Ep. 2426 - EVERYBODY’S LYING: Trump Outplays China’s Xi!

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Ben Shapiro Show – Ep. 2426: EVERYBODY’S LYING: Trump Outplays China’s Xi!
Date: May 14, 2026
Host: Ben Shapiro (The Daily Wire)

---

Episode Overview

This episode centers on President Trump's recent high-stakes diplomatic trip to China, unpacking the U.S.-China power dynamic, recent geopolitical developments involving Iran, American energy dominance, and critical discussions around technological infrastructure and political demagoguery. Host Ben Shapiro argues against the mainstream media narrative that China holds the leverage, asserting instead that America is "winning" via energy, commerce, and strategic alliances. Later segments touch on Democratic criticism of Trump, domestic political battles (notably the LA mayoral race), and a recurring theme: the dangers of "dumb" economic and geopolitical commentary in the U.S. public sphere.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

---

1. Media Narratives vs. Actual Geopolitics

• Media Prediction: Mainstream outlets (NYT, WaPo, Economist, CNN) predict Trump will be outmatched by China’s Xi Jinping.
• Ben’s Rebuttal (00:00–04:00):
  • Trump secured significant concessions: China agrees to help keep the Strait of Hormuz open (without Iranian tolls), oppose Iranian nuclear armament, and buy more American oil.
  • Media’s portrayal of China as dominant is false; China faces "demographic problems, debt totaling 300% of GDP, collapsed Belt and Road Initiative, and a major energy crisis."
• Notable quote (00:00):

  “Trump just got China to commit to opening the Strait of Hormuz without Iranian tolls… Also buying more American oil. So that’s called winning, not losing.” — Ben Shapiro

---

2. Democratic Criticisms and U.S. Leverage

• Democrats claim Trump will "concede to China" or empower Chinese ambitions.
• Ben counters, noting Trump’s record on China is tougher than any president in recent memory.
• Middle East Oil Reality (03:45):
  • China relies on Middle Eastern oil; current U.S. embargoes have cut supply to near zero.
  • U.S. leverage comes from oil dominance and weakening China’s strategic position.

---

3. Ceremonial Optics in China

• Trump met with choreographed, flag-waving students—a Chinese intimidation tactic, according to Ben (07:10).
• “Color me unimpressed... forcing small children to jump up and down and wave flags and flowers... Is it like, what, first child who stops gets shot?” (07:34)
• Xi greeted U.S. cabinet awkwardly, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is under Chinese sanctions.

---

4. Diplomatic Outcomes – The Real Readout

• American version:
  • Enhanced commercial access for U.S. businesses in China.
  • Commitment to halt fentanyl flows, increase Chinese agricultural purchases.
  • Joint statement affirming Strait of Hormuz must remain open, no Iranian tolls, and Iran must never get a nuclear weapon.
  • Chinese version:
    • Emphasizes Taiwan as the central issue; no evidence the U.S. made Taiwan concessions.
• Ben’s analysis (19:14, 24:02):
  • China’s shifting strategy indicates weakness, not strength.
  • U.S. dominance in oil and technology are leveraged for security and deterrence.

---

5. The “Thucydides Trap” and China’s Strategy

• Xi invokes “mutual respect,” “peaceful coexistence,” and the avoidance of Thucydides trap—the theory that rising powers inevitably clash with established ones.
• Ben’s take (19:14): China isn’t the rising Athens; rather, it is a declining power becoming desperate. The U.S.’s best move is “boxing in” China with strategic alliances and economic leverage.
• Notable quote (19:14):

  “China is not Athens, and we are not Sparta. China is not in fact the rising power and we are not the declining power.” — Ben Shapiro

---

6. Impact of the Iran Conflict on Chinese Power

• The Iran war notably hurts China (oil cutoff, economic instability) more than the U.S.
• China may need to distance itself from Iran for energy security.
• Christopher O’Day (Hudson Institute) segment (47:11 – 57:43):
  • China’s global port infrastructure gives them influence but can’t compensate for deep internal weaknesses (debt, failing local governments, demographic crisis).
  • U.S. still holds substantial “real” power; China’s leverage is asymmetric (ports/logistics, but not direct military or economic supremacy).

---

7. U.S. Energy Dominance – The Game Changer

• U.S. now the world’s top oil and LNG producer (27:20).
  • From 2016 to 2025, crude exports exploded from 500k to nearly 7 million bpd.
• This self-sufficiency and export power have upended global geopolitics: “We control the means of production... and distribution” (28:40).
• Comparison: Venezuela has more oil but little ability to export due to nationalization/debt.
• Notable quote (29:08):

  “America is economically, in terms of natural resources, in terms of tech, blowing all of our opposition out of the water.” — Ben Shapiro

---

8. Dangers of Economic Illiteracy in Public Debate

• Ben criticizes public figures (e.g., Joe Rogan) for promoting "nationalize the oil industry" as a solution to high prices.
  • Argues this would strangle innovation and U.S. geostrategic power.
• Notable quote (34:25):

  “The United States oil industry is dominant, planetarily dominant. The solution to nationalize Oil. It's legitimately insane.” — Ben Shapiro

---

9. Artificial Intelligence, Data Centers, and Competing with China

• Shapiro blasts “Luddite” opposition to large U.S. AI data centers, warning it hands advantage to China.
• He cites polling showing public opposition to AI infrastructure, driven by misinformation and demagoguery from both left and right.
• Exchange with Tucker Carlson and Kevin O’Leary on AI:
  • O’Leary: “By building a data center that trains AI... we create millions of jobs.” (42:12)
  • Tucker is skeptical; Ben accuses this “defeatism” endangers U.S. leadership.
• Notable quote (43:57):

  “His solution is to lose to them by claiming the United States, if we build data centers, will be just like China. ... Tucker seems completely unbothered by actually losing to China.” — Ben Shapiro

---

10. China’s Global Port Influence (Christopher O’Day Interview)

• China’s long-term port concessions worldwide function as “an operating system for the global economy.”
  • “They have all these long-term seats at the table ... they’ve basically installed what I call the operating system of the global economy.” — Christopher O’Day (47:25)
• These agreements provide leverage and supply chain dominance, but can’t remedy China’s bigger systemic challenges.
• Ben: “Decline for the United States is a choice... we’re not watching a Thucydides trap, we are watching a window closing for China.”

---

11. Domestic Politics: LA Mayoral Race & Progressive Criticism

• Coverage of Democrats’ attacks on Spencer Pratt, calling him “mini Trump” and “fascist.”
• Pratt rebuts accusations (59:27), describes personal security risks and threats tied to his candidacy.
• Karen Bass emphasizes fixing homelessness by giving the unhoused “comprehensive dental care,” which Ben mocks.
• Debate over AI-generated attack ads in the mayoral race.
• Notable quote (60:50):

  "We're not going to stop them from taking the meth, we'll just give them George Washington's teeth." — Ben Shapiro

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “[Trump] just got China to commit to opening the Strait of Hormuz without Iranian tolls… That’s called winning, not losing.” — Ben Shapiro (00:00)
• “Color me unimpressed with all of this... the government is so creepy.” — Ben Shapiro on orchestrated Chinese ceremonies (07:34)
• “China is not in fact the rising power and we are not the declining power.” — Ben Shapiro (19:14)
• “America is economically, in terms of natural resources, in terms of tech, blowing all of our opposition out of the water.” — Ben Shapiro (29:08)
• "The United States oil industry is dominant, planetarily dominant. The solution to nationalize Oil. It's legitimately insane." — Ben Shapiro (34:25)
• “They have all these long-term seats at the table ... they’ve basically installed what I call the operating system of the global economy.” — Christopher O’Day (49:30)
• “We’re not going to stop them from taking the meth, we’ll just give them George Washington’s teeth.” — Ben Shapiro (60:50)

