Talking Politics | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Talking Politics

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-28/shorten-takes-to-chinese-social-media-platfrom-wechat/10946496

"Mr Shorten said he welcomed the rise of China and did not see Beijing as a threat."

I know politicians need to distance themselves from genuinely racially motivated politics. However, they need to be careful that doing so doesn't cloud their judgement on the overall long term strategic view. Most of the world is finally waking up to the Chinese regime's long term vision and need to tread very carefully.

I'll give you another example. The leader of the Greens in Tasmania raised a very valid point of her concerns about growing influence in Australian politics of Chinese Govt linked individuals and the selling of Australian assets to oraganisations and individuals linked to the Chinese govt. What was her reward for making such a valid point? Her own party, in their predictable rush to signal their superior virtue on race issues, screamed RACIST!! And in a more bizarre twist, they were backed up by the neo-capitalists of the Libs (who will just sell anything to the highest bidder) who also screamed RACIST!

We have this relationship of strange bedfellows, between virtue signalling lefties - who habitually scream the word, RACIST at the drop of a hat - and neo-cons who simply want to sell to the highest bidder and don't care much of the consequences, as long as it benefits their wallet.

Over the next decade or two, just as the L-NP coalition will continue to fracture between the conservatives and the moderate factions. I think there is the potential to see the ALP fracture. And the catalyst to an ALP split could be the rise of China and increasing covert Chinese govt influence of ALP politicians. And with ALP politicians going above and beyond in attempting to portray themselves as not racist, there could be a dangerous tendency to turn a blind eye to such influences.

It wouldn't be unprecedented either. Remember, the ALP split back in the 1950s, where the anti-communist, more socially conservative faction split off to form the Democratic Labour Party (who by the way, still exist in a minor form). This could be essentially the same thing with a modern twist.

I think the point here is, just as the neo-cons pursuit of money and growth at any cost clouds their wider strategic judgement and awareness. So does the natural tendency to self-flagellate and overshoot the runway on issues of racial politics from the left side of the political spectrum.
 
I am pretty sure my local milk bar is owned by Chinese spies of some description. They would turnover about $6 a week I reckon.
 
spook said:
I am pretty sure my local milk bar is owned by Chinese spies of some description. They would turnover about $6 a week I reckon.
Clearly that's not what we're talking about Spook. And indeed, you may even find the Chinese milk bar owners aren't even from mainland China. They could be 4th generation ethnically Chinese people from Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan or Hong Kong, who's family hasn't lived in China for 100 years, for all we know. Or middle class mainland Chinese who were partly motivated to migrate to get away from the type of regime they were living under (no, I'm not an ignorant One Nation moronic type, I have much more of a handle on diverse range of Chinese people and their divergent backgrounds). But you perfectly demonstrate the type of black and white polarised dynamic such discussions have deteriorated to. By basically inferring, I'm some kind of racist One Nation type, by having an independent view outside the current orthodoxy.

The sale of strategic infrastructure assets, such as Ports to companies linked to the mainland Chinese regime is more the scale I'm talking about. Or Chinese govt linked teleco/tech companies potentially interfering with telecommunication networks. That sort of thing.

Sure, it's highly publicised that a proven race baiter like Trump has pushed back heavily against China during his administration. But just because he has serious flaws and often, questionable motivations. Doesn't necessarily make him entirely wrong. I have read commentary from international relations experts that the Chinese regime is taking the long view, that they are a dictatorship and hold perpetual power, so have the advantage that they can simply wait out the Trump years and go back to business as usual of US administrations (both Republican and Democrat) that are a pushover at the negotiating table.

And just remember, Europe has now finally grown a back bone and in the last two days has signaled it's intention of pushing back against growing Chinese govt influence. And even an Ardern lead NZ has also taken steps to push back as has our own government in recent times over Huawei.
 
Panthera Tigris said:
Clearly that's not what we're talking about Spook. And indeed, you may even find the Chinese milk bar owners aren't even from mainland China. They could be 4th generation ethnically Chinese people from Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan or Hong Kong, who's family hasn't lived in China for 100 years, for all we know. Or middle class mainland Chinese who were partly motivated to migrate to get away from the type of regime they were living under (no, I'm not an ignorant One Nation moronic type, I have much more of a handle on diverse range of Chinese people and their divergent backgrounds). But you perfectly demonstrate the type of black and white polarised dynamic such discussions have deteriorated to. By basically inferring, I'm some kind of racist One Nation type, by having an independent view outside the current orthodoxy.

