About This Blog

The purpose of my blog is mostly for review, film analysis, and other posts relating to popular culture. I always love to entertain and love to share the wonderful things I see. Join me on a journey through my life and the world

Thursday, September 30, 2021

Dr. Moreau is Dead




          After watching multiple videos about the nightmare that was the making of the film “The Island of Dr. Moreau,” I decided to watch the film myself to see if it was as bad as the production.  In short, it was not terrible, just horribly unfocused and confused with most of the actors lacking the ability to care about the film either because of personal problems or losing the will to continue because of their terrible experiences on the production.  Though the story concept was interesting, the book by noted author H. G. Wells likely handled it better.
There was a moment in the film though that rather stuck with me while watching it.  It was the final moment where main character Edward Douglas, played by noted actor David Thewlis, better known as Remus Lupin in Harry Potter and Sir Patrick in Wonder Woman, as well as the only one of the three leads in this film who feels like he’s trying, has to face off with the film’s antagonist and declare him God to the island.  As was the case with the film, it had a lot of discussion on man’s relationship with God, the desire to overthrow him, and then replace him and that moment encapsulated it quite well.  So I thought I’d take some time to discuss it here and the consequences of such desires.  Obviously there will be spoilers for the film so you have been warned.
For context to the event, this blogpost will start off with an overview of the film.  UN negotiator Edward Douglas is left stranded in the Java Sea after a plane crash before being rescued by Dr. Montgomery, played by Val Kilmer, and brought to the island of Dr. Moreau.  There, he meets Doctor Moreau, played by Marlon Brando, who has found a way to turn animals into humanoid creatures that can function, in theory, like real people.  During his experiments, Dr. Moreau believes he has created perfect people who can live in a utopian society where they are guided by key rules that they must follow in order to be sufficiently human (as well as being thoroughly drugged and implanted with devices to cause them pain when they step out of line).
Eventually, after several failed attempts by Edward to escape, the animals, led by the hyena-swine man, manage to rebel and kill Dr. Moreau along with the rest of his staff and those closest to him before declaring themselves leaders of the island.  Eventually, Edward is kidnapped by the rebels and forced to accept their superiority in front of the other animals.  However, he is able to outsmart them and defeat them before escaping the island to return to the world of man.
As a brief review before discussing the confrontation, the film plot may sound somewhat interesting.  The biggest issue is the execution as the film is horribly unfocused since it has multiple plotlines from Edward trying to escape to Montgomery slowly going insane out of jealousy of Dr. Moreau to Dr. Moreau’s utopia falling apart.  As a result, the film comes across as dull since nothing really stands out in terms of plotline since it’s always competing with other events.  Unsurprisingly, the book might have been a masterpiece if made use of these plot elements, but the film tragically could never find its footing and was weighed down with actors not giving the performances the film needed because they were weighed down by the nightmare that was the production.
Regarding the film’s theme though, it touches on the nature of God and those who would seek to dethrone him in society.  Notably, Dr. Moreau serves as God to his creations, which is why they call him father, and his island serves as his sort of Eden.  This is why the animals later rebel against him as they believe that doing so would give them the power they believe their creator has and would let them create themselves in their own image.
The desire to destroy Dr. Moreau in this story is similar to men who desire to overthrow God.  Often God’s rules as set by our creator are seen as archaic, arbitrary, and at odds with our desires which we believe will surpass his.  In the end, those who leave behind what they believe the shackles of religion do so believing they will find something else, ideally a better world designed in their own, man made image.




