Shaoquett Moselmane
At a time when foreign interference is at the front and centre of the political agenda, a NSW Labor MP has delivered an extraordinary speech parroting Beijing’s narrative of Western victimisation and the need for a “new world order” in which China will “force a change to the rules”.
Shaoquett Moselmane, a Labor Legislative Councillor, opened a meeting of the Sydney Institute for Public and International Affairs in Parliament House on June 25, where Bob Carr and two academics spoke on “China’s Rise from Poverty to Economic Power.” In his rather clunky speech, Moselmane offered a potted history of communist China, including that Mao Zedong’s “restructure” led to “terrible unintended consequences as the collective experiment left a controversial legacy, one that temporarily scarred the Revolution.”
It is estimated that Mao inflicted tens of millions of deaths through famines induced knowingly by his policies, as well as the murder of millions more Chinese and minorities at the direction of Mao and the Party — and his successors today.
Moselmane then turns to the future and warns that “China will not be satisfied to operate within an existing word order with the rules of the game designed to favour the west. A new world order is what China will in future demand.” Moselmane argued “the rules of the game” favour its opponents, “so the rules have to change”.
“China cannot continue to rise the way that it has within a West-designed world order, in a Western-designed global financial system, and in a West-controlled international legal trade structure dominated and controlled by Western powers.”
Moselmane goes on to say that, “The only way for China to reach its potential is for China to force a change to the rules and create a new world order.”
The argument about whether China is a rule-taker or rule-maker is an old one, but Moselmane couches it in Beijing’s terms, with China as a victim of its opponent’s self-interested international order. Curiously, this appears to not be the view of the Trump administration, which argues that China’s entry into the World Trade Organisation — one of the core elements of the international order — was a mistake and that China has been too successful at gaming the trade system. Nor, in the South China Sea, can one see China being hedged in by international rules — it has brazenly defied international law to annex and militarise territory to which it has no lawful claim. That is, it’s behaving just like another great power, the United States, which claims to adhere to international rules but which picks and chooses which ones it follows and happily breaches those if it is in its interests to do so.
Global media and the engine of social media are in the hands of China’s opponents. The Arab Spring has seen the power of Western propaganda satellites in manipulating and misinforming the public leading the Arab world to chaos and the result has been death and destruction. Today China has been able to block that intrusion into China’s internal affairs.
Moselmane also lauds Chinese censorship. “It needs greater control of the global media,” he argues.
Moselmane’s conspiracy theory about sinister Western media — or as he calls it, propaganda — destabilising non-Western countries would presumably comes as a surprise to the hundreds of thousands of Egyptians, Tunisians, Libyans, Bahrainians, Iranians and Syrians who paid no heed to Western media in trying to protest against the murderous regimes that ruled them — and paid with their lives for doing so. Just the dupes of Western journalists and editors and tweeters, apparently — with no agency of their own. Like the “unintended” victims of Mao’s mass slaughter, perhaps they’re just a “controversial legacy” for Moselmane.
This foolishly romantic view of a ruthless government with regional domination on its agenda is both dangerous and incredibly naive.
It would appear that many people who are posting on here have a more ‘romantic view’ of the current political climate than the rest of us.
China is our biggest trading partner in the region. Many, many bad things have happened in the countries of our traditional allies and yet they are overlooked by those such as Keene. I won’t enumerate them because sensible people already know about them and I am not here to educate the uninformed. Life is too short.
We need to grow up and throw off this ‘us and them’ stupidity.
Seriously this is the most useless comment I’ve read for a while. Keane (learn to spell) explicitly compared China’s behaviour to the US in this very article, so he’s not “overlooking” anything.
You might like to re-read my statement carefully before making a comment that is so far from the point I was making as to skew my words.
I only mentioned Keene/Keane (who cares), in passing with the words ‘such as’. The main thrust of my comment was for those who seem to have never moved out from the ‘Red Hordes’ mentality regarding China.
China is not a threat to world peace. It has never been a threat to world peace. If you knew even a small part of the history of the Asia-Pacific, perhaps from just before the beginning of the Second World War you might have a different view. But then, perhaps not, illusions are hard to part with.
You are right, of course, but the US policy of confrontation with China could lead to to tensions between the US and China, which do become a threat to world peace.
How long would our friend Shaoquett be around, if he tried to make a speech offering the opposite point of view in China. As we appear to have free speech in Australia, I have the right to call him a Chinese puppet, along with Bob Carr.
Bernard, I think you need to get rid of your 19thC view of China. Seriously? Quoting Trump’s opinion of China? Really? Well, after giving The Donald’s analysis, and your admiration for it, we don’t need to look much further to get a grasp on Bernard’s views: antidiluvian, anachronistic and not worth being given a second read.
