Conversation 670-023

Transcript (AI-Generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite this transcript as authoritative. Consult the Finding Aid above for verified information.

Thank you.

You know, this is my position for Mr. Francis.

From the very start, I've learned from the very start what it means to talk about him.

You know, Doctor, it's your...

I'm sorry.

Well, I very much appreciate Mr. Mallow's coming to Washington.

And I remember our meeting in Paris in 1969.

And of course, I have followed all of his writings, and particularly his .

I remember very well the day of the meeting in Paris in 1969, and of course, I followed everything you wrote, especially the words you wrote to me, since the meeting is coming to an end.

There is no doubt that it is naturally good luck to pay for the rights of the people.

Well, that is one part of many of the observations.

There's relations of truth in relation to God.

I noted that in Mr. Smalley's analysis that he indicated that the German model had a great suspicion with regard to the new generation of Jews.

and also many of the intellectuals.

What is the reason for that, and will it last?

I would like to ask you, Mr. Prime Minister, you said that the current president wants to have a lot of suspicion towards the new generation, towards the government, and also towards many intellectuals.

And I ask you, what do you think is the reason, and is it justified?

I would like to ask the Prime Minister.

Well, I first had to answer one question first. .

Yes.

At that time, he claimed to be concerned about youth, but that was not altogether true.

What was true is that he wanted to use the youth, the young people, as a map for the action of the army.

I am here in a non-culturel evolution, to be a proletarian, a cultural proletarian, to be not a parochialist, which is an appearance of contestation.

I am here without being a proletarian.

The revolution, which is to not be called a cultural revolution, a proletarian cultural revolution, was not carried out by the young people in China.

From there you only have an appearance of disagreement, which is something that we had in China in 1968, but actually it was carried out by the government.

The group was not created today, but it was 80% diverse in that whole group of people in China.

Yes.

Now, in the case of the intellectuals, Judy Mao was not really very interested in the intellectuals.

What she was interested in was the party.

Mao was the party, and the party was firm, clever, people who knew how to read, and more people were not as clever.

Yes, what he wanted to do was to teach the young people how to read, but these would be young people who would become demolished and not like the youth, traumatized.

And he won.

But I still immensely believe that the Chinese revolution will eventually take the same course as the Russian revolution or what Mao and his successors viewed to maintain the

the quality which is based, you know, on the peasantry rather than on the workers or the proletariat.

I would like to ask you, Mr. Prime Minister, if you think that the Chinese Revolution was fought in the same court as the Russian Revolution, or is it that President Lamar and his successors were able to maintain the quality of the Chinese Revolution, which was based mainly on the people and not necessarily on the workers behind it?

I don't have any doubts.

I have no doubt that it will follow the course of the Russian revolution insofar as this is possible.

And why do the Chinese hate the Russians now?

Because the Russian consumer goods cannot be achieved or attained by the Chinese, so you have this problem between the two.

Did he believe, then, that Christianity was true?

the Chinese, and the Gentile, and the Negro line, that would agree to meet with the American president.

I have a very fundamental question for you, Mr. Prime Minister.

When you wrote your book in 1965, did you think, or did you think that in 1971 or 1972, that the Chinese leaders, or Mr. Kuo-Iwai, would have accepted to return to the United States?

It was inevitable.

Even with the war in Vietnam, so long now.

Not long ago, in Vietnam, I presume?

Oh, yes.

Well, yes, I think so, because Chinese action in Vietnam is an imposter.

In the old time, I don't know if you know this, but I don't know if you know this, but I don't know if you know this,

And then, after that, they can speak, but speak, speak, and then just come back.

It's too long.

Oh.

Yes, I mean, one of those is to be very careful of dates here when you think about this, because at the time when China was being enormously helpful to Vietnam, what was happening was that it was permitted the passage of Russian arms through China to Vietnam, and this was at the time when the friendship between China and Russia was not part of the right thing.

And then, uh, starting, uh, it was when you saw the beginning of the conflict between, uh, the Senate and Russia, from that time on, everything the attorneys have said about Vietnam has been absolutely false.

All they have done is to help with the structure, and that's all.

Let's see if we can get out of here to face these things first.

And you get nothing to do with that.

China has never involved anyone, be it Pakistan or Vietnam.

Chinese foreign policy is a lie of genius.

It's a virtuous lie.

And the Chinese themselves don't believe in it.

The Chinese believe in the Germans.

then the Minister does not, as he still believes, that the Chinese foreign policy has not been and will not be in a future experience.

In my belief, China has no foreign policy.

It is certainly a myth in which the West believes, and there is no truth to it.

And I will explain it to you. .

You take it back, don't you?

That feels good.

Oh.

It feels lovely.

You must receive respect from your father and take care of him as you take care of your own son or daughter.