---

Key Timestamps for Major Segments

• 00:00 — Opening salvo: Trump's China "victory" and media skepticism
• 03:45 — Debunking the “China leverage” myth, U.S. real power
• 07:10–10:30 — China’s ceremonial pageantry, optics of the summit
• 11:24–13:19 — Christopher O’Day: China’s interests in the Gulf and impact of Iran war
• 15:05–19:14 — Xi’s rhetoric, Thucydides trap, U.S. and China’s strategic calculus
• 27:20–33:49 — America’s oil and gas dominance: shifting global geopolitics
• 33:49–36:19 — Critique of Rogan’s oil nationalization arguments
• 37:00–45:23 — The AI/data center debate: infrastructure, employment, and competition with China (exchange with Tucker Carlson, Kevin O’Leary)
• 47:11–57:43 — Christopher O’Day interview: China’s global port infrastructure and real U.S. advantages
• 57:53–61:44 — LA mayoral race: Spencer Pratt, Democratic attacks, and homelessness policy

---

Summary Takeaways

• Ben Shapiro frames the U.S.-China relationship as tilting in America’s favor, underpinned by energy dominance, technological innovation, and strategic alliances in the Middle East and Asia. He rebuffs widely-circulated “declinist” arguments, arguing instead that China’s many internal crises and dependence on U.S. and allied markets have left it desperate, not ascendant.
• The episode is a warning against ill-informed economic and political analysis, whether from media, politicians, or cultural commentators—which, Ben argues, risks sabotaging America’s hard-won advantages.
• Large-scale technological and energy infrastructure projects are cast as vital to America's future, not to be stymied by populist or Luddite backlash.
• Domestic political parallels are drawn, with Ben suggesting that the same mentality threatening strong U.S. policy abroad also undermines common-sense leadership at home.

---

For listeners interested in the nuts and bolts of current U.S.-China relations, the state of global energy politics, and the intersection of domestic and foreign policy debates, this episode offers a brisk, combative, and unapologetically conservative analysis.

Transcript

[Ben Shapiro]

You've been hearing all week long that President Trump was going to get rolled by the Chinese. They have all the leverage. Trump is going to chicken out. China is on the rise. Wrong. Trump just got China to commit to opening the Strait of Hormuz without Iranian tolls, opposing Iran ever having a nuclear weapon, and also buying more American oil. So that's called winning, not losing. I'll give you all the details in just a moment. Plus, we'll also talk about people who hate the idea of American hegemony or don't understand basic economics or both.

[Guest or Co-host (possibly a producer or secondary commentator)]

And.

[Ben Shapiro]

And how these folks threaten America's dominant global position. Plus, we'll get to the Democratic attempt to stop Spencer Pratt from becoming mayor of la. This is the Ben Shapiro Show. So if you listen to the legacy media, President Trump had none of the cards. He's going over to Beijing and he's in Beijing, and this means that he's now going to get shellacked. The New York Times had a bunch of headlines all saying the same thing with about the same credibility as a Nick Kristoff column on rape dogs. The New York Times had a headline that said, quote, as Trump lands in Beijing, Xi holds the high ground on trade and Iran. Does he, though? Does he? The New York Times, why Xi doesn't need a deal with Trump. The Washington Post, A president bogged down how the Iran war stripped Trump of leverage with Xi. The Economist, the art of the Heel. Why Donald Trump is on the back foot in Beijing for foreign affairs. The diluted superpower. Why the Beijing summit favors Xi's long game. Cnn Trump heads to China as a suitor, not a conqueror. Time magazine why Xi Jinping is the real winner of Trump's second term foreign policy. All of this is a lie. None of this is true. The reality is that China is in historically weak position, truly weak position. China is having serious trouble with its export markets. China. China has massive debt. China has demographic problems. And now China is missing its oil supply, as we'll get to in a little bit. Democrats, meanwhile, are trying to claim that President Trump is going to go over to Beijing and suddenly surrender, which, again, that seems like that's more of a democratic thing. In the recent past, after all, it was Bill Clinton who decided it was important to bring China into the World Trade Organization. Here's Chuck Schumer talking about President Trump supposedly caving to the Chinese. We all ought to fear what Donald Trump may concede to China just so he can claim a headline. Trump has fantasized about $1 trillion in Chinese investments In America, that would give the Chinese a stranglehold on our economy, threaten our supply chains, our economic independence, our national security. This is Trump empowering Xi's made in China ambitions. Okay, I'm just wondering. What, what, what? I mean, the idea that President Trump, who's been the harshest president of my lifetime with regard to China, is somehow going to be caving into Xi. Based on what? Based on what? Joe Scarborough over at Ms. Now is saying something of the same thing. Criticizing President Trump for quote, unquote, siding with dictators. Again, just going to point out Democrats are currently siding with the dictatorship of Iran,

[Guest or Co-host (possibly a producer or secondary commentator)]

him praising the thuggish dictator of Belarus, him continuing to do everything he can to help Vladimir Putin. I mean, it's obvious, really. It's just crazy. He goes out and he praises Xi as if. As if he's Thomas Jefferson. While a prominent political prisoner, he attacks for causing chaos in China. It's just, It's. It's insanity. He continues to side with dictators.

[Ben Shapiro]