The sale of strategic infrastructure assets, such as Ports to companies linked to the mainland Chinese regime is more the scale I'm talking about. Or Chinese govt linked teleco/tech companies potentially interfering with telecommunication networks. That sort of thing.

Sure, it's highly publicised that a proven race baiter like Trump has pushed back heavily against China during his administration. But just because he has serious flaws and often, questionable motivations. Doesn't necessarily make him entirely wrong. I have read commentary from international relations experts that the Chinese regime is taking the long view, that they are a dictatorship and hold perpetual power, so have the advantage that they can simply wait out the Trump years and go back to business as usual of US administrations (both Republican and Democrat) that are a pushover at the negotiating table.

And just remember, Europe has now finally grown a back bone and in the last two days has signaled it's intention of pushing back against growing Chinese govt influence. And even an Ardern lead NZ has also taken steps to push back as has our own government in recent times over Huawei.

While I think Spook was just having a lend, I agree with the concern around Australian governments selling of our land and assets to any foreign power! How the hell do you give the Chinese Govt a 99-year lease on Darwin's port? I really hope there is more push-back against the Chinese Govt by others around the world. If not it will be a world of Faustian pain coming up in the future!
 
The Big Richo said:
Mason Cox makes me want to vote for Pauline Hanson.

I will concede you the offer to explain your view, before I ask you to , “please explain”.

Does Mason have some view on gun controls that aligns with Pauline?

Just as an aside, it’s amazing to think that Hanson is more recognised than ScoMo.
 
Panthera Tigris said:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-28/shorten-takes-to-chinese-social-media-platfrom-wechat/10946496

"Mr Shorten said he welcomed the rise of China and did not see Beijing as a threat."

I know politicians need to distance themselves from genuinely racially motivated politics. However, they need to be careful that doing so doesn't cloud their judgement on the overall long term strategic view. Most of the world is finally waking up to the Chinese regime's long term vision and need to tread very carefully.

I'll give you another example. The leader of the Greens in Tasmania raised a very valid point of her concerns about growing influence in Australian politics of Chinese Govt linked individuals and the selling of Australian assets to oraganisations and individuals linked to the Chinese govt. What was her reward for making such a valid point? Her own party, in their predictable rush to signal their superior virtue on race issues, screamed RACIST!! And in a more bizarre twist, they were backed up by the neo-capitalists of the Libs (who will just sell anything to the highest bidder) who also screamed RACIST!

We have this relationship of strange bedfellows, between virtue signalling lefties - who habitually scream the word, RACIST at the drop of a hat - and neo-cons who simply want to sell to the highest bidder and don't care much of the consequences, as long as it benefits their wallet.

Over the next decade or two, just as the L-NP coalition will continue to fracture between the conservatives and the moderate factions. I think there is the potential to see the ALP fracture. And the catalyst to an ALP split could be the rise of China and increasing covert Chinese govt influence of ALP politicians. And with ALP politicians going above and beyond in attempting to portray themselves as not racist, there could be a dangerous tendency to turn a blind eye to such influences.

It wouldn't be unprecedented either. Remember, the ALP split back in the 1950s, where the anti-communist, more socially conservative faction split off to form the Democratic Labour Party (who by the way, still exist in a minor form). This could be essentially the same thing with a modern twist.

I think the point here is, just as the neo-cons pursuit of money and growth at any cost clouds their wider strategic judgement and awareness. So does the natural tendency to self-flagellate and overshoot the runway on issues of racial politics from the left side of the political spectrum.
Don't get me wrong I am concerned about Chinese influence around the world as well but in reality is it really that much more malevolent than US foreign policy influence over the years ?

That's not a reason to ignore it of course
 
Re: Talking Politics

spook said:
I am pretty sure my local milk bar is owned by Chinese spies of some description. They would turnover about $6 a week I reckon.

Same as all the Local bottle shops that Dan. Murphy and co put out of business 20 years ago. Now reopening with Chinese franchisees... But this is simply a way to buy permanent residency...by investing in a business... They aren't on skilled migrant visas...nor are they necessarily business people, certainly not experienced in liquor sakes. Just have to keep it going a few years, in the meantime house is acquired, children educated in local high schools, rotate the grandparents on holiday visas to look after the home, one parent often continues to work, run business back in China. Not sure if there is anything sinister in it and the thirsty camel franchiser is laughing all the way to the bank.
 
