MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 11^th, 2022 at 8:14pm:


Actually I'm reacting to your paranoid "China threat" theory which is a diversion from the real economic issues facing people all around the world.

The world is at a crossroads. The current IMF/World Bank   neo-liberal-based rules are failing the world economy, as national debt and ecological threats are mounting everywhere.   

Global sustainable prosperity requires a new approach to public sector-private sector arrangements.

You have to stop regarding private entrepreneurship alone as the driver of economic progress; as AI and IT increasingly shape manufacturing, the public sector must step up, to ensure fair distribution of essential goods among all.
In other words, strategic co-operation as well as strategic competition must be goals of national and international relations. 

And you have to relinquish a degree of national sovereignty, in favour of international law which criminalizes war as a means of dispute settlement between nations; the destruction of life and resources resulting from the insanity of war is no longer viable in a world which demands international co-operation to deal with the pressing issues outlined above.

[On this, it seems we might have to wait until one nation - who is not interested in global hegemony -  is powerful enough to confront the Pentagon without firing a shot. At that stage, the UNSC veto might be abolished by agreement].

So my advice to you; get a life, love your wife if possible, and support the growing economic heterodoxy known as MMT, if you want to deal with the growing political disenchantment in the democracies, in which the Right want to reduce government spending, and the Left want to increase taxation - an absurd, ongoing tug of war which merely pits taxpayers from the opposing camps against one another.

China's consensus meritocracy  of course has the advantage of avoiding this absurd partisan political  conflict, and so long as the CCP can maintain its "social contract" with the population (ie achieving national development with common prosperity), it will remain in power with the consent of the people.

As for dealing with the partisan divide wrecking the democracies, the MMT insight has a solution: the currency-issuing government doesn't need your taxes to pay for public programs.

China is the last of your problems. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 12^th, 2022 at 11:18am:

No one has mentioned China as being a threat because everyone can see the joke that the CCFP has made of China and the Chinese people.

The CCP's military has neither the military strength nor the Chinese people's morale to take on Vietnam, let alone Australia. There is no scenario where the CCP could pose any military threat to anyone except the Chinese people.

That you deflected to it, indicates the fetish you have for perceived strongmen and the political apparatus that keeps them in power.

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 12^th, 2022 at 11:18am:


Actually, China IS a threat which is relevant to the real economic issues facing people all around the world.

The world is at a crossroads. The current liberal trade rules are failing the world economy, as China is gaming the system at every turn. It signed a free trade agreement with Australia but then inposes POLITICALLY motivated trade sanctions.

Global sustainable prosperity requires a new approach to dealing with a lying, cheating China. It's international trade dealings are very, very far from fair. 

In other words, China has corrupets everything it has come into contac with/has been allwed to come into contact with: strategic co-operation as well as strategic competition and international relations. 

And while it expects the West to relinquish a degree of national sovereignty, in favour of international law which criminalizes war as a means of dispute settlement between nations; china will never relinguish one little bit of its interest or sovereignty.
It is threatening war and the destruction of life and resources resulting from the insanity of war in a world which demands international co-operation to deal with the pressing issues outlined above.

[On this, it seems we might have to wait until one nation - who is not interested in global hegemony -  is powerful enough to confront the Pentagon without firing a shot. At that stage, the UNSC veto might be abolished by agreement].  There's the cloven hoof of threat again.

China's consensus meritocracy  of course is a smokescreen  for its absurd partisan political drive for hegemony, and so long as the CCP can maintain its "social contract" with the population of the ruthlessly oppressing the people.

China is the first of your problems. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 13^th, 2022 at 12:24pm:

The oligarchs are the top rulers in Beijing, all of whom have demonstrated total allegiance to Xi Jinping - the, now, paramount leader.

From there, the next ranks are determined by the officer holders' guanxi with the CCP hierarchy, and so on down to the low-ranked CCP officials.

It's barely a requirement that prospective CCP officials can read or write - what counts is their status and guanxi with the CCP - the relevant degrees are bestowed by the CCP on the officials as required.

Learn something about how guanxi works in Chinese society.

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 13^th, 2022 at 12:24pm:

Not all of the CCP's apparent 95 million members are CCP officials, although all of them would have at least some guanxi with the CCP by the fact of their membership.

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 13^th, 2022 at 12:24pm:

Did he now? Do you know who Xi Jinping is? Who his father (Xi Zhongxun) was? How he managed to hide from Mao when Mao went on his rampage? Was his degree earned or bestowed? How did his marriage raise his profile with the CCP?

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 13^th, 2022 at 1:20pm:


Er.....ethical "consensus" is arrived at by individuals competing with one another. What murders did Xi commit, on his way to the top?

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 13^th, 2022 at 1:41pm:

Ethical consensus, eh! Xi never showed any sign during his rise that he would do a 180 and turn China back to Maoism - he played the game of being a moderate and a progressive.