It's just so happens that the state is privatised

Yeah it is by that definition, but by that definition basically every action taken by the American government overall or by essentially any police force in human history is terrorism.

If I pay someone for something and they don't give it to me, and I shoot them over it, is that terrorism? I would argue no, but terrorism laws are written so broadly that anything can be terrorism.

No it means charge.

So basically, instead of deciding to prosecute someone for a crime, or declining to prosecute them for a crime, a prosecutor can call for a grand jury. In the grand jury, the prosecutor gets to show basically whatever evidence they want to the jury, and then they ask the jury to decide if the case should be prosecuted.

The standards are supposed to be much lower than a guilty verdict in a traditional jury trial.

There's an old saying that goes something like "A prosecutor could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich."

The purpose is essentially to allow the prosecutor to make whatever decision they want while pretending that they weren't the one that made the decision. They're also not very public affairs so it's pretty easy for the prosecutor to lie about what evidence they did or did not show to the jury.

If you want an example of how they're used for this political purpose, look up articles about the Kentucky grand jury's "decision" not to prosecute the pigs that killed Breonna Taylor, and read some of the jurists statements after the fact.

A grand jury is a legal setting in which like upwards of 40 people are part of a jury that determines whether or not prosecutors have enough evidence to change someone with a felony. The proceedings are secret and only become public if the grand jury determines that the prosecutors have enough evidence to try said person/people in court, also known as issuing an indictment or being indicted. Only the prosecutors are present for a grand jury. The accused don't get to defend themselves, and the prosecution doesn't have to present exculpatory evidence.

The joke in the American legal system is that prosecutors could "indict a ham sandwich" because the grand jury process is very easy to manipulate to make your case look stronger than it is (or weaker, for that matter).

See my comment to another user below.

Basically, yuan issuance is strongly reliant on accumulation of foreign reserve and refinancing of non-banking assets, both of which can be increased by foreign direct investment.

Unlike China who is trying to create a win-win scenario for everyone, the US is forcing everyone to play their lose-lose torture game. The US is willing to kill its own consumption through tariffs to destroy export revenues in other countries. The question is do you want to risk playing this game? If you lose, your industries get wiped out and IMF comes in and privatize your industrial assets.

This is the carrot that the US is extending to China (let’s keep the charade going for a bit longer). The stick is to damage both sides of the economy and see who lasts longer. Because China issues its money through relying on accumulating foreign currencies by selling shit to Western consumers, and Europe is going into austerity which means they can no longer absorb China’s exports in the event of US tariffs, this will place China in a difficult situation.

China’s only way to win this game is to transition itself from a super exporter country into a domestic consumption economy through direct central bank money creation, which then allows it to increase the wages of its own citizens, who can then use their increased income to import stuff from other Global South countries. In other words, China exports its industrial capacity to the Global South and absorbs the export surpluses from the rest of the world. This neutralizes the dollar hegemony and allows the rest of the world to develop into their own economic zone that is independent of the parasitic US financial empire, provided the US doesn’t threaten to start a nuclear war.

What do you mean no more growth left is needed? The entire Chinese economy is designed to rely on economic growth to finance itself, and that has to do with how the Chinese government finances its budget.

Unlike the US that assumes full monetary sovereignty where the Federal Reserve (central bank) prints as much money as it sees fit, the People’s Bank of China prints money based primarily on its accumulation of foreign reserves (starts from 1994 and peaked in 2014) and refinancing of non-banking assets (pre-1994 financing mechanism and started to take prominence again after China’s twin surpluses ended in 2014). Gold reserve and direct money (debt) creation contribute only a tiny fraction of the yuan issuance. This has allowed China to keep its budget deficit to ~3% every year in accordance to IMF’s sound market principles.

So what happens when exports are down and domestic consumption slumps? How do you increase that foreign reserve and the industrial assets for refinancing? You attract foreign investment to increase your capacity to print money. (There are other temporary tricks like issuing special long-term bonds etc. that China is currently doing but these will not fix the fundamental problems).

Let me give you an example: with an aging demographic, there is some calculation that China would not be able to pay out its pension funds by 2035 unless it can maintain a 5% growth over the next 11 years. This would not be a problem for the US or any country that exercises monetary sovereignty, because the government can always print the money needed to pay out the pension fund. But for China, you either increase the retirement age (already happening) if you cannot meet the 5% target, or you do everything you can to meet that 5% target (export more stuff, attract more foreign investments to grow your foreign reserves and build more industrial capacities that can be used for refinancing purpose).

In other words, degrowth can happen only in countries that fully leverage its monetary sovereignty (if the US is run by socialists, for example), but as long China doesn’t change how its monetary system works, it cannot commit to the degrowth strategy.

I am actually writing an effort post on how China finances its budget but it has taken a lot of my time due to the extensive research required and I am still far from completing it, though it fully explains why China is so afraid of US tariffs. The solution is incredibly simple though: China should just print money as it sees fit (and will lose its net exporter status) instead of relying on accumulating foreign reserves.

With respect, you don’t understand how China’s economy works. That small % of FDI in proportion to GDP is responsible for 16% of China’s tax revenues and nearly 30% (!!) of China’s export value!

It plays a disproportionate role in the economy because a lot of foreign investment now targets high tech/high value added chain. The lower value chain industries like textile have been completely dominated by Chinese manufacturers (e.g. Shien, Temu) that have squeezed the foreign investors out of the competition.

The US hasn’t been playing a lot with FDI because it didn’t have to - it has been able to get whatever it wants by running a huge trade deficit for the past 30 years! Now that it is being forced to confront the inevitable contradictions of running persistent trade deficit (de-industrialization), it is shifting to direct investment to retain the primacy of the dollar while cutting back on trade deficit.

I should keep including that disclaimer, thank you

Just a step on the path towards her true goal, being the house Speaker