Xi’s useful idiots must declare which freedoms they’ll crush

As the CCP makes a song and dance about one hundred years of persecuting Chinese peoples, Xi Jinping’s local cohort of useful idiots are hard at it again.

The frame of reference is always the same:

  • Chinese greatness is inevitable.
  • Australia must engage China.
  • Whitlam is the template.

For samples of this today you can see the cadre of China apologists at the ABC led by chief propagandist Stan Grant. Or, James Curren at the AFR. Or, just about everybody in the Australian Labor Party.

I could go through each and unpack the obvious lack of analytical rigour in using an argument from analogy for why we should engage China like Gough Whitlam did. But we’ll let that pass because it’s really beside the point. There is a much larger hidden assumption in Xi’s useful idiot worldview that exposes their arguments as complete falsehood.

It is this. That Australia is able to engage China. That disengagement was our choice. And that we can reverse it. This is all poppycock.

The truth is that China has divorced Australia and it has made very clear why – amazingly and stupidly clear – in its 14 conditions to end democracy:

The national interest question at this point is not whether we should re-engage China. It is which freedoms are we prepared to give away to make it happen? Do Stan Grant and James Curran agree with:

  • No restrictions upon Chinese investment which will result in the CCP-aligned capital owning ever-larger swathes of strategic infrastructure, including for the explicit use of espionage and surveillance?
  • The repeal of the China pushback legislation which has only forced those doing business with the CCP to declare it, bulwarked free speech, as well as giving the federal government the power to control foreign policy, its natural right.
  • The wholesale opening of all Australian institutions to a Yangse tide of propaganda.
  • The total abandonment of all liberal principles in multilateral forums.
  • Giving China all of the South China Sea, in complete violation of international law and the territorial claims of all other democratic Asian nations, including Australian allies.
  • Accepting that China didn’t start COVID and the US did.
  • The abolition of ASPI.
  • Allowing Chinese propaganda agents to do as they like.
  • Allowing China to launch cyber warfare any time it likes with no mention of it anywhere and no reprisal.
  • The muzzling of the Australian Parliament.
  • The muzzling of the Australian media.

Which of these do the China grovellers endorse? And let’s not forget that the moment we endorse one, we are effectively endorsing all, because the CCP will know that we are beaten and press its advantage for a full capitulation.

So, let’s have it, fellas. Do you, James Curran, and you, Stan Grant, endorse the gutting of Australian democracy so that we can once again be friends with China like your mate Gough Whitlam?

The ALP can take it on notice as a question for the forthcoming election.

Houses and Holes
Latest posts by Houses and Holes (see all)

Comments

  1. “As the CCP makes a song and dance about one hundred years of persecuting Chinese peoples”…I’m no CCP apologist but that is a pretty black armband view of history…

          • No. The CCP is all bad, and especially bad under Xi.

            One of the reasons they have crushed Hong Kong and want to repeat it on Taiwan is that they want to show that they’re the only legitimate system for the Chinese people. Having as wealthy, healthy and wise Taiwan right next door highlights just how much they’ve failed. The Nationalists have kicked their butt, and as China slides into the middle income trap, the failure on economics is going to become apparent for all to see leaving them with only fascism and nationalism-racism.

            Xi’s rant in Tiananmen this week was just like Hitler in 1937, blaming others for their troubles and demanding living space… with Taiwan in place of Sudetenland… or Danzig.

            I wonder if they really understand that the US will defend Taiwan, knowing full well that if they don’t, Pax Americana is over.

    • Just taking one specific instance, the Cultural Revolution was a self-inflicted orgy of stupidity and violence aimed at cementing Mao and the CCP in power.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution

      When a government’s policies result in the deaths of millions of innocent people and the immigration of millions more, a black armband is probably in order.

