Permanently Deleted

    • longhorn617 [any]
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      4 years ago

      I understand what you are saying. You are talking about this in moralistic terms. I am not. Australian voters collectively made a choice to elect a government hostile to your largest trading partner. You undertook an action, and you are now experiencing the equal and opposite reaction. The argument you are making is like saying that you didn't deserve to get burned when you decided to touch the stove, but that's what happens when you touch the stove, and no one made you do it. You had the choice not to touch the stove.

        • longhorn617 [any]
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          4 years ago

          They all voted, it is the voice of the populace as far as attitudes to China go. Australians had the option of parties that were friendly to their largest trading partner. They chose the ones that were hostile. This isn't like saying the choice was neoliberal vs neoliberal. Being cordial to the Chinese is well within the spectrum of Western neoliberal politics that is acceptable to the bourgeoisie. You can find "We should be nice to the Chinese" opinion pieces in Bloomberg, the New York Times, and the Wall Street Journal.

      • newmou [he/him]
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 years ago

        This is lowbrow. This suggests a very limited understanding of bourgeois power

        • longhorn617 [any]
          ·
          edit-2
          4 years ago

          You are an absolute moron if you think "be cordial with your largest trading partner, even the Chinese" isn't within the spectrum of acceptable neoliberal politics put before voters.