Ok, the rape is from huge transnational companies, the Chinese ones seemingly controlled by the CCP in the Chinese version of capitalism, and most of the others controlled by transnational private interests (the majority of which seem to come down to Blackrock, whose controlling owners are kept private). It's not really a matter of whether the rape is from black, white, yellow or brindle - if you are a country on the receiving end of it, it hurts. The only reason I would make a distinction between, for example, Landbridge (the company with the Port of Darwin contract) and Adani (a company that is mining for coal in north-west Queensland) is that Landbridge is a Chinese company that is reputed to be controlled (or working closely with) the CCP, while Adani, an Indian company, is privately owned and notorious for dodgy environmental practices, tax-avoidance, and fraudulent business dealings, and definitely not in cahoots with the Indian government. In one case (Adani) their motives can be ascribed purely to profit, whereas Landbridge & other companies buying controlling interests in our infrastructure may have more sinister motives. In any event, they are placing themselves strategically to be able to control our infrastructure, which is something that no country should allow.
Sorry Mara. I didn't read all of your comment and feel that I must disagree with your perception of the recent and now past increases by China in Australian companies and industries.
Yes. The best example is Darwin and the Port. Who allowed that to happen? A state government. We were not held at gunpoint or had our lives threatened to conclude such a ridiculous transaction as that has turned out to be. Someone approved it. An Australian or group of Australians.
Also, again with respect, shareholding in companies by foreign companies must go through a process which allows the government of the day to approve such transactions, or otherwise. All very straight forward. It is again an approval from Australia. Someone approved these transactions, An Australian.Yes, Electric power, gas, dairy farms, cattle stations and on. However, China's investment is paltry compared to the US ownership of our country.
Now if you want to pursue the stupidity of what has happened in this feckless country over time, just look at the ownership of our banks, Shareholders. Australians.? Hardly, the same greedy foreign financiers like who own half of America. They were allowed in en masse and we pay the price, ongoing for ever. HSBC, CitiGroup just to name two.
Don't even think on who owns the naturals gas in Australia, the Americans owners export overseas at a great profit while we pay for our own resources through the nose......and very soon get cold in winter unless we can reclaim some of this for our own use. Australia is the only country in the world allowing international oil companies to access and export natural gas without prioritising local supply.
We are totally naive.
It is all based on what Australia has allowed this country to become over time. Foreign investment and ownership at any price with foreign control over our external policies.
And now a country totally subservient to the USA and its military objectives. I would rather deal with China as a client in a proper business-like manner than be a servile bag carrier for a criminal country like America, a country that will demand to populate the north of Australia with bases and military weaponry to add to the 800+ bases in the world now.
Australia a target.... Indeed. Mainland USA a target. Not a chance
Already on the drawing board. Will we give them the OK? Of course. It’s what we do.
Contrarian, I couldn't agree more. To "deal with China as a client in a proper business-like manner" would be my ideal too.
But Australia has been a puppet of foreign powers from its inception, as a penal colony of England. Then back in the 1950s we allowed British nuclear testing at Maralinga, in our beautiful outback, followed by the US bases at Pine Gap, and they also have a (rotating) base at Darwin.
And when we do get a leader who shows a bit of leadership or independence, they get ousted, often by their own party machine.
But Australia is by no means alone in that - every Western country seems to be under the thumb of the Controllers (and it would be simplistic to say "the US" - the "military-industrial complex" might be closer to the truth).
Three cheers for all of that. Australia is an obese, supersized, version of Okinawa or Guam, a forward base for the US to project force across Asia. And forget about China, the local national security people will use every opportunity for institutional and personal self-aggrandisement and the diminution of our rights.
Frankly, I am not sure that Adani is any less sinister. The gov't gave them that mining lease because they were (still are) trying to buy influence in India. Giving Indian oligarchs a share in Australia was the unacknowledged part of the deal that went with the ludicrous Quad. Australian resources are just being used to restructure alliances and linkages to suit the grand agenda of Washington, London and Canberra.
Private equity is a great way for our masters to drain wealth. It is also a great way for them to enrich themselves or each other via a trade in favours. Rudd's wife made a bundle on a gov't contract in the UK. You can bet your life there were strings attached. Many of the companies which deal extensively with gov't employ the wives and children of politicians. Australian capitalism is just as corrupt as any Indian or Chinese company.
Phillip, don't get me wrong - I don't like Adani, and I have put a lot of time, energy and money too, donating to various legal cases, signing petitions, and writing letters. (Not that any of that does much good.) There are all sorts of reasons why we shouldn't let them mine here, from the stomping on the rights of the Wangan and Jagalingou people, to dredging the Reef, polluting the water table, and exporting our natural resources with a lucrative tax deal. But that cause has now been hijacked by the "Stop Climate Change" movement, and everything now is about carbon dioxide and "dirty coal".
