Walz’s China Connection: A Closer Look

Tim Walz, poised as Kamala Harris’s running mate in what is being touted as the most progressive ticket in US history, has a long and intricate history with China that raises critical questions about his political alignment and fitness for high office. While Walz’s defenders argue that his relationship with China is more nuanced than his critics claim, his socialist leanings, handling of domestic issues in Minnesota, and controversial comments make him a figure of concern. More importantly, the obvious signs of a Maoist future under his potential influence should raise the biggest red flags—red flags adorned with a solitary yellow star.

Yes, we have to review his military record. Yes, we should explore his personal politics. But we are missing the biggest story… his associations with China. He is not only a person accused of selling out his fellow brothers in arms with his service record but also a clear indication of selling us out to China.

Delving into his connections reveals a troubling pattern of engagement with Chinese interests that raises serious questions about his loyalty and intentions. His dealings suggest a willingness to compromise American values and security for personal gain or political leverage. As we uncover more about his ties to China, it becomes evident that the implications of his actions could have far-reaching consequences for our nation’s integrity and sovereignty.

Walz’s China Connection: A Closer Look

Walz’s association with China began in 1989 when he participated in a Harvard University volunteer program, teaching American history and English at Foshan No 1 High School in southern China. This experience was significant enough for Walz to later organize annual summer educational trips to China with his wife Gwen, a venture that lasted over a decade. By his own estimation, Walz returned to China around 30 times. Critics argue that such deep ties with a nation often at odds with American values could compromise his ability to prioritize US interests, especially in sensitive geopolitical matters.

“Tim Walz was authorized to teach in China through Harvard’s WorldTeach initiative during the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre – visiting the site during his two year stint. Despite that experience Walz was allowed by the CCP to start a business to bring American students to China every year between 1994 and 2003 – totaling more than 30 visits over the years. Walz does NOT believe the US should treat China as an adversary.” Source

Despite his frequent travels and engagements in China, Walz’s record on human rights has been outwardly critical of the Chinese government. As a congressman, he met with high-profile figures like the Dalai Lama and Hong Kong democracy activist Joshua Wong, both seen as enemies of the Chinese state. His backing of the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act, which imposed sanctions on Chinese and Hong Kong officials for human rights abuses, further cements his seemingly adversarial stance towards the Chinese government. However, his earlier comments advocating for a non-adversarial relationship between the US and China have been seized upon by opponents as evidence of a potential soft stance on China’s authoritarian regime.

Walz’s Domestic Policies: A Record of Controversy

Walz’s political trajectory within the US is equally contentious. His tenure as Governor of Minnesota has been marred by several controversial decisions that highlight his socialist inclinations. During the civil unrest following the murder of George Floyd, Walz faced significant criticism for his handling of the situation, which many felt allowed Minneapolis to descend into chaos. His approach, seen as too lenient and accommodating to rioters, drew ire from both local citizens and national observers. Critics argue that Walz’s leadership during this period exemplifies a broader trend of pandering to extreme left-wing elements, rather than upholding law and order.

One of the more bizarre and controversial policies under Walz’s governorship was the decision to place tampons in men’s restrooms in Minnesota schools. This policy, part of a broader agenda to promote inclusivity, was widely ridiculed and seen as a misallocation of resources, especially given more pressing issues in the state’s education system. Such moves are often cited by his opponents as evidence of his willingness to prioritize fringe social issues over pragmatic governance.

Walz’s Stance on Abortion and Socialism

Walz’s support for late-term abortion has also been a point of significant contention. His stance aligns with the most extreme positions within the Democratic Party, further cementing his reputation as a far-left politician. Critics highlight comments he made defending these policies, arguing that his views on abortion are out of step with mainstream American values and represent a dangerous shift towards more radical social policies.

Adding fuel to the fire, Walz has been quoted making statements that reflect a deep-seated belief in socialist principles. For instance, his assertion that “another man’s socialism is another man’s safety net” has been used by critics to underscore his ideological leanings. Such comments suggest a fundamental misunderstanding of the economic principles that underpin American society and have fueled concerns about his potential influence on national policy should he ascend to the vice presidency.

The Implications of a Harris-Walz Ticket

The decision to place Walz on the ticket with Kamala Harris represents a significant gamble by the Democratic Party. Harris herself is often seen as one of the most progressive figures in American politics, and her alignment with Walz only amplifies this perception. Together, they form a ticket that is arguably the most progressive in US history, a fact that is likely to energize the Democratic base while alienating more moderate and conservative voters.

Walz’s critics argue that his deep connections with China, coupled with his socialist-leaning policies and controversial domestic decisions, make him a particularly dangerous choice for national office. They assert that his record indicates a propensity to prioritize ideological purity over pragmatic governance, a stance that could have severe consequences for the country.

In the context of US-China relations, Walz’s historical ties and previous comments advocating for a cooperative relationship are seen as red flags. While his congressional record shows a willingness to confront China on human rights issues, the depth of his personal connections and business ventures in the country leave room for doubt about his true stance. This ambiguity is particularly troubling at a time when US-China relations are fraught with tension and competition.