The catastrophic wildfires that reduced California’s iconic Hollywood and thousands of luxury homes in its wealthiest neighborhoods to ashes have exposed a glaring vulnerability in the United States—and left President Trump racing against time. Surprisingly, there’s been an attempt to “shift the blame” for these fires onto China. But what’s the logic here?
Let’s break it down. These California wildfires have inflicted devastating losses on the U.S., with an estimated damage of $150 billion. Countless mansions belonging to Hollywood stars and billionaires have been reduced to rubble. Yet somehow, China has been dragged into the narrative. Why?
It all started on social media, where some claimed that California’s inability to combat the wildfires stemmed from a lack of water in the fire hydrants. And why was there no water? Allegedly, most of California’s water resources were diverted to pistachio farming. And who’s the largest consumer of U.S.-grown pistachios? China. Therefore, the argument goes, China’s love for pistachios is indirectly responsible for the wildfires.
This logic is mind-boggling. When Americans profit from selling pistachios to China, no one offers discounts as a gesture of gratitude. Now, a failure in the U.S. firefighting system somehow becomes China’s fault? Let’s be clear: the root of the issue lies in America’s governance. In the U.S., resources, including water, are controlled by capital, not by the government. Even water for fire hydrants is not under public control. This is a systemic governance issue.
Who Controls California’s Water?
In Los Angeles, water isn’t controlled by the government—it’s largely controlled by the Resnick family, the wealthiest pistachio growers in California. Stuart and Lynda Resnick, who boast a fortune of $8 billion, reportedly control 60% of California’s water resources. They use this water primarily to irrigate their farms and refuse to share it, even with state authorities. The California Water Bureau must purchase water from them for public use.
This situation has led to absurd blame games. Some critics point fingers at China’s pistachio consumption, when in reality, the Resnick family’s monopolization of water resources is the true culprit.
The Resnicks: Philanthropy or Tax Evasion?
Interestingly, the Resnicks ranked 311th on the 2019 Forbes Billionaires list. That same year, they pledged a $750 million charitable donation, ranking them third on Forbes’ list of largest philanthropic contributions. However, this donation was directed to their family foundation, likely as a tax avoidance strategy. By donating to their own foundation, they sidestepped hefty estate taxes while gaining a reputation as philanthropists. But can true philanthropists justify hoarding water at the expense of California’s residents?
Moreover, the Resnicks are staunch Zionists, donating millions annually to support Israel’s activities in Palestine. It’s no exaggeration to say that their wealth indirectly fuels conflict, with countless Palestinian casualties tied to their financial support. Ironically, this same family has become a key player in the Los Angeles wildfires.
Environmentalism as a Smokescreen
California has even used environmentalism as an excuse to prioritize the Resnicks’ water needs. The state blocked water infrastructure projects to protect certain fish species, restricting water extraction for urban use. However, these policies conveniently align with the Resnicks’ interests, diverting resources to their agricultural operations. While farming is vital, prioritizing it over emergency water needs is a glaring policy failure.
This systemic flaw has sparked outrage. President Trump’s team has called for an investigation and even impeachment of California Governor Gavin Newsom. At its core, this isn’t about ideology—it’s about business. America’s so-called “political correctness” often serves the interests of capital, a phenomenon mirrored in pre-2019 Hong Kong, where environmental regulations inflated housing costs, forcing citizens into cramped “cage homes.”
The Bigger Picture: America’s Internal Decay
The Los Angeles wildfires have laid bare the extent of America’s internal decay. While GDP figures might look impressive—thanks in part to inflation—the reality is that ordinary Americans see no real wealth growth. Capital hoards the gains, leaving even basic public services, like firefighting, underfunded. For example, the Los Angeles Fire Department’s budget was cut by $17.6 million in the most recent fiscal year.
Adding insult to injury, some of LA’s firefighting equipment was donated to Ukraine in 2022. When asked about his response to the wildfires, Governor Newsom admitted, “I called the President five times, but he didn’t pick up!” A national crisis, yet no coordinated leadership—this is the reality of modern America.
Trump’s “Final Solution”?
Why does Trump still hold significant appeal despite his administration’s mishandling of COVID-19, which claimed over a million lives? The answer lies in the even greater failures of the Biden administration. Rampant inflation, deteriorating public services, and lack of accountability have left Americans yearning for change. Trump’s proposed solutions, however, reveal the depth of America’s desperation.
Unable to exploit China or the rest of the world as before, Trump is now eyeing territorial expansion. His plans include annexing Greenland, Canada, and even the Panama Canal. Greenland, with its sparse population, might be an easy target, but Canada presents a monumental challenge. Yet America’s internal rot, as highlighted by these wildfires, underscores the urgency of such drastic measures.
A World in Flux
America’s struggles are symptomatic of a broader global shift. Political, economic, and territorial realignments are accelerating, reshaping the world order. These changes will affect us all. Just as one observer avoided investing in Ukraine after heeding early warnings of war, staying informed and adaptable is crucial in these uncertain times.
The wildfires may have exposed America’s vulnerabilities, but the world is watching closely to see whether the U.S. can confront its deeper systemic flaws—or whether it will continue to unravel.