And the idea that Democrats are somehow siding against dictators is rather insane given the history of the recent foreign policy of the United States. But here's the thing. All this is predicated on the idea that China has tremendous leverage over us. Well, let's be real about this. We have the leverage over China again. Chinese oil supply comes from the Middle East. 54% of their entire importation of oil comes from the Middle East. Right now, that number is basically zero. They were getting 3 to 5% of their oil supply from Venezuela. Right now, that number is zero. Their Belt and Road initiative, as we explained earlier this week, has collapsed. Their debt is 300% of their GDP. They have massive problems in China. Basically, the only thing they can do is occasionally threaten Taiwan, a small island nation off their coast. That's it. That's the whole thing. I know there's this idea that China is a rising power. That is wrong. China was a rising power 10 years ago. Xi Jinping has been one of the worst leaders of China in recent history, probably the worst leader. He has not tried to integrate China into world markets. He's drawn them away from world markets. He has not attempted to strengthen China by making it economically stronger. He has tried to distance China from the rest of the world and essentially become autarkic, which is why China has a massive problem. They are actually a declining power trying to stave off the darkness through IP theft, regional intimidation, and a lot of bluster. All right, coming up, we'll get to what the President and Xi Jinping are actually talking about in China. Plus, you'll get to the people who seem to want to hand global power to the Chinese either out of malice or stupidity. First, running a business today means spending half your life dealing with systems that somehow make everything more complicated. You start with one insurance policy, then another, then another. Different brokers, different portals, different renewal dates, different people emailing you PDFs called something like final_v2_red,_final. And eventually you realize nobody actually has a complete picture of what your business is covered for. Which is comforting, which is why super sure is interesting. Instead of treating insurance like a pile of disconnected paperwork, they built one brokerage for your business coverage with one licensed super agent and one account team that actually works with you year round, not just once a year, when it's time to send another invoice. Modern insurance these days, it seems designed to make normal people feel confused, dependent. I mean, have you seen an insurance contract? Now imagine a bunch of those and that's what your business is supposed to see as its coverage. You don't even know what you're looking at. Well, super sure has a tool called Fine Print Facts, which translates insurance legal jargon into plain English. So you can actually understand what your policies cover and what they don't. Right now, head on over to supersure.com, get a full report on your current policies with no obligation. Find out if you're overinsured, underinsured, somewhere in between. Go to super sure.com Shapiro One super agency, one powerful platform. All your policies in one place. Go to super sure.comshapiro that's super sure.comshapiro paid for by Super Sure Insurance Agency LLC, a licensed insurance agency. So how are things actually going in China? Well, the President arrived in China and was met by flag waving students. Here's what it looked like. And this is what the Chinese do, by the way, to, to their intimidation tactic is what if we have gigantic numbers of people who basically act like robots? You remember they did this at the Olympics, the Beijing Olympics, a few, a few cycles back. I mean, color me unimpressed with, with all of this. Then kids were cheering for Trump and Xi on the red carpet. Honestly, God, what a creepy country. I mean, like, the government is so creepy. I'm sorry, like forcing small children to jump up and down and wave flags and flowers with, with troops in the background who are all of the exact same height. I understand that we're supposed to find this intimidating. I do not find it intimidating. I find it strange. Is it like, what first Child who stops jumping up and down gets shot. Is that how it works over in China? It's weird. I'm sorry, it's weird. It just is. It's not just weird. It is testament to the tyrannical nature of the government. Meanwhile, President Xi, when he first agreed to Trump, he did so in Tiananmen Square, which of course is the place famous for Chinese tanks rolling over protesters. As I said before, China is not a geopolitical opponent. They are a geopolitical enemy. And we ought to recognize that. Here was Xi greeting Trump. Okay, there President Trump is doing his unique. This is the longest handshake in human history. Xi is standing there, Winnie the Pooh over there, trying to establish some sort of physical dominance, but President Trump not really having it. Xi also awkwardly shook hands with President Trump's cabinet and advisers. Particularly awkward with the Secretary of State who is banned from visiting China. They literally had to change his name on his input documents in order so he could enter the country because of the sanctions on him from when he was a senator. Here is Xi awkwardly shaking hands with everybody. You can see the Americans not particularly pleased with Xi. So he's shaking hands there. Here he is with the Secretary of State. Does not look like the Secretary of State has much time for Xi Jinping. And then you see him shaking hands with Scott Besant, Pete Hegseth again, not looking particularly pleased to be there with Xi Jinping. And it is funny. I mean, you can see that the people trying to make all of this happen are hoping that it'll be more enthusiastic. Not a ton of enthusiasm happening from the Trump administration, which again, perfectly merited. Cuz this regime is awful. President Trump put out a truth explaining his goal, which was to ask China to open up China for business. The idea here is that China has exported tremendous amounts of product to our markets, but we have not actually been able to open their markets. Quote, CNBC incorrectly reported the great Jensen Huang of Nvidia was not invited to the incredible gathering of the world's greatest businessmen and women proudly going to China. In actuality, Jensen is currently on Air Force One, and unless I ask him to leave, which is highly unlikely, CNBC's reporting is incorrect or as they say in politics, fake news. It is an honor to have Jensen Elon, Tim Apple, maybe Tim Cook of Apple and Tim Apple, Larry Fink, Stephen Schwartzman, Kelly Ortberg of Boeing, Brian Sykes of Cargill, Jane Frazier City, Larry Culp of GE Aerospace, David Salman, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, and many others journeying to the great country of China, where I will be asking President Xi, a leader of extraordinary distinction, to open up China so these brilliant people can work their magic and help bring the People's Republic to an even higher level. In fact, I promise, when we are together, which will be in a matter of hours, I will make sure that my very first request is this. I have never seen or heard of any idea that would be more beneficial to our incredible countries would be them opening up. Well, again, China is quite unlikely to. To open up. Secretary of State Rubio, and he's on Air Force One. I have to say, this image is pretty fantastic. He donned the Nicholas Maduro Nike sweatsuit, which again, high level trollery there from the Secretary of State, who, by the way, is gaining in the Republican primary polls. There was a Republican primary poll that came out just this week showing him ahead of the vice president, J.D. vance. There is a reason for that. Again, Rubio could only enter the country because China changed his name in the documents in order to allow him in, because there are still sanctions on Rubio for their criticism of the ccp. The Secretary of State said that China is a foe. We also have to manage the relationship here. He was on Air Force One. You view China as our top geopolitical foe.

[Christopher O'Day]

Yeah, it's both our top political challenge geopolitically and it's also the most important relationship for us to manage. I mean, it's a big, powerful country. It's gonna continue to grow, but we're gonna have interests of ours that are gonna be in conflict with interests of theirs. And to avoid wars and maintain peace and stability in the world, we're gonna have to manage those.

[Ben Shapiro]

Now, one of the things that the United States is trying to make clear to the Chinese is that they should get off the Iran train because China, of course, they have been the biggest backers of Iran. They've been shipping military weaponry into Iran. They have a tacit agreement with Iran. Iran provides them oil. They provide Iran with upgraded ballistic missile components and all the rest of it. Well, the problem right now is that Iran, its economy is in tatters. Its oil supply is on the verge of basically shutting down because they're going to have to cap their wells. They don't have any export capacity, thanks to the embargo of the. Of the United States. Marco Rubio, Secretary of State. He says there are a lot of reasons why China should have an interest in joining us in confronting Iran.

[Christopher O'Day]

Look, there's three things. The Chinese have ships stuck in the Persian Gulf because setting up a system that says we're going to let certain ships through, but others not. It's easier said than done. And you saw a Chinese, not Chinese flag vessel, but it was a Chinese cargo, got hit over the weekend. I'm sure Iran didn't do it deliberately, but they did it, it happened. And so that's why these Chinese ships are stuck in there. The second is I don't think that China a huge source of instability, it threatens to destabilize Asia more than any other part of the world because it's heavily reliant on the straits for energy. And the third reason is because China's economy is export driven, meaning their economy is fueled not by what they consume domestically, but by what they make and sell to other countries. Well, of all the countries of the world, economies are melting down because of this crisis in the Straits. They're going to be buying less Chinese product and the Chinese exports are going to drop, drop precipitously.

[Ben Shapiro]

Again. The Iran war has hurt China way more than has hurt the United States. This is one of the reasons why all of the analysis so far has been total crap. The idea that the Iran war has provided China with an upper hand. In what way precisely? Their economy is weaker. They're having to beg the Pakistanis to act as go betweens to stave off the complete destruction of the rest of the Iranian regime. No, China is not in a strong position. Alrighty. Coming up, more on China, on Iran, on the people who seem to want to give China more power either because they are being dumb or because they are being malicious. First, people spend a ton of time talking about bringing manufacturing back to America, which is great. But it's also worth noticing that many industries never actually left in the first place. One example would be America's beverage companies. The drinks people have grown up with for generations. Sodas, sparkling waters, teas, sports drinks. The companies behind them have continued making those products here in the United States this entire time. And behind all of that are 275,000 men and women are across all 50 states showing up every day, doing real work. These are good paying jobs. Distribution, manufacturing, trucking, production. The kind of jobs that support families and local communities. For more than a century, America's beverage companies have continued investing here, building here, employing American workers in American hometowns. And in an economy where so many industries moved operations overseas, that actually does matter. Learn more about how they're keeping america [e-mail], again, that's wedeliverforamerica.org to learn more about America's beverage companies, how they're keeping jobs here and keeping America stronger@wedeliver for America.org that's wedeliver for America.org President Xi over in China, the dictator, he has an interest in pretending that China is a rising power when in fact they are in a secular decline. At the actual summit, Xi said we should be partners, not rivals. Okay, you first, buddy.