Are you channeling Bob Menzies and his paranoia towards Asia, or merely listening to Pauline Hanson’s dire warnings of 20 years ago? Either way, Bernard, you are a disappointment to intellectual thought in Australia.
China is, and has been for quite a while, a member of the International Community. It is part of the UN, has several foreign aid programmes in Africa, Pakistan and, soon, if not already, the South Pacific. It has nuclear weapons, now don’t tell me that that scares your tender mercies, Trump has more and I don’t remember you expounding on that fact with any fear. Not like the rest of us, anyway.
Bernard, I am not certain where or when you developed this irrational fear, perhaps in your cradle? Did a toy pagoda or similar fall on your baby head?
As for China making moves in the South China Sea (not the Japan or the Korean sea) this is commonsense in today’s dangerous political climate. Surely you are not unaware of the thousands of nuclear weapons and bases that the US has installed around the world? To name just a few, off the top of my head, Japan, Sth Korea (definitely a US base) and probably most of the NATO alliance. Definitely Turkey.
Bernard, you are a very, very small fish in a very, very small pool, unfortunately, you seem to think that your opinions about China matter. They don’t, but they could still do a little bit of harm to those of us who aren’t war-mongering against China.
John, you and Bernard, along with a few others, might be interested to know that the most popular drama on Chinese TV is/was called “In the name of the people”. The story-line is to do with corruption in government. It was also nominated in several categories in various award shows, some of which it won.
Not exactly something a totalitarian state would permit.
That’s not really an indication of a state being totalitarian or not. The Chinese authorities are cracking down hard on dissent but they are also running a campaign against corruption. Authoritarian governments do this, using popular pressure to support their campaigns. When I was living in Indonesia in the 1970s the Suharto government ran a public campaign against corruption and tolerated press criticism of its failure to sufficiently prosecute corrupt officials because the criticism gave it an excuse for more decisive action. Suharto’s government was authoritarian rather than totalitarian but the same principle applies in China.
I fail to see the connection between Indonesia and China. Suharto attained government with the aid of the CIA. The CIA supplied its lists of Communists, Socialists, Trade Unionists and progressives of all stripes to Suharto. Forgive my memory if I get it wrong, but it was my understanding that this led to over a million, at least, of Indonesians being murdered by Suharto’s forces.
You may have read recently that several of the ASEAN nations, including Indonesia, are having second thoughts about their opposition to China’s presence in the South China Sea.
I just found the following article, yesterday’s date, from the South China Morning Post (one of the online newspapers I read). It amused the hell out of me, I hope it does that same for others!
QUOTE
China’s army infiltrated by ‘peace disease’ after years without a war, says its official newspaper
Anti-corruption inspections to root out falsifying of military training data take on added importance in drive to boost forces’ combat-readiness
PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 03 July, 2018, 4:06pm
UPDATED : Tuesday, 03 July, 2018, 9:15pm
unquote
You can look it up yourself if you are still sceptical.
China’s relationship with its neighbours is one thing. Unlike the other super power it does not maintain hundreds of bases around the world or bomb various countries. Its internal policies are another matter entirely and are well reported internationally. Believe what you will about those policies, they’re the business of the Chinese, nobody else.
Mr Keane
I have long admired your work but I fear that increasingly your views on China have become seriously over the top. We in Australia are building a dangerous situation that risks a backlash against Chinese at a time when we over a million of our citizens are of Chinese origin and a quarter million Chinese students. The way you now write about anyone who does not share your views of the Chinese regime is scary in this context. In this latest case you did not counter the politicians argument but simply denounced in a seriously dangerous manner. Continue your criticism if you wish but argue do nor merely denounce!
China has merely reiterated a two thousand year truth(to them). It is the middle kingdom. The font of all that is wise and good. Not even Genghiz Khan was considered a suitable candidate to be the yellow emperor, so he conquered them instead.
The fact that an obscure Labor politician in NSW, a Mr Shaoquette Moselmane, has made a weak witted speech praising the current Chinese thinking should be put to one side for future reference. There will come a time when he will look vacuous.
I fail to see why the amount of Chinese in Australia would seriously impinge on our national identity. Unless, of course, we aim to follow our ancestors by being Pig Iron Bob’s dutiful anglofiles or LBJ’s dutiful little American lovers.
So do you agree that Chinese control of the media is a good thing? Explain what was wrong with Keane’s argument? Ironically, your criticism is simply a denouncement which is the entire point you make about the story.
Lastly, your point about criticising China as “building a dangerous situation” is telling. Talking truth about a foreign government meddling in this country’s affairs is not the same as encouraging a backlash to Chinese students. That is a vastly inflated claim. Should we see wrong and remain silent in case we infuriate a repressive regime?
Let’s face a few facts about China, without them our trade looks rather pathetic and all those cheap goodies built with slave labour will dry up. Not to mention that China is about 20% of the global population and this paranoid whining about Chinese has to stop. The cold war is over yet Bernard sounds more and more like he’s auditioning for a gig over at the Australian.