It's just that Caitlin's original post is about China (the CCP) and how they are being maligned by the media.
That may be true, but I think we also have grounds to be wary.
Glad to hear that you are active on behalf of good causes. It makes a difference. Don't let anyone ever tell you that it doesn't. Even if you fail, you are still putting the powers that be on notice that someone wants to hold them accountable and believe me, they pay attention to that. They would be even worse if they thought that they could get away with it.
Personally, I'd say saving the lungfish habitat is the key one...fauna like that are invaluable...one cannot exaggerate the intrinsic value of something as rare as that.
China is complex. No one should have any illusions about the gov't there. Ditto the incitement on offer in our media. Awareness is resistance. Respect (for the Chinese people) is the only sane and decent way ahead.
Yes, Capitalist are going to do what Capitalism demands. I'm constantly amazed that anyone could see Madam Jabbaette-The-Hut Creosote, née Georgina Rinehart, as a better option than Chinese or Indians. It' amazing what institutional bigotry can do to twist a mind.
In one case (Adani) their motives can be ascribed purely to profit, whereas Landbridge & other companies buying controlling interests in our infrastructure may have more "sinister" motives.
I'd be interested to know what is more sinister (left handed?) than capitalism, is it "capitalism with Chinese characteristics"? "Your honour**, the person was seen using his left hand, he must have sinister motives." "Well, that's good enough for me, throw them in the jail, right next to Assange will do."
**When a speaker has to tell a person they have honour, it means the speaker is lying and the listener doesn't care.
JM, having another country controlling your ports (especially Darwin, where there is a key military installation), your airports (yes, there are Chinese companies getting similar control of these) and your energy infrastructure is more sinister than a company after profit alone.
In my opinion.
It is the difference between having someone burgle your house, and injecting you with nano-bots to potentially control your mind and behaviour.
You've obviously got your own pet peeves, which is fine by me.
I'm open to thoughtful discussion, though preferably not along mainstream party lines. Not everything is about racism - that is a reductionist argument in this instance.
Just don't inflict your one-dimensional thinking on me.
Ok, the rape is from huge transnational companies, the Chinese ones seemingly controlled by the CCP in the Chinese version of capitalism, and most of the others controlled by transnational private interests (the majority of which seem to come down to Blackrock, whose controlling owners are kept private). It's not really a matter of whether the rape is from black, white, yellow or brindle - if you are a country on the receiving end of it, it hurts. The only reason I would make a distinction between, for example, Landbridge (the company with the Port of Darwin contract) and Adani (a company that is mining for coal in north-west Queensland) is that Landbridge is a Chinese company that is reputed to be controlled (or working closely with) the CCP, while Adani, an Indian company, is privately owned and notorious for dodgy environmental practices, tax-avoidance, and fraudulent business dealings, and definitely not in cahoots with the Indian government. In one case (Adani) their motives can be ascribed purely to profit, whereas Landbridge & other companies buying controlling interests in our infrastructure may have more sinister motives. In any event, they are placing themselves strategically to be able to control our infrastructure, which is something that no country should allow.
Sorry Mara. I didn't read all of your comment and feel that I must disagree with your perception of the recent and now past increases by China in Australian companies and industries.
Yes. The best example is Darwin and the Port. Who allowed that to happen? A state government. We were not held at gunpoint or had our lives threatened to conclude such a ridiculous transaction as that has turned out to be. Someone approved it. An Australian or group of Australians.
Also, again with respect, shareholding in companies by foreign companies must go through a process which allows the government of the day to approve such transactions, or otherwise. All very straight forward. It is again an approval from Australia. Someone approved these transactions, An Australian.Yes, Electric power, gas, dairy farms, cattle stations and on. However, China's investment is paltry compared to the US ownership of our country.
Now if you want to pursue the stupidity of what has happened in this feckless country over time, just look at the ownership of our banks, Shareholders. Australians.? Hardly, the same greedy foreign financiers like who own half of America. They were allowed in en masse and we pay the price, ongoing for ever. HSBC, CitiGroup just to name two.
Don't even think on who owns the naturals gas in Australia, the Americans owners export overseas at a great profit while we pay for our own resources through the nose......and very soon get cold in winter unless we can reclaim some of this for our own use. Australia is the only country in the world allowing international oil companies to access and export natural gas without prioritising local supply.
We are totally naive.
It is all based on what Australia has allowed this country to become over time. Foreign investment and ownership at any price with foreign control over our external policies.