[Xi Jinping]

We both believe that the China US Relationship is the most important bilateral relationship in the world. We must make it work and never mess it up. Both China and the United States stand to gain from cooperation and lose from confrontation. Our two countries should be partners rather than rivals. President Trump and I also agreed to build a constructive China U. S Relationship of strategic stability to promote the steady, sound and sustainable development of China US Relations and bring more peace, prosperity and progress to the world.

[Ben Shapiro]

That sounds very nice. I mean, it all sounds very nice. And then Xi was urging mutual respect and peaceful coexistence. Win win cooperation. Oh, well, that sounds nice. Maybe he should do all those things.

[Xi Jinping]

Looking back at the course of China US Relations, whether or not we could have mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win win cooperation is the key to whether the relationship can advance steadily. The world today is changing and turbulent. China U. S Relations concern the well being of the over 1.7 billion people of both countries and affect the interests of the over 8 billion people of the world. Both sides should rise up to this historic responsibility and steer the giant ship of China US Relations forward steadily and in the right direction.

[Ben Shapiro]

Oh, isn't that nice? Well, then President Trump, of course, turned about his fair play. The president then flattered Xi and talked about how wonderful China is. Again, this is not rare, okay? Pretending that this is something unique to Trump, that he's going over there, he's flattering them. I mean, again, Barack Obama flattered the Chinese. Joe Biden certainly flattered the Chinese.

[Guest or Co-host (possibly a producer or secondary commentator)]

He.

[Ben Shapiro]

Here's President Trump again trying to massage some shoulders.

[Donald Trump]

It was a fantastic day. And in particular, I want to thank President Xi, my friend, for this magnificent welcome. And it really was a magnificent welcome like none other. And for so graciously hosting us on this very historic state visit. We had a extremely positive and productive conversations and meetings today with the Chinese delegation earlier. And this evening is another cherished opportunity to discuss among friends some of the things that we discussed today. All good for the United States and for China. And it was a great honor to be with you. Please.

[Ben Shapiro]

And then President Trump said that Benjamin Franklin published the sayings of Confucius. All right. I mean, all right, whatever.

[Donald Trump]

From the beginning, our citizens have shared a deep sense of mutual respect. Founding father Benjamin Franklin published the sayings of Confucius in his colonial newspaper. And today's sculpture, recognizing that ancient Chinese sage, is carved into the face of the United States Supreme Court very proudly.

[Ben Shapiro]

Okay, so then Xi started talking about the things he actually cares about. So Xi asked if we can avoid the so called Thucydides trap. Here's what he had to say.

[Xi Jinping]

Currently, transformation not seen in a century is accelerating across the globe. And the international situation is fluid and turbulent. The world has come to a new crossroads. Can China and the United States overcome the Thucydides trap and create a new paradigm of major country relations? Can we meet global challenges together and provide more stability for the world?

[Ben Shapiro]

