Is Pauline Hanson or the world’s greatest tyranny the worry?

Kevin Rudd appears to think it’s the former:

As we flagged earlier, Kevin Rudd returned to parliament today to launch Peter Hartcher’s Quarterly Essay on China’s attempts to build influence in Australia.

Mr Rudd said Australia must “maintain domestic vigilance against any substantive, rather than imagined, internal threats to our democracy, our political institutions and our critical infrastructure”.

“China does this for their country, and we should do the same for our own, and not apologise for it,” he said.

“However, a word of caution about foreign influence. It’s very easy for this to translate into a form of racial profiling.

“I will be the first to the barricades if the most recent national security legislation becomes a political vehicle for Hansonism and a return to the days of the Yellow Peril.”

How about manning the barricades for Australia, Kev? Pauline hasn’t killed anyone as far as I know and her politcal machinations are out in the open. I am yet to see anybody except the prime minister frame this discussion as a racial threat in Australia.

The truth is Kow Towing Kevin has been in overdrive denying there is any CCP influuence issue for years while it has exploded. He has studiously avoided mentioning Hong Kong for six months too, focussed as he is on his globtrotting role as China expert, and the access that that requires, rather than the Australian national interest.

Indeed, Kow Towing Kev (like Paul Xeating) sounds a lot more like the Chinese embassy than any kind of patriot:

“Stories like ‘Chinese espionage’ or ‘China’s infiltration in Australia’, with however bizarre plots and eye-catching details, are nothing but lies.”

“We have not interfered and are never interested in interfering in other countries’ domestic affairs.

“Some Australian politicians, institutions and media have been highly tense on China-related issues. They seem to have reached a state of hysteria and extreme nervousness.

“We hope those Australian politicians, institutions and media can view China and China-Australia relations with a healthy attitude, which will truly contribute to the sound and stable growth of bilateral relations, as well as their own physical and mental health.”

What, no mention of the “yellow peril”.

David Llewellyn-Smith
Latest posts by David Llewellyn-Smith (see all)


  1. And just I case you blokes thought that the government was done in boosting property….

    The Marshall Liberal Government has announced it has reached an agreement with the Hon John Darley MLC to further amend its land tax reform package in exchange for his support for the passage of the amended bill this week.

    Treasurer Rob Lucas said Mr Darley had made it clear to the Government that he wanted further amendments to the bill in particular to assist smaller ‘mum and dad’ property investors.

  2. blacktwin997MEMBER

    Kevin Rudd? That pudgy albino twerp fvckstick?

    That he’s reduced to flogging Hartcher’s ramblings instead of being Emperor of The UN tells you all you need to know about him and his opinions.

      • blacktwin997MEMBER

        Anyone in any doubt about his ability to organise a chokoe vine on an outdoor shitter need only view his mad BBQ skillz at using a spatula to turn sausages and dumping at least 1/3 on the ground.

        And his globular idiot wife, don’t forget her either.

    • First to the barricades? That chubby little angry soyboy would have a heart attack the minute he went anywhere near a barricade.

      • I much prefer a heart attack through the scope of a sniper rifle, but in his case any old heart attack will do, thanks!

  3. HadronCollisionMEMBER

    Kow Tow Kev
    Sounds like something you’d find in a “chinese ” takeaway in a coastal RSL/bowls club

  4. “We have not interfered and are never interested in interfering in other countries’ domestic affairs.

    Never in the field of human discourse has a greater pile of steaming bullsh1t ever been deposited into one single sentence.

    That monumental lie, all by itself, clearly advises us how much contempt the Chinese tyranny has for us. To hell with them.

  5. Alright, try this one on for size. Wang Liqiang applies for asylum and gets it. Bit of a kerfuffle, the Chinese media brings out all the best superlatives, and chinese students halve in number to 3,000,000 for a year. Then Mr. Wang decides to run for parliament to stand up for the rights of ordinary people. Assisted by a temporary truce, he stands side by side with Keating and Rudd and runs as a Labor candidate. He says a few things against China, which warms him to both sides of the idiocracy, and gets voted in. By that time Labor are in government because they discover someone with a spine and Morrison is rolled after the Libs discover he’s got solar panels on his roof. The replacement PM, Matt Canavan, is a disaster as he can’t speak after breaking his teeth on a piece of coal trying to mimic his idol Tony “Onion” Abbott.

    Safe in his new office, Mr. Wang calls his boss Mr. Xi and they discuss the government’s objectives having safely parachuted two operatives into parliament, one on each side of the house. Mr. Xi transfers Mr. Wang’s bonus to his Westpac account, where the money is used, via a 23 year old property developer Hooflung Dung studying commerce at UTS, to develop an 86-storey tower block project in Beltand Road, Chatswood. Cut to the final frames, showing Mr. Wang laughing as he settles back in his easy chair with a nice cup of milk formula, and Mr. Xi chuckling as he scoops out another pawful of honey.

    It’s my movie plot. Waddya reckon? Plenty of room for a sequel too if anyone has got one.

  6. Rudd (original “Big Australia” man) also bragged today, Australia should have 50 million people. As if that would “protect” us. Well, he would know what’s best for us, wouldn’t he, that giant globalised intellect that dreams in idiomatic Mandarin. At 50 million, we’d be so “vibrant” it would shake twice as much rain out of the clouds. And who cares about the environment.

