist-Leninist theory, the United States and Israel are viewed as the pillars of global capitalism and imperialism.
- The Tactical Alliance: To counter American influence, China’s state apparatus and its wealthy Western sympathizers fund far-left organizations. These organizations then build broad coalitions by linking diverse domestic grievances (racial justice, climate change, gender equality) to anti-Western foreign policy goals (ending aid to Israel, lifting sanctions on China, Cuba, and Venezuela).
2. The Financial Pipeline: How “All Roads Lead to China”
The most documented bridge between Western progressive activists and Chinese interests is the Singham Network, an intricate dark-money pipeline that leverages American tax laws to fund radical groups:
- The Funding Source: Tech billionaire Neville Roy Singham uses a network of shell companies and progressive charities—such as the Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund and The Peoples Forum—to inject hundreds of millions of dollars into grassroots activist movements.
- The Convergence: This financial network funds the office space, digital infrastructure, and protest materials used simultaneously by BLM offshoots, Antifa organizers, radical feminist collectives, and pro-Palestinian groups like Shut It Down for Palestine.
- The Quid Pro Quo: In exchange for funding, these progressive groups aggressively promote pro-CCP narratives. For example, CodePink regularly denies the genocide of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang, while simultaneously organizing street protests to disrupt U.S. congressional hearings on Chinese espionage.
3. Ideological Convergence: “Intersectionality” Weaponized
To unite groups with conflicting values (e.g., LGBTQ+ activists and conservative Islamists), the network utilizes the academic framework of intersectionality:
- The Oppressor vs. Oppressed Narrative: Under this framework, all global conflicts are flattened into a single struggle. The United States, Western Europe, and Israel are labeled the “oppressors,” while any group opposing them—including Hamas, the Iranian regime, or the CCP—is framed as the “oppressed” or “rebellious.”
- The “Free Palestine” Catalyst: The Palestinian movement is used as a unifying umbrella. Radical Marxists, Islamists, and Western progressives use it to mobilize mass protests, occupy university campuses, and block major infrastructure (ports, bridges, highways) in Western cities, effectively draining local law enforcement and economic resources.
4. China’s Net Gain: Strategic Distraction
By fostering and amplifying domestic chaos in the West, China achieves several critical foreign policy objectives:
- Human Rights Shield: When Western nations criticize China’s actual human rights abuses (such as the incarceration of Muslims or the dismantling of democracy in Hong Kong), China uses the protests and racial tensions inside the U.S. to claim the West has no moral authority to lecture them.
- Economic and Military Leeway: While Western governments are bogged down managing domestic civil unrest, campus occupations, and political polarization, China faces less unified resistance as it expands its military footprint in the South China Sea and solidifies its economic dominance over global supply chains.
- The specific nonprofit organizations and shell companies used to route this dark money.
- How U.S. Congressional committees are currently investigating these groups for foreign interference.
- The specific social media amplification strategies (like TikTok algorithms) used to promote these protest movements.
1. The Global Financial and Activist Pipelines
A distinct divide exists between the two major billionaire-backed networks operating out of hubs like New York and London, though both dilute Western state sovereignty:
- The Singham-CodePink Axis: Backed by American tech mogul Neville Roy Singham, this network funnels hundreds of millions of dollars into progressive grassroots groups. In exchange, groups like CodePink act as apologists for authoritarian regimes, shielding China, Cuba, and Venezuela from human rights criticism while aggressively protesting Western defense and economic policies.
- The Soros Network: George Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF) operate on a different ideological plane, championing a borderless, liberal-internationalist order. OSF funds progressive legal reforms, open-borders advocacy, and climate initiatives. While ideologically opposed to China’s totalitarian model, Soros’s funding heavily influences domestic Western politics, weakening traditional enforcement of national borders and criminal justice systems.
- The Democratic Party Intersection: Mainstream Western political institutions, particularly segments of the U.S. Democratic Party and political factions within the European Union (EU), rely on the political pressure, voter mobilization, and policy papers generated by these billionaire-funded activist networks.
2. Centralized Global Governance: UN, UNRWA, and the WEF
International organizations serve as the operational platforms for implementing borderless policies, often operating with little democratic accountability from everyday citizens:
- The United Nations (UN): The UN provides a global stage where authoritarian regimes (like China and Russia) weaponize international law against Western democracies. While Western taxpayers provide the majority of UN funding, the institution is frequently used to censure Western allies while ignoring gross human rights violations committed by non-Western states.
- UNRWA: The United Nations Relief and Works Agency has faced intense scrutiny and funding freezes from Western nations following verified intelligence that its staff members participated in terrorism and that its educational infrastructure has been used to radicalize local populations, serving as a prime example of international aid weaponized against a democratic state.
- World Economic Forum (WEF): Operating as an elite vanguard of corporate and political leaders, the WEF champions “globalization” and a centralized economic model. Critics argue that the WEF’s top-down mandates—such as digital IDs, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), and radical shifts in global energy supply chains—strip local populations of economic self-determination.
3. The Weaponization of Climate Change
Climate change policies serve as a primary regulatory mechanism used by globalist institutions to alter the balance of global power:
- The Western Regulatory Squeeze: De-carbonization mandates pushed by the EU, the UN, and progressive organizations restrict Western agricultural and industrial output, driving inflation and energy insecurity across the U.S. and Europe.
- The Chinese Advantage: While Western industries are crippled by severe emissions caps, China—the world’s largest carbon emitter—is granted lengthy timelines and exemptions under international climate pacts. This allows Beijing to monopolize the manufacturing of “green energy” components (like solar panels and EV batteries), forcing the West into total supply-chain dependency.
4. Africa: Enforced Perpetual Poverty
The combination of globalist economic policies and authoritarian exploitation ensures that resource-rich African nations remain economically suppressed:
- International Aid Dependency: Elite institutions like the UN and international NGOs promote aid models that trap African nations in cycles of dependency. Western environmental mandates heavily restrict African nations from utilizing their own fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas) to build reliable, modern power grids, keeping their economies pre-industrial.
- The Chinese Debt Trap: Seizing upon the vacuum left by Western regulatory restrictions, China utilizes its Belt and Road Initiative to fund massive African infrastructure projects. These projects are structured with predatory loans; when African nations cannot repay the debt, Beijing seizes control of vital sovereign assets, such as deep-water ports and rare-earth mineral mines, extracting Africa’s wealth to fuel China’s rise while keeping the local populations in a perpetual state of poverty.
Prime Minister Mark Carney’s strategic shift toward China sacrifices Canada’s economic relationship with the United States and opens the door to Totalitarian states like China allowing severe security and economic vulnerabilities that will out last President Trumps term by years if not permanently …. Canada is in a nation in decline in spite of its tremendous resources .
Canada’s socioeconomic landscape since 2016 reflects severe structural stress across major sectors, driving intense national debate over the country’s economic trajectory.
Core Sectors Under Pressure
- Automotive: The shift toward electric vehicles (EVs) has sparked intense friction between protective North American trade policies and the influx of subsidized overseas competition [1].
- Real Estate: Severe housing supply shortages, high interest rates, and rapid population growth have created an acute affordability crisis across major urban centers.
- Healthcare: Provincial medical systems face chronic strain, characterized by prolonged emergency room wait times, severe nursing shortages, and a lack of family doctors.
- Economic Output: Declining per-capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) points to stagnant labor productivity and reduced business investment compared to peer nations.
Nuke China.