Okay, so the Thucydides trap is a term that was coined by a Harvard professor named Graham Allen. And it essentially is a theory that when you have a rising power that threatens a global power, conflict generally follows. So the model, the Thucydides model, cause he's an ancient historian, would have been the rise of Athens, which threatened the regional domination of Sparta. And so Sparta saw Athens rising, and so that made war inevitable. Sparta trying to shut down Athens to prevent them from overcoming them. There's only one problem here. China is not Athens and we are not Sparta. China is not in fact the rising power and we are not the declining power. Actually, if conflict arises in this moment, it would not be because of the so called Thucydides trap. It would be much more in line with this sort of closing window theory. That's the theory that sometimes a power sees its window closing because of self defeating policy and has to act aggressively because of the policy they've created for themselves. The window is closing. So to take an example, Nazi Germany attacked the Soviet Union in 1941 when largely because it saw its window of opportunity closing. It had conquered Poland, it had conquered France, and it was dominant over the European continent. But it also was unable to conquer Britain. It saw that Britain would likely survive that Operation Sea lion, which was its purported attempt to take over the British Isles, that would probably fail. They saw that the United States might get into the war and they felt that the Soviets might attack first. And they needed a bunch of oil resources in the east and land in the east, and so they decided to attack the Soviet Union. The window, in other words, was closing. By the way, this is one of the theories behind why Nazi Germany decided to initiate a bunch of foreign wars. Is because actually all of the talk about how the Nazis had revitalized the economy, that was nonsense. They had created a kind of Chinese like economy in the sense it was heavily regulated, heavily subsidized, heavily controlled, government down, massively debt ridden. And then they had to invade other countries for resources. And that would be the real risk here, is that China feels threatened that Xi has actually put China's economy on a road to nowhere. They have a demographic problem, they have a military problem, they have an economic problem. And so China might lash out knowing that their window is closing. So what can the United States do about that? Well, we have to ease their transition back into second rate status, which means basically de escalation over things like Taiwan. We don't want them attacking Taiwan because that's bad for them and it's bad for us. And we have to box them in simultaneously, which is why I have been encouraging for literally decades at this point, better trade relations with all of Eastern Asia. We should be having better trade relations with Japan, better trade relations with South Korea, better trade relations with Australia. We need to be boxing the Chinese in. So what exactly happened? Okay, so again we see Trump and G and they're pretending to be friendly with one another. What actually happened? We have two separate readouts from the meeting. The American readout is pretty interesting. According to the White House, quote, president Trump had a good meeting with President Xi of China. The two sides discussed ways to enhance economic cooperation between our two countries, including expanding market access for American business into China and increasing Chinese investment into our industries. Now again, I'm not a big fan of the idea that Chinese investment should go into our industries, considering, you know, that usually comes with strings attached, including IP theft. Leaders from many of the United States largest companies joined a portion of the meeting. The President also highlighted the need to build on progress in ending the flow of fentanyl precursors in the United States, as well as increasing Chinese purchases of American agricultural products. Now here's the important part. The two sides agree that the Strait of Hormuz must remain open to support the free flow of energy. President Xi also made clear China's opposition to the militarization of the strait and any effort to charge a toll for its use. That'd be Iran doing that. Right? Iran wants to militarize the strait and charge a toll, and the White House is saying China opposes this. And Xi expressed interest in purchasing more American oil to reduce Chinese dependence on the strait in the future. So in other words, they don't want to be as dependent on the Middle east and they don't want to be as dependent on Venezuela and they don't have a lot of choices. And so they'd like to buy more American oil. Both countries agreed Iran can never have a nuclear weapon. Okay, so that's a pretty good. That's a pretty good outcome. An outcome in which the United States has China agreeing that the strait has to be open, that Iran can't be charging tolls, it can't militarily control the strait, that it will buy more American oil, and that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon. Again, if China were to reverse sides in this particular conflict, if they were to say, listen, Iran isn't offering us anything, what we need is an open strait. We need Qatar and UAE and Iraq and Saudi to be able to ship their oil out to China and we need Iran not to get in the way. And we also understand that Iran's facilities have been destroyed in large part. And so we have no interest in using Iran as our cat spot. We just need our oil. That is a big win. Hey. China's version of the readout includes some material on Taiwan. Notice the White House is not so. The White House version does not say that President Trump made any concessions on Taiwan. However, a spokesperson for the Chinese wrote, quote, President Xi stressed to President Trump that the Taiwan question is the most important issue in China US Relations. If it is handled properly, the bilateral relationship will enjoy overall stability. Otherwise the two countries will have clashes and even conflicts, putting the entire relationship in great jeopardy. Taiwan independence and cross strait peace are as irreconcilable as fire and water. Safeguarding peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait is the biggest common denominator between China and the United States. Their entire readout is about Taiwan. However, we have no, no news that the President has made any serious concessions with regard to Taiwan. Again, the United States has taken a position of strategic ambiguity for decades with regard to Taiwan where Taiwan is self governed. But we suggest that it isn't necessarily an independent country and all the rest because if we do, then we have to defend it from a Chinese invasion. That's the basic idea. But if the idea is maintain the status quo, continue to arm the Taiwanese in order to deter Chinese aggression. Box. The Chinese in with better trade agreements offer carrots and also sticks in the form of control of global oil supplies. The Chinese are in particularly weak position right now. Again, just another reason why all of the headlines about how the Iran war is going are just wrong. They are just incorrect. And the real way that the Iran war is going is that the people being deprived of the oil predominantly are the Chinese. They are countries in Asia. It is the Chinese who are hardest hit here. Not only that, if this war was supposed to create momentum against the United States in the region, why is every single country in the region on the side of the United States and against the Iranian regime? So much so that apparently the Saudis actually participated in forward attacks in Iran, according to Reuters. The Saudi strikes, according to Reuters, were carried out by Saudi Air Force fighter jets on Iran linked militia targets near the kingdom's northern border with Iraq, one Western official and the person briefed on the matter said. The Western official said some strikes took place around the time of the April 7th US Iran cease fire. Gulf countries are also arresting Iranian traders. In Kuwait, officials arrested six people they said were plotting to assassinate the country's leadership. In the UAE, the authorities accused 27 men of belonging to a secretive terrorist organization. In Bahrain, the government has stripped dozens of their citizenship. Again, I'm speaking to top officials in many of these governments and I'm just telling you they want to align with the United States. They increasingly want to align with Israel. Some openly are aligning with Israel. UAE is openly aligned with Israel. The Saudis would like to openly align with the United States and Israel as well. They just have to run the gauntlet of domestic opposition to recognition of Israel. But Israel and the uae, according to the Wall Street Journal, have coordinated operations around the war. Israel's Mossad spy chief visited the UAE at least twice during the bombing campaign to coordinate operations. Israel sent Iron Dome and Iron Beam to uae and apparently there are reports that the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, secretly visited the UAE in the middle of the Iran war. This was confirmed by the Prime Minister's official X account. In the midst of Operation Roaring Lion, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu secretly visited the UAE where he met with UAE President Sheikh Mohammed Bin Zayed. Again, the alliance between those two countries is growing significantly stronger. And this is why Iran has been forced into the position of attacking all surrounding countries, because all those. Again, for those who don't know any history, I'd just like to reverse the clock back to the first Gulf War. During the first Gulf War, the United States was so afraid of Israel being unable to work with the Arab states because the Arab states would not work with Israel that Israel took dozens of incoming Scuds from Iraq in the middle of that war. And the United states under George H.W. bush told Israel they could not respond because H.W. was afraid it would break up the coalition of the Saudis and the rest of the countries in the region. Now Israel is openly operating in coordination with all of those countries against Iran. That's how far things have changed. Which is why the Foreign Minister, Abbas Arahi, knows Iran is now isolated. According to the Foreign Minister, he put out a tweet, basically threatening uae, Bahrain and all the rest. Netanyahu has now publicly revealed what Iran's security services long ago conveyed to our leadership. Enmity with the great people of Iran is a foolish gamble. Collusion with Israel in doing so is unforgivable. Those colluding with Israel to sow division will be held to account. Again, here is the thing. The regimes in the Middle east who know what the future looks like, a future that is largely reliant on. On American technology and the and Israeli technology and American oil and Western economic development. It is not reliant on solidarity with a country in Iran that wishes to destroy them. A government in Iran that wishes to destroy them again. This is why what has happened with oil is the single greatest untold story in modern American politics. Back in the 1970s, in 1973, to be precise, there was the Yom Kippur War. This is when Israel fought yet another war of near extermination, which Arab armies attacked Israel unprovoked, trying to destroy the state of Israel and wipe the Jews off the map. They failed. However, their failure led to the Saudi Royal Kingdom deciding to impose an oil embargo against the United states for the US's support for Israel in the late stages of the 73 Yom Kippur War. And that had significant economic impact on the United States for a full decade. Well, things have radically changed. And the reason they have radically changed is because America is now the leading producer of oil and liquefied natural gas on planet Earth. On planet Earth, we control the means of production. We control the means of distribution. We are in control of what is going out of the Strait of Hormuz via Iran. We are in control of what exits at Venezuela. This is a radical shift. It's a radical shift. The story of how America's drilling freed up our geopolitics is an amazing, amazing story. The Wall Street Journal has an incredible piece today about how the United States became the world's greatest energy exporter. Here's what they say. LNG shipments from the lower 48 states began in 2016. LNG is liquefied natural gas, began in 2016 from a Louisiana terminal initially built to receive imported gas. Because gas compresses when cooled large LNG tankers can hold enough energy to power 70,000 homes for a year. Basically, you take the natural gas, which is a gas, and then you liquefy, you turn into liquid, and then you ship it, and then it is turned back into natural gas on the other end. Well, within two years, from 2016 to 2018, US LNG export volumes had more than quintupled, exceeding a trillion cubic feet. The biggest buyers were South Korea, Japan and Mexico. Then Russia invaded Ukraine and energy markets shifted because the Europeans wanted to get off of Russian gas. France, uk, Spain, Netherlands, they all bid up prices for LNG cargoes to draw them away from Asia. US export capacity is ballooning. The United States shipped more than 5 trillion cubic feet of LNG abroad last year, still feeding Europe and the Far east, while gaining market share in Turkey and Egypt. And think about how crazy that is. We're getting market share in Turkey and Egypt. Look at a map. What are Turkey and Egypt really, really close to all of the oil producing countries of the Middle East. Instead, we are shipping LNG all the way from here to there. That's how dominant the American oil and natural gas industry is. US Output has helped keep global prices much steadier than in 2022, even despite the Hormuz closure. South Korea, Spain, Italy, France each bought at least 50% more US LNG in March than they did in February before fighting broke out in the Persian Gulf. So again, one of the things that's been happening is that as the Strait of Hormuz has been closed by Iranian terrorism and then by US blockading the Iranians, it turns out the US crude oil exports have been rising precipitously because again, we are the dominant producers. And look at this. This is US crude oil exports weekly dating back to 2016. We are almost up to 7 million barrels per day in crude exports. We were at half a million in 2016. We have totally shifted geopolitics because of our capacity to innovate, because of our natural resources that we can access. By the way, it is not just the presence of natural resources that makes a country rich. Venezuela has the biggest oil reserves on planet Earth, but they have been barely able to produce 1.5 million barrels of crude per day because they nationalize their oil industry. So here's the thing. America is economically, in terms of natural resources, in terms of tech, blowing all of our opposition out of the water. Yeah, we got lots of problems here, but we are blowing everybody out of the water. Economically speaking, if you've got a buck, you are not Investing it in China, you are not investing it in the Europeans. You're not investing it in Japan, you're investing it in the United States. That is the reality. And that is because of our free market system, because of the innovations, because of our private companies, which are unbelievably efficient. The only thing that could threaten this is if dolts, economic dullards, decide that somehow all of this is bad. And what really needs to happen is that we need to penalize companies for their success. Again, we have totally shifted geopolitics. China is weaker because of our oil industry. The Middle east, we don't care about it as much because of our oil industry. We need a better class of commentator who understand basic economics. We just do. Joe Rogan had on a person named Brendan Schaub to talk about oil markets. It did not go amazing.