No.

As Tony last said, China is a continent.

China can be seen as an Australian.

There are certain small framing problems, which I may deal with later, but what is essential to them is China itself, what is inside of China.

And if China has to receive the Sultan of Zanabar, for example, China will do so, just as China will receive you.

Mr. Nixon, that essentially they do not understand the world outside.

You find that they feel that they must eat very poorly in order to preserve justice.

And what this essentially means is that all of their foreign policy revolves around one serious point, and that is their domestic policy.

That's right.

No, no, no.

There is no real issue.

How do you mean that they can't?

They've raised me from hundreds of dead to be one.

They've gotten to the point where it's all clear that she is the son of God.

They've helped mothers and children.

I don't know.

You didn't like it?

Lorsque Jean-Pierre dit qu'on nous a tenus, personne ne pourra combattre mes luttes.

Ce que je lui ai montré, il nous l'a dit.

There is a great place where I am, where the world is against me.

What I haven't understood yet.

But what we don't understand yet, it's important, and that's why I'm here today.

Some of the things that got turned around had one fear, Mr. President, and that was that either the Americans or the Russians with 10,000 bombs would be able to destroy the county industrial centers and set China back 15 years, and then China would be set back 15 years, and now we'll be at death by that time.

And what Chairman Martin told me at that time was that when I will have six atomic bombs, no one will dare to attempt to bomb my city.

The time, as you said, he didn't understand what Chairman Martin meant.

Then Chairman Martin said that the United States, the Americans will never use atomic bombs against me.

I guess, again, Mr. Marbury says he didn't understand, but what you don't understand is important, and that's why he's repeating it for you.

I did not ask Chairman Marbury questions about it, because one does not ask Chairman Marbury questions.

What about the reason the Chinese might have used the lab gate in the United States?

We have our agents of purpose, but we see what their agents are.

Good morning.

Okay.

Well, first of all, all of the children and young politics in the past 20 years has not been a revolutionary policy at all, but a policy of righting the standard of living.

Il ne peut faire qu'un amortissement d'une beauté à cette coche que sur un minimum d'inspiration.

And he cannot carry out his writing of the standard of rural agricultural standing of living unless there is a minimum that he must carry out.

He has not received any of the benefits we have been holding to keep him clean.

This is not what he has been told.

He has not received any of the benefits we have been holding to keep him clean.

They don't have the capability of making small machines.

They're not capable of making heavy machines.

And they expect them, they hope, to take them from you.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

One more thing, one very important thing about this.

In fact, they're all together this equipment for me, but they can't pay for it. .

And yet the only one who's in a position to be able to provide them with this is the social credit, so that the machines will be paid for every 20 years.

Right.

The whole time you're out on the street, you're going to have to pay for 20 days of money.

You're going to have to pay for 20 days of money.

And the interesting part is that for a long time, he never thought that she would agree to such a thing.

But now the new thing, I'll mention it, the new thing, as soon as they hear it, is that they're no longer sure, particularly as far as mine, that it's not, that it's no longer true, and that there is some possibility of negotiation.

Mr. Minister, what does the Secretary of State know?

How is this consistent with the other point that you made in your book, that the Chinese media are all apologizing about self-reliance?

That, for example, when the Russians are all crazy,

that Miles, that Joe Miles, if you've heard of this, that maybe it was a good thing because it taught them to depend on themselves.

Would not that also be their attitude toward trading credits with the United States?

I'm not sure I asked this question.

but I would like to see the compatibility and coherence of what you have said and what you have written, and others as well, on the human attitude, which is almost pathological, for what it is to be independent and to think only of oneself.

You said that now everything is in danger, and that's a good thing, because it will have a great impact on the region tomorrow.

And won't there be a trade talk tomorrow with the American president?

I don't know, but I'll ask you the question.

Thank you.

Yes.

I said this will depend on your dialogue.

Now, please, if this doesn't work out, what will happen is they'll say exactly what they said is in the case of the Russians.

Well, this is fine.

We'll just go around and do everything by ourselves.

But if it really doesn't work for the Russians,

then I think that they would be quite satisfied, quite pleased, just something that, along those lines, would work out.

But one thing that I think you must be careful about when I say this is what I wrote day five, five years ago, and it's my belief that their obsession with their standard of living versus the revolution is continuing to grow this year.

I don't believe you're not coming back to this.

I don't want to church.

I see that you think that the question of the president is not the question of the president.

The president is the president of a world policy that is not a political policy.

Yes, yes, yes.

Because for me, this name is not my name.

It's my name.

So I'd like to ask the following.

I don't see you in order to solve economic problems.

If, indeed, some of the problems of that nature are worked out, well, that will be fine.

