Chinese imperialism and future Australian sovereignty

[5 from the wing on debut]

^There's nothing new to add: the solution is as it's always been, i.e., a new standards-based trade agreement with the sum of forces greater than China. There's nothing else to discuss on the matter. You're not even in the game in its absence, let alone war games.

Biden is the best chance to do this since the TPP, but this opportunity is even better because the TPP had other nasties in it that can be eliminated, and we are that bit wiser now. Biden's even happy to look at proper tax collection from digital multinationals, so you can deal with the tax problem at the same time, which underlies all manner of domestic issues.

The fact you even think you're 'on the path to war' suggests you're dragging yourself down to the level of Aussie shock jock nonsense when you're far smarter than that. You deserve to get belted for it because you refuse to step up, siding with the short-termists on issue after issue going back years. It's as if you fear being called a 'latte sipper' and think the only other option is to consign yourself to Trumpist-level company.

The EU and UK are aligning with the US on this already. I've noticed it just quietly in the news for a few weeks now. Have you been following South Korea, Japan and India on this? They're aligning as expected. (Now would be a good time to build rather than burn bridges with India, but it would take actual leadership beyond a news cycle to do so).

War is inevitable only in the dumbest sense of inevitability, i.e., it's the easiest and most instantly gratifying idea for people to resign themselves to, much like climate change denial or some new world order conspiracy theory. Far more exciting than the long-term business of international development and relations. But we're not always at war, contrary to some people's deep desire for that to be the case.

I can’t quite work out whether you are serious or whether you are just taking the piss.

Or did you update merely update a Chamberlain speech from the 1930’s?

[watt price tully]

^There's nothing new to add: the solution is as it's always been, i.e., a new standards-based trade agreement with the sum of forces greater than China. There's nothing else to discuss on the matter. You're not even in the game in its absence, let alone war games.

Biden is the best chance to do this since the TPP, but this opportunity is even better because the TPP had other nasties in it that can be eliminated, and we are that bit wiser now. Biden's even happy to look at proper tax collection from digital multinationals, so you can deal with the tax problem at the same time, which underlies all manner of domestic issues.

The fact you even think you're 'on the path to war' suggests you're dragging yourself down to the level of Aussie shock jock nonsense when you're far smarter than that. You deserve to get belted for it because you refuse to step up, siding with the short-termists on issue after issue going back years. It's as if you fear being called a 'latte sipper' and think the only other option is to consign yourself to Trumpist-level company.

The EU and UK are aligning with the US on this already. I've noticed it just quietly in the news for a few weeks now. Have you been following South Korea, Japan and India on this? They're aligning as expected. (Now would be a good time to build rather than burn bridges with India, but it would take actual leadership beyond a news cycle to do so).

War is inevitable only in the dumbest sense of inevitability, i.e., it's the easiest and most instantly gratifying idea for people to resign themselves to, much like climate change denial or some new world order conspiracy theory. Far more exciting than the long-term business of international development and relations. But we're not always at war, contrary to some people's deep desire for that to be the case.

Great post PTID. Ever since Scotty’s dumbarse way of leading the world pack about blaming China for the Coronavirus when we’re minnows in terms of world power rather than let the US be the bellicose one, China has paid us back in spades. To quote Paul Keating when addressing John Hewson the feral abacus “well done professor” with respect to Scotty.

That is not to say I don’t blame China but let those with power do our bidding don’t do it coz you want to cozy up to Trump FFS. Sharp as a bowling ball our Scotty. He’s been laying his hands on it too long.

[pietillidie]

^It's been one short-termist knee-jerk press conference after another for years now. The culture wars really are the new opium of the masses.

Perhaps instead of discussing the international agreements being fashioned as we speak, we could count RAN tug boats in the channel. There just has to be a smarter way of rearranging them to clinch victory here

[stui magpie]

Ever since Scotty’s dumbarse way of leading the world pack about blaming China for the Coronavirus when we’re minnows in terms of world power rather than let the US be the bellicose one, China has paid us back in spades.

Just because you want to bend over rather than stand up doesn't mean it's smart or right.

We stood up and for better or worse it was the right thing to do.

[watt price tully]

Ever since Scotty’s dumbarse way of leading the world pack about blaming China for the Coronavirus when we’re minnows in terms of world power rather than let the US be the bellicose one, China has paid us back in spades.

Just because you want to bend over rather than stand up doesn't mean it's smart or right.

We stood up and for better or worse it was the right thing to do.

It was dumb row in primary school stuff, makes u & ur Murdoch mates feel good. However,

Was it smart? No
Was it in Australia’s interests? No
Was it populist? Well Stui you’ve answered that pretty well

How have we fared since that intervention?

