China is not mad in any way over Australia, also they may not need natural gas from Aus anymore. - Australia Derangement Syndrome now spreading rapidly throughout China.

[Super-Chevy454]

China seem to suffer more than Australia Derangement Syndrome. They're more nervous instead of being angry from what Styx vlogged on Bitchute.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/qDlKD7O6OutY/

That Bitchuter gived me some chuckles

J123456
Well, at least with this story being a Bitchute exclusive, it won't "accidentally" be auto-deleted.

 

[Too Many Catgirls]

This is pretty amazing to watch unfold. China must have had to push ahead and start executing its plan to strangle out the competition years earlier than they wanted or expected.

What they are doing now is what they were going to do to everyone once they had a firm grip on the global economy. And now they're flailing around trying to play hard ball before they have finished puberty.

 

[LegoTugboat]

That and it really hurts the narrative. It makes it seem like a country of 1.39-1.4 billion is being bullied and threatened by a country of 25 million.

Which for an idea in terms of population, is like America (328 million) being threatened by the Solomon Islands (650k) or Macau (630k).

 

[Radioactive Man]

Which for an idea in terms of population, is like America (328 million) being threatened by the Solomon Islands (650k) or Macau (630k).

Or Tasmania, ha.

I'd be curious to see the reaction if we seized their Australian assets with no compensation.
I know they don't give a damn about their everyday citizens, but it'd be interesting to see if their wealthiest citizens taking big financial hits would cause a change in tone.

 

[Rei is shit]

This is pretty amazing to watch unfold. China must have had to push ahead and start executing its plan to strangle out the competition years earlier than they wanted or expected.

What they are doing now is what they were going to do to everyone once they had a firm grip on the global economy. And now they're flailing around trying to play hard ball before they have finished puberty.

This stuff makes me think that the economic indicators the party is privy too are a lot worse then what has been made public. Trying to make plays now before a decade+ of middle-income trap fun would be the rational thing to do. But then again this is China.

 

[Lonely Grave]

Recapping all of this reminds me of the victory scene in Ocean's Thirteen.

Australia: Hell of a year. COVID outbreak, chimping out over our probe. You gonna roll over and cry?
China: You think you hit me. You don't even know where my soft targets are. I got the biggest economy on the block, control of the WHO, and I got your exports to fuck over.
Australia: You sure?
China: Sure? I got them all sewn up-
Australia's other trade partners: Oh? Whoops...
China: ...this world might have changed, but not me. I'm gonna hunt you down, and I know ways that'll really, really hurt... in ways you can't even imagine.
Australia: Well, first of all, we got a lot of other people who would love to buy from us. They like us better than you.
Second of all, you're not gonna go crying to the UN... well, let's face it, you don't give a shit about the UN.
And third... you're a big country with over a billion people to feed. You should know better, really.

 

[Anonymus Fluhre]

China doesn't need to buy from any Western country due to their investment in Africa. They put in billions of dollars into different African countries and for many, instead paying that money back with currency they can trade natural resources instead. Ethiopia for instance has such a deal. This also allows China to use Africa nations as free votes in world affairs as any African nation that doesn't vote the way China wants get's less funding.

 

[Fcret]

China doesn't need to buy from any Western country due to their investment in Africa. They put in billions of dollars into different African countries and for many, instead paying that money back with currency they can trade natural resources instead. Ethiopia for instance has such a deal. This also allows China to use Africa nations as free votes in world affairs as any African nation that doesn't vote the way China wants get's less funding.

The West has been trying to extract resources from Africa for more than a century at this point. It doesn't work. African development isn't high enough to have even extractive institutions and the geography makes it nearly impossible to move things around efficiently within the continent.

Also, China doesn't have the naval power to secure the routes into and out of the continent. Forget the whites - if the US said tomorrow that it no longer cared about global naval security, then the Koreans, the Japanese, the Taiwanese, the Vietnamese, the Indians, and the Filipinos would line up to sink every Chinese convoy from Shanghai to the Horn of Africa (assuming they didn't simply board the ships and steal everything of value before sinking them).