I think there's going to be a few of us who will do that.

at all about healing the Muslims in Canada.

So I'll tell you what I think he expects to discuss with you and what he's looking for.

What he wants to know from you is to know whether the President of the United States has a world plan, a world plan, to simplify ideas.

I'll use the Marshall Plan as an example.

Do you have a world plan?

Because I, my wife, do not have one.

I have a Chinese policy, but actually I only don't have one.

And I thought that I just pretended I had one, I claimed I had one, and I hope to not turn around.

Whether President Nixon is pretending or whether he indeed does have a world policy, whether he does want to work out,

a moral policy.

And if indeed he does want to have a policy, he has one, then we can work something out.

If he does not have a policy, then we cannot work it out.

One that you mustn't forget, the Vietnam Affair absolutely delighted Trevor.

In fact,

In fact, he told me that what he called the Dulles policy was the best thing that could have happened to time.

And I know that he was the prince of Rome because the king of Rome changed his view on it.

When we say that the Chinese do not have a world policy, how does the minister account for

the Chinese-African policy, for example, two or three years ago.

For example, he mentioned in his book the event where the Chinese government, the prime minister of Samadhi with 2,000 dancers and 300,000 people,

Is that ?

Or does it have to do with the revolution, the support of the revolution and the enforcement of all of the political and the smaller countries and the main science countries?

When we say that the Chinese do not have a global policy, how do you explain, Mr. Prime Minister, the policy that you have discussed, for example?

There are two things.

The first is that there is a complete revolution in the history of this country.

The second is that there is always a reception of good people.

Although it is a lie.

It's a complete lie.

It's just my kind of stuff.

It's nothing but pictures and pictures of small pieces of state.

What do they have to do with it?

One day, Mr. Kessler, she will find herself dealing with the face of the Colossus.

But he is a colossus who will turn his face to death.

Because he told me he did not have a successor.

Your father's not a successor.

Yes.

I'm sure he does not want to do it.

Of course, it's always hard to tell, because when the time comes, this immense drama that the death of Ronald will be for time, it's possible that he will change.

But for the moment, he certainly doesn't want it.

And in fact, the only thing he wants is foreign policy.

He doesn't even care about being prime minister.

Could I get the minister's opinion on what was the farm out of the issue?

the United States and Japan and the United States and China.

will have, will determine the fate of the Pacific.

Looking at the world, the relationship between the United States and the Soviet, and between the Soviet Union and China, could well determine the fate of the world.

The critical question is

Is the breach between the Soviet Union and China one that has caused Soviet a change in top command, or is it a breach which is transitory, having a lot of personalities and media policies running the fundamental

but everything cannot be resolved.

The question that I wanted to ask you was about the future, the relationship between the United States and Japan, between the United States and Africa.

This certainly will determine the fate of the Pacific, and we are looking at the fate of the world in particular.

And in the case of relations between the Soviet Union and Russia, the Soviet Union has created this to determine the fate of the world.

And I have a few questions for you.

Do you think that this conflict between the anti-ethnic movement and the women is due to reasons that are so profound that a change of direction will not affect and will not lead to this state of things?

Or is it really a question of the children of the victor, which is mainly based on the questions of personality or the questions of immediate politics?

Mr. President, we have two questions and I would like to answer them separately.

I think the first question that we're going to have to deal with is what is the near future for us in terms of the great powers and the great forces in the Pacific?

This cannot have great immediate consequences with respect to the Soviet Union, or with respect to Panama.

Oh, no.

Yes.

Let's suppose that you do work out a thorough, deliberate policy that you decide to pursue, and that in such an event you will gain time, because in that case, both China and Russia will go all the way to the revolution, and will concentrate everyone on the question of the standard of living, and therefore China will have ever greater need of you.

Yes.

As far as the issue of personal, the first time I've been involved, I don't think that this is important because the successor of Stalin is necessarily Khrushchev, and I believe that Mao's successor will be necessarily a good bit lesser of a constraint than Mao.

You know what?

Mom is going to pick up when he sees you.

When he sees you come in, he's going to take you inside.

He's so much younger than I am.

I'm catching up with that.

But I asked to, I noticed that Mr. Morrow, along with General McLaughlin, who also sat in his chair, this is his chair of presence,

believe that the United States should withdraw from Vietnam.

And it was certainly an opinion that they could use of the gentleman before me.

But looking at it,

Looking at U.S. policy in the Pacific, let me turn to Japan.

If the United States gets to have a viable foreign policy in the Pacific,

Does Mr. Maduro believe that the United States should withdraw, basically, anti-Pacific power, not only from China, but should we move away from our Japanese and our Korean independence?

Now, this is the, this is the line coming, these handrails.

But would that serve the cause of world peace?

Well, you know, my personal defense, I mean,