      And let’s not forget that the Cultural Revolution was a response to challenges to CCP power caused by the Great Famine in which tens of millions starved to death…a famine induced by the Great Leap Forward policy of the CCP in which more than the entire Australian population died.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine

    • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

      That line raised an eyebrow for me too JohnnyR (Dave’s not usually prone to such hyperbowl) but the rest of it was pretty much on the money.

    • The CCP is directly responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of people. It makes Hitler and Stalin look like rank amateurs in comparison.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Yeah sure they got lots of horrors to be ashamed of.
        But one must also take into account Population.
        Don’t ignore the Per capita numbers like Economists do with GDP

        • Anders Andersen

          EP,

          If you’re going to use the per capita logic I guess you must think that cv19 is just the seasonal flu, per capita?

          • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

            If you look at the hysteria caused by the Cultural revolution in China and how that lead to the killing being done, across the country, by mostly citizens killing other citizens then yes one must take into account population in calculating the lethality of any regime against another.
            Its arguably that Pol pots regime was heaps more leathal to its own citizens than the CCP was in China since the percapita killing of the population was so much higher in (low population) Cambodia.
            Same goes for all the European revolutions when compared to the Russian ones.
            Not only was the population larger in Russia (with heaps more peasants just like china) but their revolutions came much later into the industrial age allowing for vastly more numbers to be killed on an industrial scale.

            Ironically Nukes maybe the only thing from preventing these “numbers” from growing ever larger in an increasingly overpopulated and technologically leathal world.
            MAD is probably our only hope!

  2. SnappedUpSavvyMEMBER

    you made it too easy for Stan he’s already there: Allowing Chinese propaganda agents to do as they like.

  3. Sometimes I think these guys want to be appointed viceroys when the Chinese Empire flows through.

    • SnappedUpSavvyMEMBER

      the beautiful irony is they would lose everything that has made them what they are now…

  4. SnappedUpSavvyMEMBER

    What really irritates is we are funding stan’s very personal wrong side of history china folly, the abc shouldn’t be funding this personal agenda, cos that’s all it is

  5. Fishing72MEMBER

    I think you’ll find that broadening the debate regarding China vs US as patron state is counterproductive. The answer lies in narrowing the debate. It’s this simple : Would you prefer to be a subservient vassal state of the US or of China?

    We have 70 odd years of experience to show what it’s like to be a US subjugate. It brings imposed neoliberalisn and the illusion of democracy. Governments unsympathetic to US motivations are curtailed or removed covertly. We have much soft power cultural propaganda. We have corporations siphoning our natural resources without much return for the people of Australia. We also have peace, stability and individual freedoms todo basically whatever we want. We still have a mostly free press, a free internet and free speech. The US never tried to colonise us with their citizenry and assume us as a true geographic component of their empire.

    Contrast this with the Chinese model. It poses all of the downsides of US subjugation but with the removal of individual freedom of opinion and political persuasion. Chinese oppression of Australian politics would e absolute. Chinese colonialism is apparent, the population of Chinese heritage living in Australia since Jinping took power has increased by well over 1000 percent. There is not a single instance where Australians would experience more freedom under Chinese autocratic oversight than under the current US dominion. Life would be inherently worse for almost everyone.

    Plus….The US soft power propaganda may provide for a slew of shite reality programs and often gormless entertainment, but the Chinese alternative is exponentially worse.

    These are the only real considerations when discussing whether we should support the notion of historic Chinese victimhood as partial justification for their plan global domination.

  6. Mic SmithMEMBER

    Spot and well said. These ALP / lefty idiots just do not get it – China wants to trash our democracy and enslave us.

    • drsmithyMEMBER

      If only you were as worried about the Coalition _actually_ trashing our democracy as you were China _wanting_ to trash our democracy.

      • Mic SmithMEMBER

        Yeah, Australia is not prefect and the Federal Government even less so however I will put it to you this way: How many people do you know that want to retire to Communist China?

  7. Xi’s latest speech about his “wall of steel” made me chuckle. “Wall of Australian steel” more likely.