Policy Bites (NOT from chocky bikkies) and Bytes: Global, pragmatic choices for our best interests

If one wants to uphold the values and precepts of:

- Globalism

- Pragmatism (economic and political)

- Scientism (not a swear word, but a positive attitude towards science and technology)

and to do so pursuant to protecting Australians and elevating Australia's national interests, then China is clearly a better choice for Australia as a trading partner and global security partner than the US.

Why?

Let's ask, and answer, a couple of simple questions in order to see why.

Question. Are Western Great Powers - Specifically the USA and UK - trying very hard to get Australia, and Australia's defence forces, involved in needless a hot/kinetic/shooting war with China in the SCS?

Answer: It very much seems so. In fact: yes. They have us sending our navy into the SCS, and our parliamentarians are all but threatening armed conflict - putatively over the rights and freedoms of Taiwan and Hong Kong. Interestingly, neither Taiwan or Hong Kong are any of our business, and it's not clear that - given the way in which we're being, err, Shanghaied, into dangerous military alliances with Western warmongers, it's not clear that our concept of freedom is superior (Sorry - but 'wamongers' is more than appropriate).

Question. Is China threatening any kind of armed conflict with Australia, or with the USA or UK, for that matter?

Answer. Obviously - no.

China is simply defending itself and responding to the wholly unprovoked aggressive 'surround and contain' posturing and actions of Western great powers.

US and UK and other Western powers have been running a pretty constant, very expensive propaganda campaign to convince us all that China provoked us. However, the technical terms for this are 'misinformation', and, to be frank, 'bullshit'.

Apparently China provoked us by existing and being - Chinese, socialist, and atheist?

Gosh. Not allowed, says delusional Scott Morrison's nutty megacult and imaginary omnipotent friend. And Michael Pompeo's. And Andrian Zenz's. And Joe Biden's...

Does anyone know whether they all have the same imaginary friend?

Okay. That question's rhetorical. It DOESN'T MATTER. It's a delusion about an IMAGINARY FRIEND. (Try and keep up, people.) China become strong enough to overcome the illicit, bullying, asymmetric treaty imposed by Great Britain pertaining to Hong Kong - under threat of war and domination and on the back of the vile Opium Wars and invasion of Hong Kong Harbour by the British Admiralty. That is China's (fairly righteous) business.

Reasserting sovereignty over the province of Taiwan is China's business, and it is very local business.

Sino-Australian relations need not be negatively affected by China's domestic affairs regarding Hong Kong, nor it is very geopolitically, geographically, and geostrategically close, local, domestic issues with Taiwan.

Pragmatically speaking - the smart globalist move is to work with China, and to tell the US military industrial machine (plus Pentagon and CIA) and UK (The Crown) to calm down stop telling Australia what to do.

Regardless of what one thinks of China's relationship to Taiwan - it seems undeniable even to the novice that intervening in a Sino-Taiwanese conflict could only possibly make things worse and simultaneously poses an unecessary and dire risk to the life and limb of ADF personnel.

Question. Has China (certainly prior to the US and UK 'surround-contain' assault that's ostensibly - but not really - about freedom in Hong Kong, Taiwan-SCS, Tibet, and Xinjiang) been a well-behaved and excellent trading partner, offering more generous terms and better exchange rates than US/UK/Europe?

Answer. Resoundingly - almost comprehensively - yes. Of course.

Most people know this is true, even if they only know that the China-AUD exchange rate has been about 5-1 in favour of the Australian dollar for decades, and that - for example - Chinese patronage of our tertiary export industry still constituted one of the biggest (and cleanest, and most beneficial) industries that Australia has ever seen.

The only reason to aggress against China politically - and certainly militarily - seems to be the economic interests of the US and UK, plus a whole lot of nutty, ideological idiocy that goes along with it. (Make no mistake - it is us, along with our US-UK masters, that are the aggressors.)

I don't know about you, but I am not remotely interested in what Michael Pompeo or Scott Morrison's specious, religious megacult bigotries say about 'godless' China.

I like godless, atheist China. A lot.

Is an atheist socalist-freemarket government and great power not allowed?

Says who?

Why not?

Why should my kids have to fight for, or suffer lack because of, some delusional megacultist's imaginary omniscient friend? It is stupid, and obscene.

---