[Joe Rogan]

Here's what I don't understand. Are we getting oil from Iran?

[Christopher O'Day]

No.

[Joe Rogan]

That's what, maybe 3 or 4%? So are they just us in the air?

[Ben Shapiro]

They just know, oh, Americans know if we go to war, we can increase the gas price. So we all just go along with it.

[Joe Rogan]

Is that real or is it global prices went up because some of the gas can't get to where it needs to go. And so it, they need to make that money. So they just. You. Isn't it funny? Like, they're like, we're going to make money no matter what. The American people are going to lose money. So we make the same amount of money. And also you, you need oil.

[Ben Shapiro]

My whole thing is even like, when, you know, when we go to war, people are like, yeah, they're just doing it for money. It's like, how much money do they need? They're all rich anyway. Oh, my God. Yes. Clearly the people we need discussing oil markets to legitimately tens of millions of people are a former professional MMA artist and standup comedian and another standup comedian who comments on MMA experts in oil markets. The people who here's the reason this matters is because this particular podcast ended with Joe Rogan calling to nationalize the oil industry. So the United States oil industry is dominant, planetarily dominant. The reason why prices have gone up is because Rogan himself said it. Joe said it right there. When supply is constrained and you're in a global market, prices rise. It's not because of greed. Did the oil company, were they less greedy like 3 weeks ago when the oil prices were lower, or were they the same greedy? It turns out that self interest is always self interest. But the solution to nationalize Oil. It's legitimately insane. Like truly crazy. Truly crazy. And then Rogan suggested that Trump can't fix the problem with the oil companies because they unspecified they would might kill him. What in the world? What are we. What are you. What? What?

[Joe Rogan]

They're a bunch of crooks. They're a bunch of crooks.

[Guest or Co-host (possibly a producer or secondary commentator)]

Yes.

[Joe Rogan]

We should have a national oil company and only sell America. Keep it in house. So no matter what right there foul we do outside the world, companies can

[Ben Shapiro]

still sell wherever they want.

[Christopher O'Day]

Yeah.

[Joe Rogan]

Even though US Is the world's largest oil producer, companies can sell oil on the global market to whoever pays the highest price. High world prices still translate into high domestic gas prices. Hey, Mr. President, please fix that. I don't know if he can do that. They'll kill him. They try to kill him three times already. You try. You try to.

[Christopher O'Day]

With that oil.

[Ben Shapiro]

They'll kill him.

[Joe Rogan]

All of a sudden President JD is crying on TV. I'm going to miss. I'm going to miss Donald

[Ben Shapiro]

ExxonMobil is going to try to kill President Trump for nationalizing this. What are you even talking about? What is this nonsense? What is this, by the way? You want to know why oil supply from the United States is up? You want to know why it's up? Because we are dominating global markets just like any other. I'm sorry, the stupidity. The utter stupidity. This is low IQ insanity. I'm sorry, it is. I like Joe as a person. This is retarded. The reality is that if you want supply to go up, what you do is you create new markets and you broaden out the production to new markets. You have an incentive structure for people to pump more. The reason the United States is globally dominant, the reason why everybody else is having their oil prices doubled and our oil prices are up like 20%, is because we are dominant. Remove the profit margin and what you'll get is an inefficient industry incapable of supplying oil even to the domestic population. Take a look at countries that have done what Rogan is talking about. It is deregulation in the oil industry that has led to our global dominance. But this sort of conspiratorial nonsense, you know, you can just sit there and you'll solve the oil problems by having. Yeah, government bureaucrats will do a great job. Yeah, sure. Bernie Sanders running the oil industry. That'll go amazing. That'll go just incredible. Again, there is this completely idiotic idea that is predominant among people who never studied econ 101, that the best way to relieve a pricing problem is to constrain supply. The opposite of how you relieve a pricing problem. Literally the opposite. It's just in. It's just ridiculous. By the way, the. What you actually need to do is add refinery capacity, more deregulation, more private companies in the business. One of the big problems that happens when the price is artificially depressed is that people stop drilling because it becomes more money to drill than it would to remove, to leave the oil where it is. You think the government is going to make this stuff more efficient? We spend the last couple of decades completely reshifting the entire geopolitics of planet Earth based on private industry in the United States doing things like fracking, doing things like freeing up lng. And the solution is to nationalize the oil industry. Again, this sort of stuff, it sounds funny and it sounds cute, but the reality is it destroys America's capacity to win. This is not just true in oil, it is true in AI. America right now is dominant in the AI industry. It is. Nvidia is the world's most valuable company. It is located in the United States. It is run by an immigrant to the United States, Jensen Huang. It is providing directly and indirectly hundreds of thousands of jobs. AI is going to increase productivity at a scale never before seen. That is going to mean better products and services, cheaper for you and your family. The Chinese are pursuing it. If they win, the Chinese will have a military advantage against the United States. So we need to win. We need to stop the Chinese from winning. You know what you need in order to do that? An enormous amount of what is called compute. You need an enormous number of data centers that are able to compute all the data and spit out answers for you. And yet there's been an ongoing effort in the United States to undermine the very thing that will allow us to dominate for the next century. There's a brand new Gallup poll out, and it shows, quote, overall, would you strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose the construction of a data center in your area to support artificial intelligence or AI technology in the United States? 48% strongly oppose, 23% somewhat opposed. Now, you know what the polling data shows here? If you remove the word AI or the abbreviation AI from that polling question, and no one cares. So if you're just building a normal data center or say a Costco warehouse near your community, no one cares. But the minute you say AI data center, people freak out. This is an op. It is an op. It is driven by a bunch of Luddites in the United States, people who think that if you break the machinery somehow we all get richer. And yes, foreign powers online who are fostering this sort of stuff. You know who doesn't care about building AI data centers? The Chinese. They don't care at all. They are happy to outproduce us. Meanwhile, Utah residents, according to cnn, want to vote in November to oppose a massive AI data center development, one that will provide tens of thousands of jobs, presumably. The Utah project was approved by Box Elder county commissioners on Monday, despite protests from community members. Shark Tank investor Kevin o' Leary says the project will boost the local economy and that increasing America's computing and energy production capacity is crucial for national security. He is right about this. He is right about this. So Kevin o' Leary then decided to go on Tucker Carlson, the nation's leading Luddite, to talk about all of this. And it went precisely how you would think it went.

[Kevin O'Leary]

2,000 jobs. Okay, so relative to the size, the physical size of the project, which as you noted, is multiple times the size of Manhattan and the power draw at peak, this data center, your projections will consume about as much energy as New York City does. But New York city provides almost 5 million jobs. And this project, by your own description, would provide about 2,000 jobs. I don't see the trade.

[Tucker Carlson]

You definitely got that calculation wrong. By building a data center that trains AI, that provides productivity to the entire nation, we create millions of jobs.

[Ben Shapiro]

And Tucker Carlson saying that you create 2,000 jobs because it takes 2,000 people to build the data center. That's not all the jobs that are created. That is like saying that you found an Internet company that like Amazon. All the jobs created by Amazon are not relegated just to Amazon. It is not just the people who built the data centers for Amazon or even the distribution centers for Amazon. It's everybody who produces for distribution by Amazon. This is such idiocy. By the way, again, Tucker Carlson, economically illiterate Tucker, citing the number of jobs in Manhattan. This is the guy who rails against Wall Street. How many jobs in Manhattan have been created by the very investment class that he derides consistently? Not a lot of farms in Manhattan. And the kind of jobs that Tucker is constantly talking about, preserving agricultural jobs, manufacturing jobs, are some of the least space efficient jobs in America. And then Kevin o' Leary talked with Tucker about losing to China. Tucker seems pretty blase about losing to China, as it turns out. Shocker.