China are acting like a rising power, the USA acts like an established power. If Australia wants to protect its own interests it needs to be careful of both.

DS
 
Sintiger said:
Don't get me wrong I am concerned about Chinese influence around the world as well but in reality is it really that much more malevolent than US foreign policy influence over the years ?

That's not a reason to ignore it of course

DavidSSS said:
China are acting like a rising power, the USA acts like an established power. If Australia wants to protect its own interests it needs to be careful of both.

DS
I agree, US foreign policy has not been ideal at times. But to me, it's a matter of the devil you know. The big overriding difference is that one is an authoritarian dictatorship, the other is a democracy of western European origins. From the point of view of shared values, cultural connections, governance, the US obviously has far more in common with Australia than the current Chinese regime. This is not to say, I'm suggesting following the US blindly on all matter of foreign policy. And sure, people may be wary of of the US under the unpredictable Trump administration. But Presidencies in the US come and go. The current Chinese authoritarian regime still has many years to run.

Going back to my point on the Trump Presidency. If one good thing comes from it. Hopefully it gives future administrations (even Democrat Presidencies) heart that they can push back against Chinese foreign Policy that they see as detrimental. Like I said in an earlier post, about commentary I've read in foreign policy journals. The Chinese regime has long been shaking their head in disbelief at what a pushover US administrations have been at the negotiating table (both Democrat and Republican) and have finally been made to sit up and take notice at Trump's tactics on trade. Sure, they may not particularly like him personally. But they do respect the position he has taken. However, the Chinese are playing the long game and feel they just need to wait out the 4-8 years of Trump, to go back to business as usual at US administrations being a pushover.

That all said, on the flip side, I don't totally trust Trump from the perspective of a formal ally to the US. Despite cliches and conspiracies of American "Imperialism". Trump is actually more of an isolationist. Very populist too. So it's very much, 'US number 1, bugger everyone else'. Hence his threats about US withdrawing support for Europe and Europe needing to contribute more to their own defence. So related to this, I just wonder what is said at the negotiating table with China. He's pushing for a better trade and foreign policy deal for the US. But in doing so is there a wink and a nudge, "Give the US this better deal and we'll turn a blind eye to bullying and coercion of your neighbours - even those who have formal alliances with the US"? Essentially selling Aust, NZ, Singapore, Philippines etc etc down the river. He doesn't have respect for normal legal conventions and legacies of foreign relations such as traditional formal alliances and pacts.

This all brings me to my last point. My view is that the ASEAN nations along with Australia, NZ and the rising power of India should be engaging in working towards more close collaboration strategically on trade, defence and politics as a long term project, to act as a counter-weighted bloc to Chinese influence in the region. And as a method of self help among ourselves - not needing US influence. The ASEAN members - particularly Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia - are already very concerned about the kind of bullying and coercion they are suffering at the hands of China. Singapore has tentatively made noises they are concerned and are a nation with extremely close political, defence and trade ties to Australia and could act as a stable, neutral driving force and champion towards such a collaborated bloc. And finally, India as a growing power to tie it all together. Sure, India has it's issues. But at least (like Singapore) it is a democracy with a system of government derived from similar roots to ourselves. There is much to gain from a more collaborated, bloc of nations stretching from India, through South-East Asia, to Australia, NZ and the small Pacific nations. Engaging with this region should be Australia's long term foreign policy focus in my view. You'd have to go back as far as Keating as our last political leader who believed in the paramount importance of our nearest regional neighbours on the foreign policy front.
 
Panthera Tigris said:
This all brings me to my last point. My view is that the ASEAN nations along with Australia, NZ and the rising power of India should be engaging in working towards more close collaboration strategically on trade, defence and politics as a long term project, to act as a counter-weighted bloc to Chinese influence in the region. And as a method of self help among ourselves - not needing US influence. The ASEAN members - particularly Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia - are already very concerned about the kind of bullying and coercion they are suffering at the hands of China. Singapore has tentatively made noises they are concerned and are a nation with extremely close political, defence and trade ties to Australia and could act as a stable, neutral driving force and champion towards such a collaborated bloc. And finally, India as a growing power to tie it all together. Sure, India has it's issues. But at least (like Singapore) it is a democracy with a system of government derived from similar roots to ourselves. There is much to gain from a more collaborated, bloc of nations stretching from India, through South-East Asia, to Australia, NZ and the small Pacific nations. Engaging with this region should be Australia's long term foreign policy focus in my view. You'd have to go back as far as Keating as our last political leader who believed in the paramount importance of our nearest regional neighbours on the foreign policy front.