This brings us back to the final confrontation where the Hyena-swine has taken Edward and intends to use him to declare himself God in front of the other animals.  The Sayer of the Law, the sort of priest of Dr. Moreau, refuses to acknowledge the Hyena-Swine as God as the only God for him is his creator.  However, Edward instead responds by saying “You are all Gods” to the animals that had killed Dr. Moreau, much to the Sayer’s dismay.
The Hyena-Swine, thinking he’s won, tells Edward to say that to the other animals as though to show the legitimacy of the former’s reign.  Instead, Edward asks him what makes him any more the new leader than the other animals as all are equal and there were others just as capable as the Hyena-Swine who were also involved in killing Dr. Moreau.  In response, the animal man goes on a rampage and tries to kill the others before Edward defeats him.
Once the rebellion is over, Edward crafts a raft and returns to civilization.  He offers the Sayer to send someone back to help the animals, but the Sayer recommends against it.  The animal man knows that without the laws of Dr. Moreau, the animals will return to their original state and that that was what nature had always intended.  With that, David Thewlis leaves, knowing both that he has learned from his experience, and that he won’t have to return to the set again after the nightmare of a production.
This scene is actually deep as it shows the truth of men who try to declare themselves as God.  Just like the animals, all human being are equal, meaning that despite differences they have the same propensities towards corruption, sin, and failures.  Some may be more capable than others, but the idea that the rules don’t apply to them leads to pride, hubris, ego, and other synonyms.
One thing one of my Sunday school teachers always said was that there's a God shaped hole in our hearts and that without him we will try to replace it with something else.  Often, we try to shove our own interests to replace him, but we are one perspective among many and what works for us may not work for others.  In the end, man can never replace God because we are not morally superior nor inferior to his other men and thus incapable of reaching that status.  This brings us to the inevitable truth: that objective morality does not exist in this world without God.
Through his commandments and the teachings of Christ, God left man the path towards enlightenment and purpose, a way to better one’s and become more Christlike.  When we reject God’s vision, we inevitably become trapped in ideas that are ideologies of equal merit that will fail the same way we do.  For God is perfect, something to be imitated, and knows what is good.  Since the fall, man has been flawed and the things we create will be just as flawed, meaning just as likely to fall.
Lacking an objective morality that God provides, man will try to replace him with something inferior that is also just as likely to fall.  This is why G. K. Chesterton said When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.”  The end result is that like the animals, we resort to a phase of nihilism and purposelessness, destroying what separated us from animals and becoming the creatures we were made to rule over.
This theme is found repeatedly in the Book of Genesis, starting with Adam and Eve’s decision to eat from the tree of Knowledge.  They were told it would make them like Gods, when the only thing it did was make them aware of their brokenness and thus were cast out from the garden, the furthest thing from Gods they could have been.  Another story would be the tower of Babel where the people making it thought doing so would make them superior to God and instead resulted in them getting cursed to speak other languages.  Be it in the bible, or real world examples like the Cristero War, Godless Communism, or even in America where our society gets more depressed as it rejects God, the desire to replace God, to say “God is dead'' ends always the same with a river of blood and an utopia never arrived at.  The end result is always the same: the desire to replace God ends in failure every time.
The theme of the film does not justify the bad things about the film, but I still did find the film interesting.  It encapsulated the hubris of those that seek to replace God with themselves and the inevitability of what happens to a society without him.  Never forget, the guard rails of society exist for a reason, and there may be justification to go past them but you do so at your own peril.



