MPs line up behind Bannon China warning

Via Domainfax:

Mr [Andrew] Hastie, who chairs the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security, said the Chinese Communist Party thought “generationally” about how to maintain its grip on power.

…“How are we safeguarding democracy for future generations? How are we protecting our sovereignty and prosperity?” he said.

…“We are dealing with a state that uses the whole of society to advance its national objectives. We are less organised because we believe in individual liberty,” he said.

…One of Labor’s most respected voices on national security, Victorian MP Anthony Byrne, said despite his differences with the anti-globalist Mr Bannon, he agreed that defending liberal democratic values against challenges from authoritarian regimes was one of the defining political issues of this generation.

…Queensland Nationals MP George Christensen said Mr Bannon was “dead right”.

…Labor MP Michael Danby said that Mr Bannon was right about Australia being on a “fault line” and right to endorse the foreign interference laws.

Cue Beijing Bob demands for quiet.


  1. ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

    Anyone opposed to the foreign interference laws should have no place in our Democratically elected Parliament.

    • deustchedropper1

      We don’t have a democratically elected parliament. You don’t get a choice in who is nominated to run for election. You get whatever conflicted shit stain they can control easily because of the candidates incompetence or ethically challenged nature.
      Thats not democracy champ

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Our NSW State Candidate for the Parramatta electorate, was decided by only 180 votes of eligible rank and file members.
        It should have been decided by thousands of members.
        There are democratic structures within all our Political Parties,…that these structures get corrupted by a few, is as much the fault of a pathetically apathetic public as it is the “Leadership”.
        The more power is left unchecked, the more it becomes corrupted,…inspite of whatever “correct ideology” is adhered to.

    • Given how far the infiltration has gone so far some tough decisions need to be made on the ex pollies and bureaucrats probably that need to be closely examined. Even NZ admits they took their eye iff the ball. Even on cyber grounds we’re well and truly in trouble keeping them out at every level. The ANU one has bern going on for months and we’ll never be told the rxtent of this. The Chinese Quantum researchers at Sydney Uni are kniwn to be central committe connected. It’s easy to see where this is going so the current gov need to really get tough. Imagine if we did this in China…we would not get off first base.

    • lololol.
      “Anyone opposed to the foreign interference laws should have no place in our Democratically elected Parliament.”

      EP, would you like to reread that again? In.Our.DEMOCRATICALLY.elected.Parliament. No place? Wouldn’t be a democracy, then, would it?

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        My point was that people shouldn’t vote for anyone that would oppose such laws, due to the likelihood that those MPs are corrupt traitors.
        I apply that to the MPs from my own party.

    • drsmithyMEMBER

      Indeed. Cuz there’s no way anyone might try and hide some nefarious legislation behind a crowd pleasing name. Like, say, “the patriot act”.

  2. How long before the ore contracts get cancelled?

    1 year?

    As I posted a week or so ago, this whole trade war thing is ultimately about US/western democratic hegemony vs Chinese dictatorship hegemony.

    Once the EU bends over, buys a bunch of war toys, promises to meet their NATO obligations, and implements their own tariffs on China, we’re next.

    I expect Taiwan, Japan, SK, greater Europe and the US to be the buyers of our ore as China gets pinched.

    • Most of the main mobile phone makers have ARM chips, and it’s part of what’s called SoC (Silicon On CHip) , and …those chip foundries are in Taiwan which the Chinese almost certainly have people in and explains why they leapt years in R&D for their own Huawei made their own chips, or MediaTek which has R&D in China. They lead the world in Quantum computing, and much of that has been stolen, but they have plenty of smart scientist/engineers that have unlimited funding. The US and the rest of us don’t invest as much in science other than medical which usually is sold off to the US. We’re a sad dumb bunch.

      • DarkMatterMEMBER

        SoC stands for System on a Chip. Silicon on a chip doesn’t make much sense when all our processors are made from a silicon wafer. The chip is the silicon.

        The ARM SoCs that the Chinese make are licensed from ARM, however last year the control of ARM passed to a Japanese company – Softbank – which is partly owned by the Chinese. Anyway, in the event of a global conflict, what use would license agreements be?

        Intel currently makes the good chips – i5, i7 in the US. They only make the jellybean chips in China. If China can make powerful x86 chips on their own, it makes them independent. One of the big advantages we have at the moment is that most technical data for chips is in English. If chip development moves to China and we can’t read the data sheets, that is a very serious setback.

        I think this is just another case where the west is sleepwalking into decline, and it is because of arrogant ignorant stupidity by our “leaders”.

    • “If chip development moves to China and we can’t read the data sheets, that is a very serious setback.”

      Hopefully that wont happen. As a side note, I think in general, the Chinese language is the major barrier to their advancement.
      China may overtake USA only if they begin to speak English as their major second language cause then they would attract talent from all over the world and wouldn’t need to steal IP cause they would just attract the best talent to migrate to China in order to assist them with developing the IP within China (kind of like how America attracts the best talent all over the world). A top scientist from anywhere in the world would find it uncomfortable to live in China due to language and cultural barriers. Compared to America – which is multicultural and speak English (which is easier for people who already speak a European language). And I doubt Mandarin will become the next universal language because it’s not widespread enough and mostly only spoken within China. It’s extremely tough to learn and English is already the language of global industries within science/medicine/technology/entertainment media etc.

  3. BubbleyMEMBER

    America buys chinese stuff, china makes money.

    America stops buying, china goes broke.

    Is China biting the hand that feeds it? Because the Chinese middle class is not strong enough yet to support the Chinese economy – unless the Chinese use the American economic play book and use wars to kick start their finances.

  4. drsmithyMEMBER

    “Best of all, the more we can distract people with another reds-under-the-bed scare, the less likely they are to look at where the real threats to democracy have been for the last few decades. “

  5. – “Defending (australian) Democracy” ? Absolutely, but Bannon and Trump are not the ones I would choose to defend democracy.

    • drsmithyMEMBER

      Indeed. Bannon is apparently quite taken by “neoreactionary” thought, which pretty much sees the whole idea of democracy as a catastrophe.

  6. Rather than safeguarding democracy via forms of authoritarian prescriptions, there’s the option to free-guard democracy through grass roots mobilisation. Firstly rally free thinkers who would advocate divergence of opinion. Secondly alow for modalities of vagueness within political community to flourish.