[Tucker Carlson]

With all of the nefarious concerns about AI, which outcome do you prefer as an American for your family? Would you prefer all of us that are developing these data centers? Put down our shovels and stop while the Chinese accelerate theirs. Would you like that?

[Kevin O'Leary]

Well, I see a kind of a different question. I see the question I want to be. Let me answer your question in the following way. Do I want to become like China in order that we can, quote, beat China? Not at all. The problem with China, from my perspective, is that it surveils its citizens and it limits their ability to say what they think and to oppose existing power.

[Ben Shapiro]

So he wants to lose to them. His solution is to lose to them by claiming that the United States, if we build data centers, will be just like China. We will not be just like China. That is nonsense. It is absolute nonsense. Tucker seems completely unbothered by actually losing to China, but he does say that data centers are a blot upon the Earth. They're a blot upon the Earth. Again, these are luxury beliefs. Tucker can live in a cabin up in Maine that costs multimillions of dollars, or it can live in a beautiful house in South Florida that also costs multi million dollars. But it turns out that there are lots of people all over the United States who need jobs and don't get to live in the forest and actually, you know, would like greater productivity and better products and cheaper products and better services. But Tucker, sounding very much like Rachel Carson, says data centers are a scar upon the Earth.

[Kevin O'Leary]

Literally, Nobody has taken 20 minutes to explain how this is gonna be great for you and me. We're getting higher power costs. Of course, there's probably nothing uglier on planet Earth than a data center. It's a physical atrocity. It's an offense against God and nature, prima facie. Look at it. This is not the Parthenon. This is the opposite. This degrades the landscape. It is a scar upon the earth. Notice no environmental groups seem upset about it. That wasn't an op or anything. The environmental movement, where are they?

[Ben Shapiro]

The environmental movement is very much opposed to the data centers because they believe that it is going to actually create energy facilities that must be created. And Tucker Carlson, environmentalist, in the name of destroying America's technological future. Great. And of course, in the end, what it comes down to is everyone who Tucker disagrees with is a bad person. Of course. Of course.

[Kevin O'Leary]

Reflects the character and the predispositions, the biases of the people who made it. So if this machine, this technology AI is being created by people like Sam Altman or the Google guys,

[Christopher O'Day]

you can

[Kevin O'Leary]

expect that, well, I don't know. Programs built by some of the least trustworthy people in the world probably shouldn't be trusted. So it's likely not a huge surprise that AI is often caught lying, manipulating results to hide the truth from people who use it, which itself is an indication of consciousness. Is it not

[Ben Shapiro]

an indication of consciousness? No. You just said that it's a programmed algorithm made by people you don't like, but it's conscious. That's it. So it's lying to you. Again, it's all just nonsense. And in the end, it is defeatist demoralization ops nonsense that puts America in a losing position vis a vis our chief geopolitical enemy, the Chinese. The way that you lose to the Chinese is you destroy your energy capacity by doing things like nationalizing the oil industry, you regulate the crap out of the American economy, and you fight against every aspect of AI in order so that China will win. That's how China wins. It's the only way that China can win. Fortunately for China, they have friends who will do that sort of work either through actual complicity or through just unbelievable stupidity. While joining me on the line to discuss the negotiations currently happening between the United States and China is Christopher o'.

[Spencer Pratt]

Day.

[Ben Shapiro]

He's an adjunct fellow at the Hudson Institute, former International Investment Management executive, and authority on capital markets, political economy and public finance, and the security implications of infrastructure, finance and governance. Christopher, thanks so much for taking the time. Really appreciate it.

[Christopher O'Day]

Well, thank you for having me. Interesting to hear that lead in about ways to lose to China. This is the topic I think we can discuss today for a few minutes. Another way to lose to China is one we're actually doing quite well at, and that's conceding the power of commercial shipping and commercial logistics infrastructure. There's been a lot of news coverage over the last few years, particularly in policy and more technical publications, but it's starting to seep out into the broader press about how many seaports China is involved in. And the involvement is typically owning and controlling terminals that load and unload containers from the massive container ships. Typically, although it's presented in the press as China controlling ports, they don't really own the ports. That's still part of the government that is hosting them. But the thing that makes a port valuable and useful is being able to have containers moving in and out of it. It hooks up your society. If you're in the seat of, say, the politician running the port or the port authority, this hooks up your society to the flow of goods. As you mentioned, people want jobs, they want to buy goods at reasonable prices. And as we know, China has done a bang up Job becoming a manufacturing platform for the world. They also then, in addition to that, I call it a one stop shopping strategy. They had to learn for their own purposes, loading and unloading in China, how to build these massive container ports. So they've done very well at that. And now they go around and they offer this service to basically build your loading dock for you. If you're a country, that's achieved through what they call a concession. And it always sounds complicated, but it's really the same as buying a hot dog stand a license to sell hot dogs at the beach. You pay the government for a license. And that's basically what's happening with these concession agreements reports. So when you read about this or people talk about it, don't be put off by all of the talk about the financing arrangements and involvement of all the big financial firms that get into these deals. It's really a very simple thing where a government is cutting a deal and making what I believe is essentially a treaty, calling it a concession contract with the Chinese to come in and run their supply lines. And that is a very, very powerful piece of leverage. And for people who are familiar with local politics, for the local politician it's a great deal because the core of these arrangements is revenue sharing on the container fees. So before you had maybe no port or a very badly operating port, after you have a state of the art seaport running, moving containers in and out, generating jobs, generating a need to hook up road and railroad networks and best of all you're getting a revenue share whereas before you didn't have any of that money. So this is a very, I think it's actually quite a clever strategy. And they've been, the Chinese have been pursuing this through their state owned companies for really since the founding of the PRC in 1949, they had to make all sorts of arrangements to get their own supplies. And they first started with the old common turn countries in what's now called the Global South. They've kept a lot of those relationships and they've just learned how to build. After the 1956 invention by an American, an impatient American truck driver wanted to move his trucks, his containers on and off faster. So that's the hallmark of America, speed up the pace of commerce and revenue generation. The Chinese took that technology and they ran with it because the need to have the ability to handle containers required just massive amounts of rebuilding of infrastructure or building of new infrastructure. And that is what the Chinese have exploited. So in effect we all hear about how they reverse engineered products, cars, solar panels, Et cetera. Really what they've done is reverse engineer the whole concept of conquest. And so now the, the Chinese are in a position in about 110 port sites around the world where they've achieved the kind of goals you used to get from military conquest, which would really be in the areas of economic influencer control and political influencer control. And they've done that through this infrastructure program, not the Belt and Road. The Belt and Road is something somewhat different. It factors into this. But they've been working on this commercial shipping tied to their manufacturing and export economy. They've been working on that for decades, since the late 70s, early 1980s, long before Xi came on the scene with the Bri. So they've basically now got the situation where they have all these long term seats at the table because these contracts run from 20 to 40 years and it's very difficult to get them out of there. The US is starting to try to do that, but, but it's a real uphill battle. So the Chinese have basically installed what I call the operating system of the global economy. There's all these containers and the ports and everything is running just like your smartphone. It's running 247 and it's running in the background. So while they're in China and we're seeing all of the pomp and circumstance and the big meetings and they're going to talk about chips and they're going to talk about tariff rates and things like that in the background, the real battle for control over the world is who's going to control all of this commercial shipping and logistics, really the supply line. So it's not a matter of one supply chain for a particular product. China basically has installed and runs the supply platform itself and they're starting to use that power already. So it's a very dangerous situation that the US is in. And it's, I guess the military would call it kind of classic asymmetric warfare. Because we have a big powerful navy and you know, we can use that in certain situations. But we're really, I don't think, going to go around and start invading or militarily taking over any seaport anywhere in the world, blowing up the infrastructure. The Chinese are already there installed, running this and any place where they're operating, it's very dangerous or impossible for the US Navy to go dock there because of the digital and cyber surveillance risks. So they're fighting at the level of kind of getting again the direct economic and political relationships. It's very, very classically Chinese.