Wednesday, May 26, 2021

12 Rules for Dealing with a Grudge


        Much to my chagrin, I’ve always struggled with letting things go.  Be it forgiveness of myself or of others, that can be a hard thing to ask when I’ve been hurt or upset.  That’s why I try to figure out how to deal with that and improve my handling when something bad happens again (as it inevitably will).
Since I know I can’t always control my emotions, I try to create a key series of rules to follow so that I don’t do things I’ll regret or make things worse.  Even if I can’t feel the greatest, knowing I have a plan can help me get through it and readjust.  So in this case, I thought I’d share my rules and see if they help anyone else.
  1. Sometimes, it is best to leave well enough alone” - Emotions can be hard to control.  If you can’t be cordial or respectful to that person and there is no benefit to continuing a relationship, it can be best to walk away.  Don’t simply ignore it, actively minimize it in your life until you forget it exists.
  2. Learn from it and make it positive - Chances are you’ve learned something from it or can find a truth to it you can use in future relationships.  Ask yourself what it is you have learned and how you can use that to improve your life or the lives of others in the future.  Doing that will make your life better and reduce negative consequences for yourself and others from it.
  3. Ask yourself what’s bothering you - Sometimes another person may only be the face of something that’s really bothering you.  Make sure your anger is correctly invested.
  4. Don’t blame yourself - You’ve probably done things you regret that led up to what’s causing the grudge.  However, the other person did actions that upset you as well and the decisions you made likely made the most sense at the time.  If you really went in with the best of intentions, then harping on yourself is only going to make you angrier and promote the grudge so most importantly don’t try to put all the blame on yourself.
  5. Find support - Always try to replace bad memories with good ones.  Find people who can get you through your bad times and try to focus more on a time with them than time with people you don’t get along with.  In the end, it will make your time more productive and get you through emotional strife.
  6. Don’t spread gossip - Anything you do today can have a lasting impact on people in the future.  You can change somebody else’s opinion of that person or you can impact your relationship with them in ways you can’t imagine.  That person may change but what you spread behind their back will hound them for a long time, even if they aren’t the same person.  So try to speak neutrally about them and don’t use their name.  Just say “this person did this” or something to that effect.  Now, you may be more open to discussing that with family or very close friends who don’t know that person, but beyond that try not to say things that will last with that person longer than you will be angry at them.
  7. Humanize and be honest about your opponent, but don’t praise them - The person you are angry at is likely flawed, and may have problems in their own life.  You don’t know what got them to that decision and you don’t know why they do the things they do.  Likely, the decisions they make may make sense to them at the time just as yours make sense to you at the time so they hopefully didn’t have bad intentions.  So remember that they’re flawed as well and have to deal with their own flaws more than you do.  However, don’t say nice things about them to mask your pain.  Doing so is not being honest about how you feel about them, and giving them praise you don’t give yourself will cause envy for what you give them.
  8. Respect their independence - As a human being, another person has the full ability to make decisions of their own.  You can’t control them and trying to will make you into something bad.  However, they also bear responsibility for their mistakes, you don’t.  You won’t be held accountable when they do something you don’t like, they will.  So just being willing to accept that they will need to deal with the results of their actions whether it be positive or negative is on their shoulders, not yours.
  9. Compare how you handle this grudge to a previous grudge - if you handle this one better than a previous one, that shows improvement.  Improvement should remind you you’re handling it better.
  10. Pray for them, but never for your own benefit - God wants this for those we consider enemies.  We must want the best for them by his plan.  Praying for them both reminds us of that and lets us put that burden on the almighty who is always happy to deal with it in ways we can’t.  However, don’t ask God to change that person in ways to please you, ask him to do so in ways that please him.  He knows what they need and what we need so he is a better judge.  Asking him to change that person for yourself means you are putting your interests above God’s.  Asking him to enter that person's heart for their own benefit and God’s acknowledges that the end result you may still not like, but you will respect his decision, their independence, and hope good can still come from them.
  11. Want them to get to Heaven - We are hopefully going to spend eternity in heaven, and God loves everyone so that means he loves the people we don’t.  We will be spending eternity with them then, but when their flaws and ours are gone so we won’t be fighting anymore.  Remember, God gets to decide who gets to heaven, and you don’t.  Acknowledging that means you will be with them at a point when all your mistakes are gone and theirs are too, so every petty disagreement will be behind us.  After all, hell is eternal and your anger at and memory of that person will fade long before hell’s wrath.  It then seems unfair that they should suffer for something that will be forgotten.  So never want that for someone else, and always want the best for all people.  For God always knows best, for all of us
  12. Acknowledge you won’t live up to these rules - All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.  You will likely break your own rules and do things that violate them and you will regret it.  After all, man is naturally sinful due to original sin.  Be aware you will do that, but find ways to forgive yourself and make up for it.  Never forget, you are not perfect, but that’s not a reason to stop trying to be better.
These are my standards of how I try to deal with a grudge.  As 12 states, I don’t live up to them.  However, I believe that being aware will at least give me goals and ways to overcome my failings.  So while I try to move on from my own dissatisfaction, they give me guidance on what to do so that I don’t act on emotions I may regret later.  I hope any of these are useful in the future to you, the reader.



Thursday, April 8, 2021

My Letter to the President

         To the surprise of no one and the chagrin of my girlfriend, I wrote a letter to the President.  That's right, I performed my patriotic duty and made my voice heard by mailing a letter.  Though I don't expect a response, I thought I'd share what I sent him here"

Dear Mr. President, 

 

I hope this letter finds you in good health.  You are no doubt aware our country is facing a time of extreme crisis and a need for direction.  Our people are very divided and that only seems to be getting worse by the day.  It is time for bold direction and a President to reach across the aisle to support legislation all Americans can get behind.  For that, I am asking you to reinstate former President George H.W. Bush’s ban on Broccoli from the White House. 