Just because one doesn’t have to lead the world in bellicose and belligerent statements doesn’t mean one axiomatically “bends over” (again your obsession with Bums

[pietillidie]

^Utter cowards who are so incompetent and psychologically unfit for serious leadership, they can't wear the pain of a bad news cycle, let alone a tough election cycle, in order to focus on a disciplined long-term strategy quietly and effectively. Short-termist fail after short-termist fail for two decades, wasting Australia's natural advantages, egged on by shock jock-level dimwits.

[stui magpie]

<snip>

We called the CCP out and they've shown what they are to the world.

I'm happy with that. Now to deal with the future.

[David]

Then, find leaders who can work the global maths: Do you think that Japan, South Korea, India, SEA, the US, Europe and whoever else don't have enough mass to negotiate to mutual advantage here? It's not rocket science; just will and effort. China is the one clearly hemmed in, forced to use asymmetrical leverage like the Soviets before it. But, geographically and historically China has much greater possibility for reform over time because it's exposed to liberal and capitalist forces in a way the Soviets never were.

This is pretty good analysis, I think.

Otherwise I’m sceptical of criticisms of ScoMo&co for failing realpolitik by not adequately sucking up to China. We should pick our battles, sure, but I would rather intemperate dissent than constant hedging for fear of upsetting the schoolyard bully. Either point to something the Libs said that was false or unfair, or explain why the true thing they said shouldn’t have been said (and in the process be complicit with the placation brigade).

Let’s not brush under the carpet the fact that a good deal of what has the Chinese authorities’ noses out of joint at the moment is the acknowledgement of their disgraceful human rights abuses in Xinjiang. I’m not for a second assigning positive or honourable motives to our government in this, but do you really want to trade that acknowledgement for a better tariff rate? Really?

Having said all that, any talk of war with China is insane, criminally so, and as far as I’m concerned anyone agitating for that can volunteer to ride the first missile.

[watt price tully]

^Utter cowards who are so incompetent and psychologically unfit for serious leadership, they can't wear the pain of a bad news cycle, let alone a tough election cycle, in order to focus on a disciplined long-term strategy quietly and effectively. Short-termist fail after short-termist fail for two decades, wasting Australia's natural advantages, egged on by shock jock-level dimwits.

Exactly. Short term populism / electoral cycle politics vs Australia’s interests.

Trading Australian business interests for party populism was shielded by the CornaVirus. As though one can’t make the same point in a different way. Who’d a thunk.

Scotty of course has form in abrogating responsibility.

[watt price tully]

Then, find leaders who can work the global maths: Do you think that Japan, South Korea, India, SEA, the US, Europe and whoever else don't have enough mass to negotiate to mutual advantage here? It's not rocket science; just will and effort. China is the one clearly hemmed in, forced to use asymmetrical leverage like the Soviets before it. But, geographically and historically China has much greater possibility for reform over time because it's exposed to liberal and capitalist forces in a way the Soviets never were.

This is pretty good analysis, I think.

Otherwise I’m sceptical of criticisms of ScoMo&co for failing realpolitik by not adequately sucking up to China. We should pick our battles, sure, but I would rather intemperate dissent than constant hedging for fear of upsetting the schoolyard bully. Either point to something the Libs said that was false or unfair, or explain why the true thing they said shouldn’t have been said (and in the process be complicit with the placation brigade).

Let’s not brush under the carpet the fact that a good deal of what has the Chinese authorities’ noses out of joint at the moment is the acknowledgement of their disgraceful human rights abuses in Xinjiang. I’m not for a second assigning positive or honourable motives to our government in this, but do you really want to trade that acknowledgement for a better tariff rate? Really?

Having said all that, any talk of war with China is insane, criminally so, and as far as I’m concerned anyone agitating for that can volunteer to ride the first missile.

You don’t lead it for goodness sake. That is as smart as playing Moore in the fwd line when Howe is injured. Many ways to make the same point and it’s simply not as binary as you and the bum obsessor seems to suggest.

[pietillidie]

Let’s not brush under the carpet the fact that a good deal of what has the Chinese authorities’ noses out of joint at the moment is the acknowledgement of their disgraceful human rights abuses in Xinjiang. I’m not for a second assigning positive or honourable motives to our government in this, but do you really want to trade that acknowledgement for a better tariff rate? Really?

It's not a trade-off and not binary, though, as WPT says.

"We have serious concerns about...and we will in no way be skirting around that in serious discussion with our Chinese counterparts and regional partners. That is an important matter to us as global citizens. At the same time, we believe there are many avenues for progress for China and the region...and we are working on...the future for us all in a region this integrated is one which...embraces China as a partner along with countries like Japan, India, South Korea...all of whom I know seek the betterment of their own countries and indeed the betterment of lives of the people of China...we celebrate with China that hundreds of millions of Chinese people can now...Of course, no relationship is ever perfect... but nations develop and evolve and we think China can now look to improve on its...but again, we believe China is making great strides...and so on and so forth without hysteria."