And that's even assuming the Africans are willing to trade resources in the first place. Nothing is stopping the Africans from telling the Chinese to fuck off. All it would cost them is future Chinese investment which doesn't seem to be coming anyway. The only recourse the Chinese would have would be suing the African countries in western legal systems since all the loans were made in USD, EUR, GBP, and JPY due to no one trusting Chinese funny money (not even the Chinese). But wait - China is snubbing western monetary systems anyway so in what universe would they be able to claw back even a fraction of what they lost?

 

[Anonymus Fluhre]

The West has been trying to extract resources from Africa for more than a century at this point. It doesn't work. African development isn't high enough to have even extractive institutions and the geography makes it nearly impossible to move things around efficiently within the continent.

Also, China doesn't have the naval power to secure the routes into and out of the continent. Forget the whites - if the US said tomorrow that it no longer cared about global naval security, then the Koreans, the Japanese, the Taiwanese, the Vietnamese, the Indians, and the Filipinos would line up to sink every Chinese convoy from Shanghai to the Horn of Africa (assuming they didn't simply board the ships and steal everything of value before sinking them).

And that's even assuming the Africans are willing to trade resources in the first place. Nothing is stopping the Africans from telling the Chinese to fuck off. All it would cost them is future Chinese investment which doesn't seem to be coming anyway. The only recourse the Chinese would have would be suing the African countries in western legal systems since all the loans were made in USD, EUR, GBP, and JPY due to no one trusting Chinese funny money (not even the Chinese). But wait - China is snubbing western monetary systems anyway so in what universe would they be able to claw back even a fraction of what they lost?

And yet that's what China is doing in Africa. African governments want the free money from China they'll even ignore the racism in China during COVID-19 for that free cash. You may want to look into the Belt and Road initiative for starters when it comes to transporting goods. You'll also want to read up on China investments into Africa and what they want in return. Other things to read up on is China's investments into places like Pakistan as well.

 

[Fcret]

You've completely missed the point in my post - when China comes to collect its money, who's going to enforce the contracts? The only countries with the power to put pressure on Africa are the US, the EU, and a handful of other developed countries. Why would they abet the Chinese in getting their money back? China doesn't have the power projection to seize assets by force and it increasingly doesn't have the cash flow to keep these countries on the Chinese teat. It barely has the power to enforce the contract in Sri Lanka, a country in their own backyard.

BRI is a vehicle for China to export surplus production in exchange for favors. So far its only consequence has been China building ports in a lot of places people weren't visiting anyway. If the project was some master gambit, then the infrastructure built would have been a stepping stone to a greater presence in the economies it partners with. In a word, the projects would have been successful. Instead, most of the projects have gone bust, been put on life support by Chinese SOEs and then been aggressively cordoned off from the rest of the country by the locals to the point where it's not even clear if the cost of keeping Chinese personnel in the area is worth the money lost on the project.

A lot of people have this idea that the Chinese are these glorious 4D chess players but they're really not. It's not even clear if Xi Jinping finished primary school. Imagine Joe Biden as a high-school dropout and you get an idea of what the current Chinese leadership is like. These aren't the hardy dudes who learned a lot about governance hands-on by orchestrating a communist revolution and marching across the countryside. These are their princeling kids who have 100% drunk the Kool-Aid and who came of age before widespread access to modern education in China. They do not make good decisions.

 

[Save the Loli]

The West has been trying to extract resources from Africa for more than a century at this point. It doesn't work. African development isn't high enough to have even extractive institutions and the geography makes it nearly impossible to move things around efficiently within the continent.

That's why China's been building all those roads. And African geography isn't bad, it's no worse than lots of other parts of the world with railroads.

Also, China doesn't have the naval power to secure the routes into and out of the continent. Forget the whites - if the US said tomorrow that it no longer cared about global naval security, then the Koreans, the Japanese, the Taiwanese, the Vietnamese, the Indians, and the Filipinos would line up to sink every Chinese convoy from Shanghai to the Horn of Africa (assuming they didn't simply board the ships and steal everything of value before sinking them).

Pretty sure none of those countries want to go to war with China so why would they do that? The only people who would are the Somali pirates who barely exist anymore because of global intervention there (not just the US). If Somali pirates started shit against China, even the PLAN could deal with them.

And of those countries, only Japan and India are worth a shit anyway in terms of navies (and Indian Navy is China-quality), and maybe Taiwan and Korea since they're next door and have land aviation.