 

As you may know, your predecessor banned Broccoli from the White House and Air Force One in March of 1990.  The decision was well met by school children whose mothers had forced them to eat their greens and had shown solidarity with them and the many others who rightfully hate the awful vegetable but are too scared to admit it.  I believe if you bring back the ban, you will touch those same Americans again and show solidarity with the public.

 

For far too long the vegetative menace has haunted this great nation from the coast to coast.  It can be found in grocery stores, schools, local farmers markets, and anywhere our nation’s nutrition can be found.  It hides in the shadows, waiting for the opportunity to ruin any good meal.  People may have tried to mask its fowl taste by drowning it in cheese, but no amount of dairy can protect us from its spread. 

 

This is an excellent opportunity for you to take decisive action and show the American people where you stand on this important issue.  Remember that President Bush was a Republican and you are a Democrat so this is a perfect chance to show bipartisanship and unity.  In addition, it will show your respect for the office by bringing back a policy from your predecessor. 

 

I have full confidence that you will make the right decision and take this crucial action.  For far too long, the party has allowed this menace to ravage our society and it is finally time to defeat it.  If you do not take this, school lunches will be ruined forever and no shopper will be able to get groceries without the green terror lurking.  So I ask you on behalf of my friends and family, ban Broccoli from the White House and make this nation proud.

 

 

        Yes, I seriously mailed this to the President.  No, this isn't an April Fool's Day joke.  Just thought you all might enjoy.

Tuesday, March 30, 2021

Some Warning Signs in a Conversation

            Throughout my debates in college and high school, as well into my studies for communication, I've noticed certain patterns in conversations, debates, and arguments that show the person I'm talking to has no interest in what I'm saying and is just trying to dominate the conversation. I have found the best course of action in these kinds of conversation is to disengage with that person as nothing you say will motivate them as they have ceased to care what you have to say and are often looking for emotional validation. So here are warning signs to assure you it is best to drop the conversation and stop second guessing if you were to blame:

1. Calls for Unity-Usually there is a push to guilt the opponent to make them feel like they are an outsider and therefore the one causing the problem. Simple examples would be "can't we all just get along," "we don't have to do anything," or "this is too divisive."   The use of "We" is an extremely telling sign as unless it is in reference to another group (which can become the "appeal to the crowd" fallacy), using "we" to include the other speaker makes no sense if they're not addressing your interests or values.  Likely, what they are trying to do is to SUBTLY give off the impression that you are being divisive by questioning their set beliefs or goals.  Anyone who uses this is already treating you like an outsider or an other so tread lightly as they likely don't care about your interests and are trying to get you to submit to their's. 

2. Repetition-Few people are that original, but a person that keeps repeating their own statements or those of others may show signs of an inability to think critically, meaning they have clung to some key belief or thought and refuse to change from it.  One form would be repeating something that is mainstream common wisdom without being able to variate it. Now, most people of like mind may say similar things, but if you've heard their argument a million times and they can't variate it, there's a good chance they're just repeating someone else. Listen to how many of the same things they say that you may hear on the news, in circles they fly in, or or social media and see if they can even lightly deviate from that.  If they can't, they're just repeating what someone else told them and digging in their heels.  This means they won't change they're mind as they'd rather repeat the so called "common wisdom." Another sign of repetition is if they repeat themselves.  Chances are, they've thought about it a bunch and they're not actually addressing your concerns, they're dismissing your concerns to address whatever issue is in their head.  This is a sign they do not care and just want to practice their own soundbite, meaning you will never break through. 

3. Mockery-This is obviously a bad sign for any speaker, but there is a reason for mockery that's a sign you've probably won. If a person had an argument, they could say it and leave it at that, but usually they know they don't so they're belittling you to shut you up so they don't have to face your arguments. After all, if they are repeating themselves, they've already shown they can't think critically so it's safer to push you away so they don't have to face their own shortcomings. 