    • So we would be safer from china having allowed 20 million Chinese into this country? Yeah don’t think so.

    • SnappedUpSavvyMEMBER

      none of these clowns really care, Kevin Rudd would be sitting next to Lucy Terdball on the first flight out of Australia when the country runs dry and the Chinese move in

      • proofreadersMEMBER

        Where does Kevin (and the missus) actually spend most of his time these days? Straya or the US or …?

  7. I see this as largely related to taxation and individualism. Cutting taxes, and being free to act to maximise your own personal benefit is not a free lunch. Someone needs to pay for the services we require, and ideologically if we are not prepared to fund public goods (such as independent universities, a free press and other institutions), then ultimately you have to pay the piper.

    Either get used to China running the show, or start thinking about your own personal and political philosophy and how much you really value a free, democratic society. Because that comes at a cost.

    • Jumping jack flash


      We’re still living Howard’s lie of curbing the “out of control government spending”, privatising everything that isn’t nailed down, and cutting taxes while trying desperately to keep wage inflation low so interest rates never rise again.

      Its supposedly the winning formula, validated by the glory days when Howard the rat wrested control from the Iron grip of Labor, despite introducing incredibly unpopular private health insurance and the GST. So the Libs keep playing the same song, over and over, believing it to be working just fine because they’re still in power.

    • Don’t know what your banging on about paying for stuff like it needs to be funded at a state level by selling off assets or borrowing it from investors, taxes at this level just destroy money aka taking liquidity out of the system.

      Now as far as stock and flows go wrt to trade and how that effects over all economic and FX matters in another story.

    • LOL the LNP was going nanna over pink bats and boat people in them days, said Rudd proved government could not run a lemonade stand. Problem was he could only pony up the money to fund private sector cowboys to do installations because the right wing of the labour party and the LNP, then some are confused about VET et al …

      He was not wrong about Hayek … and said so … but dominate ideology makes change hard yacka …

      • It would be revisionist to suggest Rudd did not quaff deeply from the markets jug. He wasn’t limited by the times, he was the times.

  8. I like Kevin as he is always consistent…he has and always is consistently wrong, he has and always will be a consistent wanker, he also is and has been consistently ridiculed…….I like Kevin for that…he makes me chuckle…

  9. Good goats sake ….

    For the uninitiated that have attention spans of a fruit fly per link above thread:

    What gets forgotten is that Neoliberalism and democracy are not necessarily compatible and that he protection of private property trumps any desire to maybe change its status and obligations. Property is paramount and if democratic elected governments act against the interest of the property owners, the state has to be weakened into inaction.

    In the German Grundgesetz an article actually states that “Property has obliges meaning it has to be used to the benefit of the whole society. This is an idea that the Mises school of neoliberalism would argue strongly against:

    “Democracy, for Mises, was not an absolute value to be respected at all times. It was a good system insofar as it made peaceful, gradual change possible. Democracy’s “function is to make peace,” he wrote, “to avoid violent revolutions.” When it failed in that task, Mises thought that enforcing order by other means was preferable to letting democracy destroy the economic foundations of prosperity, as he understood them. Although it is frequently said that neoliberals want a weak state, in which the market can be left to do most of the work, that is not quite correct. Against the enemies of the market—economic nationalism and democratic demands—the state has to play a role, mostly by creating a system of laws that protects property and by representing enough force to deter challenges……………….

    The neoliberals sought, Slobodian writes, to “encase” markets, not to liberate them. Their project was not anarchy: It was a global system that sufficiently ordered the world so that capitalism would be safe from certain forms of political interference.

    China is not so much a new type of government, having read (in translation) some of the classic literature and some of its history it reminds me more of a continuation of the old empire.

    And it is very far from any Marxist idea of the state withering away after the worker class has attained control of the means of production into a “free cooperation of free producers”, it is an elitist system that prevents any attempt by delving into capitalist ideology and the Stalinist model of state capitalism to prevent exactly that.

    So by chance that China is being a bit strong armed in its response to outcomes which have strong links to western radicalization, of a small percentage of the Muslim population for past reasons, would it be unreasonable to argue that the seemingly umbrage is about not dealing with this national concern with the use of drones and white phosphorus all whilst MIC and private contractors make packet because it broaches an almost Lockean sensibility of liberty and freedom … chortle ….

    • Interesting the Naked Capitalism article. Especially the comments as you mentioned and the article by a “Joseph Thomas” aka Michael Pirsch linked therein.
      Amazing what 10 minutes searching on the internet reveals.

      • Sorry if I don’t find the ***amazing*** aspect you infer or how you ascribe the entirety to some suggestive reference to Michael Pirsch. I could just as easily reference Zimm from an historical reference and debate the veracity of his observations T or F sans his ideological perspective publicly stated. Same applies to say Greaber and 5000 Years of Debt, for the better part its grounded in evidence based anthro and history, solid academic work, don’t agree with his ideological otherwise.

        Yet since you chimed up, positive identification of AET leanings, I would challenge you to respond to the perspective above, rather than paint others as manipulative and maladaptive from an intellectual aspect considering your philosophical groundings.

      • Just might be a reason your camp hates [tm] social democracy so much, paper hand counted ballots with public oversight, you know like in HK.

  10. BTW H&H thank you for allowing that contra perspective, tips hat at your ethical forbearance, respect.