[Ben Shapiro]

So I Do want to ask you where you think the kind of state of conflict is. Obviously they have an advantage in the area that you're talking about. I've been making the case that China is to a certain extent having to leverage power in this way because they have enormous systemic problems as a top down centralized economy. They have a huge debt problem. They've been able to cram down on their own population and hide on the balance sheet. They have an enormous demographic problem. Their military is, is well developed, but certainly not up to the pace of the United States military. They're losing the AI war, they have to import all of their oil. And so they are, they are sort of relegated to doing the thing you're talking about, which is to say that if the United States were bright, if we were, if we were to act in a, in a self interested way, we would be trying to dismantle precisely this infrastructure that you're talking about. And you've seen the Trump administration do some of that most obviously in Panama where there were concerns specifically about the Chinese companies controlling the, the, the in ways and out ways from the Panama Canal. In other words, decline for the United States is a choice. The President Xi suggested that we are in a Thucydides trap where China is rising in the United States is falling. And what I've suggested is that actually what we are watching right now is not a Thucydides trap. We are watching a window closing for the Chinese because they have serious problems that are actually developing for them internally and externally. And so the possibility of conflict is arising from desperation on their part, increasing desperation. It is not arising from the idea that they're on the verge of overcoming the United States globally.

[Christopher O'Day]

Well, I would agree with parts of that. Certainly this is a capability that they have that the US does not possess that gives them a certain amount of advantages and influence with many, many countries around the world. And I think looking forward, reasonably, you would expect that they would utilize that leverage to offset exactly the types of weaknesses that you've pointed out. To say that they have done a very good job building this network of highly influential port and terminal concessions is not to say that China has some sort of, as you'd, I guess would gather from reading all the press coverage going into this summit meeting that China is about to overtake the United States in any really substantive way. It does give them the ability to, it's really, as I said, a capability to kind of battle and fight the United States by turning a number of countries in their favor because of that kind of supply line and economic and job dependency. Now, whether that does anything to relieve the deeper problems that they have with about a third of their local governments are bankrupt. They have a terrible social or non existent almost social welfare system. They have a closed financial economy, basically controlling currency manipulator. People are starting to just openly call the China currency manipulator. So they do have all of those weaknesses. How far that goes, does that topple the CCP regime? I think that's probably an open question. I think it's well known that they'll do almost anything and they'll subjugate any policy to the need to stay in power. You've certainly covered that topic extensively. So I think what you've got here is something where you can fight these things to a standoff.

[Ben Shapiro]

Well, that's Christopher o'. Day. He's an adjunct fellow at Hudson Institute. You can go check out all of his work over there. Christopher, thanks so much for the time and the insight.

[Christopher O'Day]

Thanks for having me, Ben.

[Ben Shapiro]

Meanwhile, over in Los Angeles, the Democrats have decided that Spencer Pratt is a real threat, clearly. And they are trotting out as much propaganda as they possibly can. So LA mayoral candidate Nithya Rahman, who is now trailing both Spencer Pratt and Karen Bass, is unbelievable. They might reelect Karen Bass as the, as the LA mayor. She's done such a horrible job. She is currently the front runner. Nithya Raman. There's a brief period in time in which it appeared she was going to be the front runner. That is no longer the case. She now says that Spencer Pratt is a fascist. Here we go. But I also think it's a very real thing that we should take seriously and we need to grapple with and we need to offer it an offer, honest response, a response that's rooted in actually solving these problems. Otherwise people will turn to fascism, to mini Trump, which is who I think Spencer Pratt really represents. Fascism, Mini Trump. What exactly does Spencer Pratt say that is fascist? He says that we should not allow crime to predominate in LA and that homeless people ought to be put an involuntary commitment if they have serious mental illness and they should not be allowed to just abuse drugs openly out on the street and all the rest of it. TMZ put out a bit of a hit piece saying that actually Spencer Pratt is not living in a trailer, you know, where his house is burned down. Actually. He's been staying at the Hotel Bel Air for more than a month and his wife and kids are staying in Carpinteria, which is just north of la. Well, Spencer Pratt pointed out, Madu, the reason that I have to live in a hotel is because my house burned down. That would be the reason.

[Spencer Pratt]

So this idea that anyone's, like, always at a hotel. I'm at a hotel because these psychopaths are messaging me every day. They're gonna kill me because Nithya Raman is calling me a fascist because I don't want people to have their kids next to drug addicts at the park or stepping in human poop when you get your matcha. I have common sense. That's not fascism. So these psychos here, I'm a fascist. And then they. They literally, like, if you like to see the death threats, I can send them all offline where people are like, I'm going to hire people to kill you. So, yes, unfortunately, now I have a security team, and they will not, even if I wanted to stay in the Airstream, would let me because there's 360 unobstructed views since there's no houses. So you can literally snipe me out from any part from 300 yards away, easily.

[Ben Shapiro]

Yeah. Meanwhile, Karen Bass, she is making compelling cases to why she should retain the mayoralty in Los Angeles. Her case is, you cannot succeed in life without teeth. This is a thing that is happening right now in America.

[Guest or Co-host (possibly a producer or secondary commentator)]

How many people who are unhoused that you meet have no teeth at all? They don't have teeth. Why? Because meth rots your teeth. You can't succeed with without teeth. So there needs to be comprehensive health care provided to people.

[Ben Shapiro]

So we're not going to stop them from taking the meth. We'll just give them George Washington's teeth. But classic political lines. Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. And also, you cannot succeed in life without teeth. Great job there by Karen. Matt. She's doing. She's doing an amazing job. I can see why Angelenos love her. So she also says that she's very upset about Spencer Pratt's AI ads in which she, for example, plays the joker. She's very upset about this. She just. She can't deal with this. It's too much.

[Guest or Co-host (possibly a producer or secondary commentator)]

What's worrying me now is, is that his social media is now taking on a violent turn. And that worries me, because when you do that and when your messages are so hateful or when you demonize people, then you do provoke people who are unstable and you can jeopardize people's safety.

[Ben Shapiro]

Yeah, those ads, those AI ads, that's the real cause of violence in America today, not the Democratic Party that continues to cheer violence in America today. Alrighty. Coming up, we'll get into Sweden. So you keep hearing over and over and over again that we need to be more like Europe. The Europeans, they've got it right. What we really need is to be democratic socialists, just like the Europeans. Well, it turns out a lot of the European countries are like, yeah, we're not going to do that anymore. You know what we like? We like the capitalism. We'll get to that in a moment. First, if you're not a member, you have to become a member. To watch, use Code Shapiro at checkout for two months free on all annual plans. Click the link in the description and join us.

[Guest or Co-host (possibly a producer or secondary commentator)]

Sam.