4. Non-sequiturs-Similar to mockery, it's also a sign your opponent has lost. Likely they can't address your issues so they try to change the conversation in an attempt to dodge an issue they can't address. Never let them change the conversation or else they will never face that reality.

5. If All Else Fails, the Moral Card Will be Played-This goes back to appeals for unity, but it is important to remember that they will question your morality to question your interest in doing "good". Once again, if their's is the superior decision, they shouldn't have to guilt you into supporting something, but the truth is their's isn't and they can't defend it besides repeat. Anyone who uses this is trying to control you and get you to submit. The best way for them to lose is to not give them that privilege. 

            So those are warning signs that the person your talking to will not change their opinion. The best option is to disengage, let them calm down, and maybe try again later if you care about their opinion or not bother if you don't. Either way, remember that if they use these five things, it isn't your fault and you should not feel bad they did. However, see to it that you don't use them yourself.





Tuesday, February 16, 2021

Do Democrats Still Care About Unions?


        Unsurprisingly, unions played a role in the victory of President of Joe Biden.  In addition to receiving many union endorsements, union households voted over 60% in the swing states of Wisconsin and Michigan.  Likewise, it was revealed by a Time article that union collaboration with big business played a part in making sure their members supported Biden’s election.  In spite of this, some of Biden's first actions as president eliminated union jobs.
        In the first week of his Presidency, Joe Biden killed the Keystone XL Pipeline which destroyed 11,000 jobs, 8,000 of which would have gone to union workers.  This unsurprisingly got condemnation from unions such as LUINA, the Pipe Fitters, and the AFL-CIO.  Of course, Biden and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg assured green jobs (that do not yet and may not exist) will replace those jobs, but since large portions of green tech are made in China, this could likely increase jobs instead for non-unionized foreign labor than American unions.
        This is hardly the only evidence though that the Biden administration might be turning on unions.  Plenty of his current policy positions have come out against union interests.  Further evidence suggests the Democratic Party may no longer be interested in union support.
        Other Biden policies include increased support for trade deals that will send jobs overseas such as the TPP and the promise to destroy the oil and gas industry (while telling those displaced to learn to code).  Meanwhile, though he has promised to raise the minimum wage to $15/hour, that remains stalled in the senate.  It seems unlikely he will carry much for unions with his future policies.
        This is likely a sign that union power in the Democratic party is waning.  After all, union membership has decreased 10% in the last 40 years so that may be heralding a reduction in interest for them from workers.  If unions do not carry as much power over labor, the Democratic party may be looking for other forms of support.
        Still, it’s no surprise as most of his financial support came from Wall Street which may suggest Biden’s more interested in them.  After all, he received $74 million in Wall Street donations.  Also, Biden has been hiring people from tech companies who usually oppose unionization.  With increased Democratic support coming from cities, it’s likely that their policy may reflect coastal elites more than working class Main Street.
        This then brings up the question: would unions be winnable for Republicans?  After all, the Dems are becoming increasingly hostile towards traditionally unionized fields like the energy industry and manufacturing as they increasingly become the party of the wealthy.  This may mean labor may be leaving the party of the donkey.
        However, there are many issues stopping the Republican Party from benefiting from labor support.  First of all, union leadership continues to benefit from Dem leadership.  While laborers may lose jobs, national leadership may not be concerned if the Dems keeping benefiting them specifically.
        This may actually mean a coming reckoning between labor and union leadership.  After all, some unions were reporting majority Trump support despite leadership opposition.  It should come as no surprise then that a majority of union members support voluntary dues laws like right-to-work as they don’t want funds to go to leadership that does not support them.  So this may be a bad sign for union bosses.
        All the same, a second issue may be Republican opposition in the past.  After all, many have taken stances unions have disliked in the past, such as Nikki Haley intervening in the Boeing labor dispute when she was governor or South Carolina.  So some may be untrusting of the party.
        Still, with dwindling numbers, changes in party structure, and a transitioning economy, union members may feel a need to start adapting to the times.  Those members still have families to feed, work to do, and long term threats to those things.  A change in political direction could be in the wind.


