Australian-Chinese Trade and The Menace of Mentally Ill, Delusional Western Leaders and Activists

Trade War. China the Aggressor?

Recently even the normally balanced and moderate Australia-China Relations Institute seems to have lost their way with regard to the PRC's recent moves on trade with Australia:

"It's not looking possible that China can continue to deny that this isn't a punishment strategy, and they've been pretty clear about that this year,” UTS:ACRI Advisory Board member @GolleyJane tells @RadioNational following CN’s ban of Victorian timber

However, such 'confusion' is not unexpected. Golley is affiliated with ANU, a Group of Eight University with multiple ties to the ludicrously error prone, and hopelessly religiously and ideologically biased (not to mention military-inustrial backed), Australian Strategic Policy Institute. It's now more or less impossible for anyone associated with the ASPI to retain their credibility. The ASPI's biases are nearly tragicomically obvious, as is their affiliation with mentally ill and delusional fideist, Adrian Zenz.

What is really not looking possible is that the US, UK, and British Commonwealth can claim they’re not the initiators, and original aggressors, in the current trade based tit-for-tat conflicts with China. Economics as a proxy for warfare has been a longstanding political commitment of West since the structuralist economics of the late 20th century, and earlier Keynesian approaches. Aggressive Western actions along such lines have not abated since the quashing of the Boxer Rebellion by the Western owned Princess Dowager, and The Opium Wars (And have continued through the murderous US carpet bombing campaign on China's neighbour Korea in the 1950s to the dangerous sabre rattling being perpetrated by the US and Australia in the South China Sea.)

China’s CPC long held off returning fire at Australia over the latter’s duplicitous, and rudely condescending, undiplomatic (and unabashedly duplicitous and hypocritical) abuses. The West’s actions in relation to Hong Kong alone are long-standing provocation. Accompanied by 'surround and contain' rhetoric that is the mutant discursive frightened child of 'Yellow Peril' and 'Poor Man of Asia' slights, the approach of the West has been continuously imperious and aggressive.

China has been patient. The ‘surround and contain’ rhetoric of the West has never been passive. Nor have the duplicitous and violently disruptive interference of the US and UK in Great Britain’s formerly illegally invaded and militarily annexed overseas territory of Hong Kong. These alone are long-standing, and unmistakeable, provocations.

The duplicitous and opportunistic interference of the US in Great Britain’s formerly illegally invaded and militarily annexed Hong Kong is evidence enough that China’s CPC have been the bigger global diplomatic and political persons. Hong Kong democratic activists don’t really care about democracy except as a means to their variously bizarre and delusional ends. They don't care about democracy any more than the clinically delusional US Secretary of State - Michael Pompeo - really cares about Freedom of Religion (If the reader doubts this, then, at minimum, they should familiarise themselves with Protestant Baptist and Anabaptist theological perspectives on religion. Put simply: religion is for principalities and Papist cults. Faith is for the 'born again' cultist.)

Hong Kong and ‘Democracy’ Activists Joshua Wong and Nathan Law

It is clear that, as a programmed Protestant delusional, Joshua Wong is not only in need of professional psychiatric mental health intervention, but that his modus operandi and motives are dictated and constrained by the semantic and ideological content of his fideistic, grandiose delusions. These include delusions such as the belief that he is personal friends with some imperial god being that rules the universe, and that he will live forever in the company of said imaginary imperial person. Then, of course, there is the bizarre idea that these delusional commitments should be foisted, as normative, upon others at the level of Earthly and corporeal governance.

Anyone that knows about the bigoted, and quite bizarre, doctrinal commitments of (clearly) mentally ill delusional theists like Joshua Wong and Michael Pompeo, knows that these commitments include that their imaginary, imperial god friend is, in their split-from-reality world, the ultimate authority in human affairs. Their doctrines are not only unabashedly bigoted against unbelievers (false claims to the contrary notwithstanding), but are also no respecters of human endeavour and institutions: especially those of the scientific and philosophical variety. Those openly, and intrinsically, bigoted doctrines regard philosophy as human folly. Science is disrespected as a substandard epistemic tool which is inferior to fideistic epistemology: faithist ways of knowing. It is the usual delusional nonsense that is enabled by deistic, meta-religious, and para-religionist secularists with other modi operandi.

Pompeo’s doctrinally-bound mental illness expresses itself variously. Of primary concern, however, is his neo-McCarthyist hate speech directed at the PRC, and specifically the ideologically atheist Chinese Communist Party. Pompeo’s Biblical-crusader style of warmongering discourse, with its freedom-of-religion rhetorical packaging, has no place on the world stage or in global geopolitical diplomacy in 2020. It doesn’t really have a place in any kind of sensible company.

Wong’s similarly grounded grandiose delusional entitlement and cognitive split from reality is expressed in his duplicitous references to democracy. Both Pompeo and Wong share a doctrinal bigotry that has little to no real interest in Earthly democracy and freedom of religion, except as a means to further their dominionist monotheist insanity. It’s unlikely that either man is well enough to understand this to any meaningful degree.