Yes. Actually this is already a key goal of Australian engagement in the region and it's why Australia is (usually) trying to forge stronger relationships with ASEAN nations. This is also why Australia's career diplomats shook their heads when ScoMo had his Israeli embassy brain fade just when the Indonesians were hosting a Palestinian delegation.

I agree totally though - this is our region, we need to engage more. It will be increasingly important from a trade and strategic point of view as China flexes its muscles. Indonesia is projected to be the world's fifth biggest economy by 2050 - and by 2025 or thereabouts its economy will be larger than Australia's.
 
antman said:
Yes. Actually this is already a key goal of Australian engagement in the region and it's why Australia is (usually) trying to forge stronger relationships with ASEAN nations. This is also why Australia's career diplomats shook their heads when ScoMo had his Israeli embassy brain fade just when the Indonesians were hosting a Palestinian delegation.

I agree totally though - this is our region, we need to engage more. It will be increasingly important from a trade and strategic point of view as China flexes its muscles. Indonesia is projected to be the world's fifth biggest economy by 2050 - and by 2025 or thereabouts its economy will be larger than Australia's.
And indeed, the reason why I include the South Pacific as part of this long term strategic view as part of this bloc. Eighteen months ago I traveled to Samoa (my second trip there). Last time I was there, the airport terminal was something you'd find at a small regional airport like Launceston or Albury-Wodonga. This time though, they were three qtrs through a complete rebuild of the terminal. The new one is very modern with all the bells and whistles. Funded by a seemingly very generous loan from a Chinese Development Corporation (The Chinese Govt holding the majority stake in that Development Corporation).

Reading the local press when I was there. There was skepticism among the local press and citizens as to the extravagance of the new terminal and how it will possibly be paid for by the Samoan Govt's limited financial resources. A couple of extra issues were raised. 1) Whether govt officials had received personal kickbacks from the Chinese financial backers. 2) What hidden consequences are there for taking out the loan with the Chinese Development Corporation. The insinuation that there is a deliberate strategy to hoodwink small, poorer nations into financial enslavement to Chinese Govt Corporations. The consequence of not being able to repay the loan, being virtual repossession of some of the asset. Suffice to say, don't be surprised to see Apia airport doubling as a Chinese Military airfield in the future.

This is a poorer nation that historically has fallen under New Zealand (and by default, Australian) protection. It is our backyard. We need to wake up to it. Under an ASEAN-South Pacific bloc perhaps you achieve the scale required to set up institutions backed by development corporations from the likes of Singapore, Malaysia. Australia & NZ to fund this type of project. And look to facilitate projects that are actually looking out for the well being of the recipient country - so for example, the project might preferably be on a much more modest scale, not hoodwinking the Samoan Govt into something that will enslave them financially.

https://www.news.com.au/world/pacific/china-almost-has-australia-surrounded-but-its-debttrap-diplomacy-has-been-exposed/news-story/3f8d390e8c8e3b5158214836ee412aee

As this article points out. Australia has begun to push back, but we are not strong enough to do it alone. A united front among nations stretching from India, through SE Asia to the South Pacific stands much more chance of success.
 
Giardiasis said:
Referring to any government as fraudulent, incompetent and corrupt is tautological.

It’s good to find a post we agree on 100%
Incentives can’t lead to much but this outcome without exemplary leadership.
 
Have the quality of polies we are currently diagnosed with ever been so superficial, so puddle deep, so underwhelming, so big picture no have, so beige?

I mean honestly. I already know who I'm voting for and I can't stand the prick, or the shallow minions that suck off him.
 
glantone said:
I can't stand the prick, or the shallow minions that suck off him.

yeah, where has the leader gone who had the shallow minions sucking him off?
 
If the choices are Chlamydia or Syphilis or Gonorrhoea I think I'll abstain from voting