Addendum:  Of note, the Biden administration is making overtures towards teachers’ unions, especially by supporting not opening schools
despite approval from the CDC.  Public sector and private sector unions tend to function with different sets of interests and rules so they have different interests.  So while private sector unions may be open to change, public sector unions will likely stick behind the President.

Sunday, February 14, 2021

Yesterday Was My Birthday

         I celebrated my Birthday yesterday.  It was a nice affair but pretty low-key.  I went to work where I made a lot of sales and won $7 on a free lotto ticket so it went as well as could be expected.  After that, my sister Meg, her boyfriend Nick, and I celebrated by watching Disney cartoons, getting food from Buffa Louie's, and opening my gifts.  Overall, it went as well as could be expected.
        I usually like to use my birthday as a time to reflect and think about how the last year has gone.  A lot has happened and I like to think about how I'm in a better place now than I was back then as I usually am.  So I thought I'd take some time to reflect.
        My mom chronicled this pretty well on her blogpost, but it's worth repeating.  Last year I lost my job rather suddenly right before the pandemic started.  After that, I was unable to find work as the lockdowns started, but I lucked out in making a second part time job I was doing full time to cover some of my costs.  Beyond that, everything I wanted to do (churches, restaurants, time with family, seeing my girlfriend) was largely shut down so I was mostly alone, unhappy, and trying to find work while finding ways to keep my spirits up.
        I have to admit I was extremely lucky thanks to the support and encouragement of my friends.  Some of my closest friends, Sean, Andrew, and their wives, lived in town and when we were able to travel again, I'd visit them as often as they'd allow and we stayed in constant contact.  Other people, including friends and family  I could only speak to electronically were always around if I needed someone to talk to and there were a few others I was able to meet with in spite of everything.  So I was able to keep from going completely insane.
        However, job searching was still a nightmare.  Mostly it was sending applications that went nowhere, setting up interviews that went nowhere, and all the while balancing this around a full time job that was the focus of my creative activities (though fortunately I got along with a lot of my coworkers so there were also people there to talk to during all this).  It really did though drain after awhile because constantly applying to places that keep telling you you wasted your time with constant rejections can tear you down emotionally.
        Eventually though, I did find a full time job that not only paid my bills but also let me save up for the future.  It was a fun job too where I very much enjoyed the work I did, the people I was with, and the opportunities it afforded me.  It was also a better fit for my skill set and previous interests so it made me realize what I was good at and what my career interests are.  It has taught me to stop trying to make things work because doing the work should be as fun as the end result.
        Since then, I've gone even further on other personal goals.  I have an amazing girlfriend, I finished a novel (that still isn't published), and did this all with the support of my friends and family.  This has only improved since that year and I realize that right now there isn't really a better place to be then.
        Which only further makes me realize as I reflect that my life now is better than it has been in a while.  Sure, I've had great experiences (congressional internships, campaigns, living in New England, my time at St. Paul's, etc.) but this is the soundest I've been in a while.  I have free time since unlike school, my work ends once I punch out and I don't bring it home with me, I'm actually making money now, I have some idea where my future is going, and I have a consistent support group that I know will always be there for me.
        So as I look back on this trip around the sun, I realize I've gotten through COVID about the best I could.  I don't think I would have believed I'd be here if I had told myself that at the beginning of grad school (or even senior year in undergrad).  I don't seek to brag, merely just hope I can tell people that life does get better and that next year can improve.  So as I leave, I realize my life is well reflected in a Zac Brown Band song:

Tuesday, February 9, 2021

Someone Wants Xi Gone


  Recently, the think tank the Atlantic Council published “The Longer Telegram,” a report by an anonymous “former senior government official.”  In it, the author recommended that the United States pressure China to remove Chairman Xi Jinping in favor of a more “moderate” leader sympathetic to US interests while keeping the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in charge.  Unsurprisingly, the article was a near sighted policy suggestion that would be at best hard to implement and at worst greatly make the United States’s problems with China worse.  However, a worthwhile question to ask might be “Who gains from doing this?”
        Now, there are ample reasons why people would want to remove Xi from office.  He’s actively engaging in genocide against a minority population, mishandled a viral outbreak that became an international pandemic and covered it up, has overseen a mass crackdown on dissent, manipulated the countries currency, used accumulation of other countries’ debts to manipulate their policies (to preclude naval expansion), etc, etc, etc.  There may be a shorter list of things Chairman Xi hasn’t done.
        However, this is hardly new for China.  Never forget, censorship existed well before Xi became Chairman, massacring political rivals has happened before, and questionable economic practices are usually the norm.  So why would anyone think someone else from the party that continuously produces despots would be any better?
        Well, we could find out the bias of the paper by looking at the background of the author.  However, since it is an “anonymous” source, it is impossible to independently verify who used the info.  Also, as proven during the Trump administration, it is impossible to even prove independent sources are credible.  Therefore, we cannot use the author or their alleged background as evidence of anything.
        Instead, those funding the Atlantic Council may give us an insight into who is supporting the idea.  After all, those who give money to it likely do so because they support the institution.  However, if we do take a look at their donor list, we begin to see a lot of businesses that have financial ties to China.  This may imply that these companies may be supporting this for self-interested purposes.
        Some of the financial firms that have donated to the Atlantic Council include Goldman Sachs & Co., the JP Morgan Chase Foundation, the Mubadala Investment Co., and BP, among others (like Burisma).  Goldman Sachs is trying to buyout its Chinese partner, JP Morgan “is seeking to establish another Chinese joint venture in wealth management,” Reuters reported Mubadala investing $2 billion in China back in 2019 with plans for more, and BP has been expanding its gas Chinese importations.  It seems that companies doing business in China may have a vested interest in the nation’s leadership since it impacts their deals.
        There are also entertainment companies that have been doing work in China.  21st Century Fox (now owned by Disney) and NBCUniversal Telemundo Enterprises (owned by Comcast) are both on the donor list.  Both companies have investments in China so they are another potential interested party.  This is starting to suggest a pattern.
        Some of the more prominent companies though on the donor list are Google and Facebook, two of the largest tech companies in the world.  Both are actually banned in China but have been working with the Chinese government and are trying to get into the nation.  They may see regime change as a way to get themselves legalized internally, especially if they conform to Chinese censorship standards.
        Now this is a long list of companies that have financial ties to China, but the reader may be wondering just what exactly this means and how this connects directly to Xi Jinping.  Well, it is possible that the “Longer Telegram” report is a sign of growing dissatisfaction with Chairman Xi’s leadership and a belief that his removal could actually help these companies.  After all, Western firms are increasingly purchasing Chinese bonds so there is corporate desire to control political action in China.
        Under Xi’s leadership, the Chinese state has been greatly increasing state influence and authority over the countries’ businesses.  In addition, he is purging political rivals which creates a hostile environment within the government.  All of these would make business ventures hard for foreign companies hoping to use government ties to make a profit.  This may lead them to support a political rival for a better business climate.
        It is important to remember though that there is no hero in this conflict.  Yes, Xi Jinping is a genocidal authoritarian responsible for the worst pandemic in decades, but many companies have actively supported his rise to that position.  Nike, Apple, Coca-Cola and others fought to protect slave labor in the Xinjiang province while Disney thanked the agency overseeing that for letting them shoot a film nearby.  So their interests are not humanitarian and whoever replaces Xi will probably be just as bad even if he supports foreign investment.
        Nevertheless, the real question may be if there are any actual plans to implement policies on behalf of the “Longer Telegram” report.  Well, the Atlantic Council also takes money from governments including countries at odds with China like Japan and Korea, countries investing in China like the United Arab Emirates, and factions in the United States government like the United States Department of State, Department of Energy, and the Marine Corps.
        President Joe Biden has actively been focusing on addressing China by hiring multiple Asia experts.  However, Wall Street spent $74 million supporting Joe Biden (more than it did for Trump) and Joe has been hiring folks with ties to Wall Street, including tech companies, so he will have their voices in mind.  So there is a good chance that his policies may reflect the will of Wall Street, especially in favoring American financial interests abroad.
        All this is conjecture though at this time.  There have been no major pushes from the Biden Administration into Asia and there may be other ideas in the works besides removing Xi Jinping.  All the same, it would not be surprising if removing Xi while preserving communism suddenly became an interest of the US.  After all, President Joe Biden was the head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when the US voted to invade Iraq and Afghanistan so he may know something or two about regime change.