In reality, and in doctrinal terms, Pompeo and Wong are no more tolerant of other faiths that the average Islamic Jihadist sociopath. This is evidenced by the ire that Baptist Christian cultists often direct at both Catholic and Charismatic Pentecostal Christian cultists. (The inhabitants of the asylum rarely get along: their various interpretations of delusional narratives clash and cause uncomfortable cognitive dissonance.)

Pompeo is, largely, only curbed by domestic parareligionist secularism and multiculturalism (which also exists in China). Probably also contributary is the fact of a large Catholic population in the United States (Political culture is never simple: Catholics are heavily represented in the PRC, and Hong Kong CPC head Carrie Lam is reported to be practising). Nonetheless, the US military and military industrial complex means that, rhetorical distancing spouted at pulpits notwithstanding: US Christian cultists are just as militaristic as any Jihadist. The US military might not carry Christian flags (although sometimes some of them do, and they have Chaplains aplenty) but the US military carries deistic and theistic imperatives forward under the false banner of freedom of religion.

'Democracy' activist Nathan Law’s Hong Kong alma mater – Lignan University – was founded by the Presbyterian Christian cult. Presbyterian sectarians are another variety of split-from-reality delusional Christian cult that is interesting in that they have retained interesting ties with Freemasonry when most other Christian cults – such as Catholicism, Anglicanism (including High Anglican cults) and Protestant Anabaptist sects – have been traditionally extremely wary, or even antagonistic towards, Masons (Catholic Papist cults have historically famously imposed Papal bans on deistic Masonry).

Masonic secularism is multi-faith and ecumenical, and is generally far more pro-enlightenment and pro-science than most theist cults. Yet, it is generally fixedly deistic. Nearly comprehensively, atheists cannot be Masons, who must display a deistically grounded objective moral realist commitment of some kind. (Yes, Lucifer will apparently often do, which is just one thing that makes Christian cult delusionals aversive.) It is not clear exactly how Nathan Law’s beliefs are aligned, or if he wears the apron at all. However, if he has theistic delusional commitments typical of Presbyterian cultists, then his cognition and doxastic commitments are as duplicitous and split from reality as those of Wong and Pompeo.

To the extent that he is a theist and/or deist delusional, Law’s love of Western faux democratic political institutions is explainable on much the same basis as Wong’s. One can only further question Law’s judgement if he really thinks it is a good idea to have delusional cultists like Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in ‘charge’ (the degree to which these hired hands are really in charge of anything is openly debateable and can be doubted). I guess if Law is US-backed, and part of the Hong Kong religionist and delusional cultist monied establishment, he might feel De Tocqueville’s tyranny of the majority is useful. Although: left-democratic academics – arguably some of the best equipped members of Western society to do so - seem to struggle to keep DeTocqueville’s tyranny at bay. Mentally ill Morrison and Pompeo, and their parareligionist allies, keep academia on a tight leash. (They call in the security services if necessary. The same measures seem to be applied to certain groups of journalists.)

Morrison and his fideist predecessors Tony Abbott (Catholic) and John Howard (Methodist-Anglican) share the delusional belief that they’re special friends with a god being. However, the degree to which it is the same imaginary friend with the same inferred properties for each of them is not at all clear. (We probably shouldn’t leave out mariginal but practicing Uniting Church cultist Paul Keating. By the way – according to Baptist cult delusionals – Uniting Church delusional theological memes are broken beyond repair: more infighting among the inhabitants of the asylum). Apparently it is not clear to these quite sick leaders what is going on with their specious delusions either. However, no one ever said that delusionals with imaginary god friends had to be self-aware, consistent, or coherent. Don't ask the fish about water, as the proverb goes. Especially the delusional, mentally ill theist fish. In reality the clinically schizophrenic doxastic commitments of Morrison, Pompeo, and Wong are grounds for committal to a mental health facility, but in the West we don’t let reason and science overcome the tyranny of the delusional majority.

If Law is a religionist with rich uncles: then he is likely even less committed to democracy except that it is a means to his financial and personal ends. Would Law’s or Wong’s families businesses stand up to the scrutiny of China’s financial auditors? Do they want to establish a faux democratic duopoly in China too? It does not seem that they care what persistent duopolistic outcomes in the ‘democratic’ West might have to do with De Tocqueville’s tyrannical majority. Are they going to establish a Chinese an electoral college?

It is quite clear that democracy - if true democracy (whatever that is) is even possible - is not the main concern of mentally ill delusionals like Wong and Law, who, in their pathological confusion, are more interested in propagating their delusional memetic infections. Real democracy is no more their true aim and interest than is freedom of religion the real concern of equally sick Michael Pompeo.

For these tragicomically inappropriate, clinically delusional, ‘leaders’ and activists: democratic discourse is just a means to their bizarre, delusional, and openly bigoted, doctrinal ends. That is all it is for clinically delusional Pompeo and Morrison. Their respective delusional theistic dominionisms only ultimately respect the governance of their imaginary imperial friend (Yes: they really are that ill. It is, to be frank, quite insane. Not that conservative Baptists and Charismatic Pentecostals like each other (take it from the split-from-reality delusionals themselves). There are many examples of the former calling the latter ‘of the Devil’. Are these really the kind mentally ill people that Wong and Law want in power? Apparently and resoundingly – yes.