I don’t think it was Ghenghis who conquered China, just a bit of the northern part. It was Kublai Khan who conquered most of Northern China. They then became the Yuan Dynasty. However, the Yuans didn’t quite know how to rule, so they left that to the Chinese established bureaucracy.
The rest of China just got on with it
NUDIEFISH: was your comment directed at me? Chinese control of our media is a deplorable possibility. The truly terrifying thing is that Australians, by their obscene
apathy will happily knuckle down into an unquestioning torpor. Look at the ease with which Rupert Murdoch has eradicated public thought.
I hope the cheap goodies dry up. We have too much stuff and we buy too much more. Even Australians surviving on welfare can enjoy a bulging wardrobe, op shops are full to the brim, my child could wear a new t-shirt every day for months with no discernible difference to my bank account.
The majority of that ‘slave labour’ comes from joint ventures such as those with Apple. China needs to kick them out.
And ensure their workers are fairly paid
I don’t think that the Chinese government’s control of media in China is a good thing but equally I don’t think that the foreign citizen’s ownership of 70% of our MSM and control over it is a good thing either. If you make a fuss about one, you should make a fuss about the other. I am happy to criticise both.
I am not sure what Keen’s argument was. His conclusion at one point seemed to be that a NSW politician had wrongly supported China’s control over its media because it blocked foreign influence. I agree with Keane that the Chinese government’s censorship is bad but I agree with the ALP politician that we should block foreign control of our media, if we can.
As to foreign government meddling in this country’s affairs, the Chinese government comes a poor second to the US government. Our foreign policy should not be to confront China. The US government has chosen this policy and meddles in our affairs to push us to adopt it too.
He quoted Trump! Need anyone say more?
Are you not aware that there has been interference in Australia since 1788? Are you that uninformed?
The NSW Lang Labor Govt was dismissed at the behest of British Bond Holders.
The Whitlam Labor Govt was dismissed the behest of US and British banks.
There are probably more little dismissals done by the same people. The entire Australian mass media is controlled by an American, and his control is not benign.
Well, I agree there has been foreign interference since 1788. I did not say anything to suggest otherwise. I might differ with you on details. For example, I think Whitlam was sacked by means of CIA interference, as they arranged the all too convenient arrival of Khemlani to set up the dismissal, although the CIA interfered because the US government was upset with Whitlam over departures from traditional sources of funds and over Lionel Murphey’s raid on ASIO. You can read David Hunt’s “Girt” and “True Girt” to get a very detailed account of UK interference from 1788 to the late 19 th century. I don’t think that Murdoch owns more than 70% of our mass media, although we should concede that his influence reaches from there into even the ABC.
I enjoyed both books, thank you.
If you haven’t read The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein may I recommend it. It doesn’t fully cover The Dismissal but if lays it at the feet of Wall Street Bankers.
Another book is Rooted in Secrecy, by Joan Coxsedge and one other person, this book is older than the foregoing three but none the worse for that. I must re-read it in the light of recent events.
NUDIEFISH: was your comment directed at me? Chinese control of our media is a deplorable possibility. The truly terrifying thing is that Australians, by their obscene
apathy will happily knuckle down into an unquestioning torpor. Look at the ease with which Rupert Murdoch has eradicated public thought.
He didn’t stumble into the wrong party did he?
Great powers are ruthless and pursue their own agendas without caring which ants they step on. Australia’s 25 million people would be enough to populate one large Chinese city. We only matter to them for the produce we sell them. The other super power doesn’t care about smaller countries either, especially but not solely under the present administration. Australians need to learn the survival tactic of playing off one great power against another wherever possible and bending with the wind where necessary. I think it’s the Thais who have a saying that rigid, unbending trees get uprooted in a typhoon whereas bamboo bends and survives. Thailand, of course, was the one Southeast Asian country (apart from Aceh in today’s Indonesia) that never succumbed to Western colonial rule.
Thank God someone around here has got the intelligence to bring to bear on this issue.
Australia has buckley’s of perusing an independent line. America has garrisoned the world and we are their vassels.
At the moment we are pretty much “attached at the hip” to the US. The present administration there isn’t much into alliances though as we see in their remarks about NATO and their attitude to other treaties. Their only interest in us is as a source of resources and a place to put bases. A sort of unsinkable aircraft carrier. If they get tired of spending their money in the western Pacific our great alliance won’t be worth much.
An unsinkable aircraft carrier indeed. During WWII when the Americans were kicked out of the Phillippines they did some hard thinking. ‘Ah’, they declared ‘Australia is the very country for us. It resembles a giant aircraft carrier.’ The rest, as they say, is history.
Anyone doubting this is encouraged to do their own research. I put too much pain into my own.