But the Glibs are utterly bereft and mistrained. They've spent decades (a) following nutcase Republicans in lieu of thinking and leading internationally; (b) tearing down constructive policy aimed at broadening the economic base to protect their mates' quick bucks today; and (c) fuelling shock-jock loons and Facebook nutters to score quick points and derail serious discussion. That's their skill set.

Australia needs leaders who can rise above the received nonsense and differentiate between the people and the regime. Showing concern for the average Chinese bloke is exactly how you stick it to the regime. Regimes come and go; 1.4b people don't. But doing this takes discipline, because you have to wear shock-jock tripe and Facebook hysteria on the one hand, and Chinese flag-waving nationalist crazies on the other, both trying to drag you into their respective mires.

But that's your bloody job as a leader. If you haven't got the kahunas and self-awareness to cope with the task, then bugger off back to the pub with the rest of the failed Iraq invaders, Abbott adorers, Trump lovers, Brexit delusionalists, climate deniers, species killers, broadband wreckers, science haters and technology underminers who have similarly poor self-control and short time horizons, and get it wrong time after time after time after time, even while fist waving in imaginary victory.

[stui magpie]

Then, find leaders who can work the global maths: Do you think that Japan, South Korea, India, SEA, the US, Europe and whoever else don't have enough mass to negotiate to mutual advantage here? It's not rocket science; just will and effort. China is the one clearly hemmed in, forced to use asymmetrical leverage like the Soviets before it. But, geographically and historically China has much greater possibility for reform over time because it's exposed to liberal and capitalist forces in a way the Soviets never were.

This is pretty good analysis, I think.

Otherwise I’m sceptical of criticisms of ScoMo&co for failing realpolitik by not adequately sucking up to China. We should pick our battles, sure, but I would rather intemperate dissent than constant hedging for fear of upsetting the schoolyard bully. Either point to something the Libs said that was false or unfair, or explain why the true thing they said shouldn’t have been said (and in the process be complicit with the placation brigade).

Let’s not brush under the carpet the fact that a good deal of what has the Chinese authorities’ noses out of joint at the moment is the acknowledgement of their disgraceful human rights abuses in Xinjiang. I’m not for a second assigning positive or honourable motives to our government in this, but do you really want to trade that acknowledgement for a better tariff rate? Really?

Having said all that, any talk of war with China is insane, criminally so, and as far as I’m concerned anyone agitating for that can volunteer to ride the first missile.

You don’t lead it for goodness sake. That is as smart as playing Moore in the fwd line when Howe is injured. Many ways to make the same point and it’s simply not as binary as you and the bum obsessor seems to suggest.

Bullshit. David makes great points, your obsession with Morrison is what's binary here.

[stui magpie]

Having said all that, any talk of war with China is insane, criminally so, and as far as I’m concerned anyone agitating for that can volunteer to ride the first missile.

No one sane is agitating for it, just preparing for it.

What happens when China decides to take Taiwan? There's be all the sabre rattling and diplomacy etc but if China decides to call the US bluff (and we'll be expected to support the USA) do we just go, "Damn, you caught us bluffing, Ok, have them" or do we push back and hope they're bluffing?

[watt price tully]

This is pretty good analysis, I think.

Otherwise I’m sceptical of criticisms of ScoMo&co for failing realpolitik by not adequately sucking up to China. We should pick our battles, sure, but I would rather intemperate dissent than constant hedging for fear of upsetting the schoolyard bully. Either point to something the Libs said that was false or unfair, or explain why the true thing they said shouldn’t have been said (and in the process be complicit with the placation brigade).

Let’s not brush under the carpet the fact that a good deal of what has the Chinese authorities’ noses out of joint at the moment is the acknowledgement of their disgraceful human rights abuses in Xinjiang. I’m not for a second assigning positive or honourable motives to our government in this, but do you really want to trade that acknowledgement for a better tariff rate? Really?

Having said all that, any talk of war with China is insane, criminally so, and as far as I’m concerned anyone agitating for that can volunteer to ride the first missile.

You don’t lead it for goodness sake. That is as smart as playing Moore in the fwd line when Howe is injured. Many ways to make the same point and it’s simply not as binary as you and the bum obsessor seems to suggest.

Bullshit. David makes great points, your obsession with Morrison is what's binary here.

Oh dear

[5 from the wing on debut]

Having said all that, any talk of war with China is insane, criminally so, and as far as I’m concerned anyone agitating for that can volunteer to ride the first missile.

No one sane is agitating for it, just preparing for it.

What happens when China decides to take Taiwan? There's be all the sabre rattling and diplomacy etc but if China decides to call the US bluff (and we'll be expected to support the USA) do we just go, "Damn, you caught us bluffing, Ok, have them" or do we push back and hope they're bluffing?

You knew when you asked that question that you would not receive an answer, because it would require a practical response. That requires some actual thought and a solution.

There's been lots of old man screams at the clouds ranting here (I don't mean David when I say that), but nothing of any practical value.