And now a country totally subservient to the USA and its military objectives. I would rather deal with China as a client in a proper business-like manner than be a servile bag carrier for a criminal country like America, a country that will demand to populate the north of Australia with bases and military weaponry to add to the 800+ bases in the world now.
Australia a target.... Indeed. Mainland USA a target. Not a chance
Already on the drawing board. Will we give them the OK? Of course. It’s what we do.
Contrarian, I couldn't agree more. To "deal with China as a client in a proper business-like manner" would be my ideal too.
But Australia has been a puppet of foreign powers from its inception, as a penal colony of England. Then back in the 1950s we allowed British nuclear testing at Maralinga, in our beautiful outback, followed by the US bases at Pine Gap, and they also have a (rotating) base at Darwin.
And when we do get a leader who shows a bit of leadership or independence, they get ousted, often by their own party machine.
But Australia is by no means alone in that - every Western country seems to be under the thumb of the Controllers (and it would be simplistic to say "the US" - the "military-industrial complex" might be closer to the truth).
Well painted background of the whole sorry situation.
There is nothing you said that is not true. It's all of our own doing.
Three cheers for all of that. Australia is an obese, supersized, version of Okinawa or Guam, a forward base for the US to project force across Asia. And forget about China, the local national security people will use every opportunity for institutional and personal self-aggrandisement and the diminution of our rights.
Exactly. Mara didn't have a problem with Americans taking over Australia. But the Chinese?!
Frankly, I am not sure that Adani is any less sinister. The gov't gave them that mining lease because they were (still are) trying to buy influence in India. Giving Indian oligarchs a share in Australia was the unacknowledged part of the deal that went with the ludicrous Quad. Australian resources are just being used to restructure alliances and linkages to suit the grand agenda of Washington, London and Canberra.
Private equity is a great way for our masters to drain wealth. It is also a great way for them to enrich themselves or each other via a trade in favours. Rudd's wife made a bundle on a gov't contract in the UK. You can bet your life there were strings attached. Many of the companies which deal extensively with gov't employ the wives and children of politicians. Australian capitalism is just as corrupt as any Indian or Chinese company.
Phillip, don't get me wrong - I don't like Adani, and I have put a lot of time, energy and money too, donating to various legal cases, signing petitions, and writing letters. (Not that any of that does much good.) There are all sorts of reasons why we shouldn't let them mine here, from the stomping on the rights of the Wangan and Jagalingou people, to dredging the Reef, polluting the water table, and exporting our natural resources with a lucrative tax deal. But that cause has now been hijacked by the "Stop Climate Change" movement, and everything now is about carbon dioxide and "dirty coal".
It's just that Caitlin's original post is about China (the CCP) and how they are being maligned by the media.
That may be true, but I think we also have grounds to be wary.
Glad to hear that you are active on behalf of good causes. It makes a difference. Don't let anyone ever tell you that it doesn't. Even if you fail, you are still putting the powers that be on notice that someone wants to hold them accountable and believe me, they pay attention to that. They would be even worse if they thought that they could get away with it.
Personally, I'd say saving the lungfish habitat is the key one...fauna like that are invaluable...one cannot exaggerate the intrinsic value of something as rare as that.
China is complex. No one should have any illusions about the gov't there. Ditto the incitement on offer in our media. Awareness is resistance. Respect (for the Chinese people) is the only sane and decent way ahead.
Yes, Capitalist are going to do what Capitalism demands. I'm constantly amazed that anyone could see Madam Jabbaette-The-Hut Creosote, née Georgina Rinehart, as a better option than Chinese or Indians. It' amazing what institutional bigotry can do to twist a mind.
In one case (Adani) their motives can be ascribed purely to profit, whereas Landbridge & other companies buying controlling interests in our infrastructure may have more "sinister" motives.
I'd be interested to know what is more sinister (left handed?) than capitalism, is it "capitalism with Chinese characteristics"? "Your honour**, the person was seen using his left hand, he must have sinister motives." "Well, that's good enough for me, throw them in the jail, right next to Assange will do."
**When a speaker has to tell a person they have honour, it means the speaker is lying and the listener doesn't care.
JM, having another country controlling your ports (especially Darwin, where there is a key military installation), your airports (yes, there are Chinese companies getting similar control of these) and your energy infrastructure is more sinister than a company after profit alone.
In my opinion.
It is the difference between having someone burgle your house, and injecting you with nano-bots to potentially control your mind and behaviour.
You've obviously got your own pet peeves, which is fine by me.
I'm open to thoughtful discussion, though preferably not along mainstream party lines. Not everything is about racism - that is a reductionist argument in this instance.
Just don't inflict your one-dimensional thinking on me.