And that's even assuming the Africans are willing to trade resources in the first place. Nothing is stopping the Africans from telling the Chinese to fuck off. All it would cost them is future Chinese investment which doesn't seem to be coming anyway. The only recourse the Chinese would have would be suing the African countries in western legal systems since all the loans were made in USD, EUR, GBP, and JPY due to no one trusting Chinese funny money (not even the Chinese). But wait - China is snubbing western monetary systems anyway so in what universe would they be able to claw back even a fraction of what they lost?

That's where the Chinese have their global propaganda networks. If the Republic of Kangzland in Africa tells China to fuck off, China can run screaming to France and the US and tell them how US and EU investments are next and how Kangzland needs to be tought a lesson. So the US and France sends a firmly worded message to Kangzland and Kangzland does what they say because they know the US and France will green light a coup or protests or all sorts of fuckery.

That's what China is counting on.

 

[Fcret]

That's why China's been building all those roads. And African geography isn't bad, it's no worse than lots of other parts of the world with railroads.

Africa has some of the most unfavorable geography in the world for development. Almost all of the land is either desert, jungle, swamp, or fucking continental plateau. Do you know how much time and money it takes to build a road down a cliff that's nearly perpendicular to the place you're going to? And how much money it takes to run automobile traffic up and down such steep inclines? The most successful states on the continent specialize in a single resource, oil, and they specifically subjugate their entire country just to funnel all of the oil to one port. And it still struggles to keep up with global prices.

Even in the heydays of imperialism, when the Europeans were willing to literally enslave the native population, Africa was a money sink. It is not a stable or price-efficient source of anything as the west has found out for itself multiple times when it has tried to play in Africa. And this is not lost on China, who, for example, imports nearly 4 times more copper from Australia than they do from Central Africa despite Australia producing significantly less copper than the DRC (and only about half of what the DRC and Zambia together produce).

 

[Save the Loli]

Africa has some of the most unfavorable geography in the world for development. Almost all of the land is either desert, jungle, swamp, or fucking continental plateau. Do you know how much time and money it takes to build a road down a cliff that's nearly perpendicular to the place you're going to? And how much money it takes to run automobile traffic up and down such steep inclines? The most successful states on the continent specialize in a single resource, oil, and they specifically subjugate their entire country just to funnel all of the oil to one port. And it still struggles to keep up with global prices.

And yet somehow there are roads and railroads in places with that exact same topography like the American West, Brazil, and you betcha, China. Want to see all the cliffs and swamps there? At the end of the day, a styrofoam bridge like what China builds is usually better than no bridge at all. Geography is no obstacle to development if anyone feels like sinking the money and, and Europeans already started the work back in the day.

Even in the heydays of imperialism, when the Europeans were willing to literally enslave the native population, Africa was a money sink. It is not a stable or price-efficient source of anything as the west has found out for itself multiple times when it has tried to play in Africa. And this is not lost on China, who, for example, imports nearly 4 times more copper from Australia than they do from Central Africa despite Australia producing significantly less copper than the DRC (and only about half of what the DRC and Zambia together produce).

Imagine my shock when importing copper from next door is better than importing it from halfway around the world. Fact is if you have a stable infrastructure, all those African resources become a lot more valuable and in high demand. Latin America was always an unstable shithole but countries were always importing copper and rubber and oil from there.

 

[Too Many Catgirls]

What did that Chinese guy say in Empire of Dust?

If Africa develops, it will only be after the Chinese replace all meaningful labor and oversight with Chinese people. And Africans aren't going to be okay with that, just like they weren't okay with European colonialism. Uh... and I don't think the Chinese colonialism is going to be any nicer than the European colonialism. They have to do it themselves in these African nations or it is never going to stick. The Chinese are wasting huge amounts of money on this project and the result is going to be a lot of broken toys and suicidal thoughts.

 

[heathercho]

So what is Australia going to do about Daniel Andrews? If they seriously wanted to show the Chinese, they'd kick Andrews out and veto his BRI plan.

 

[Billy_Sama]

Looking at that map on how much food China exports, looks like China due for its 21st century mass cannibalism event.

 

[haurchefant]

What did that Chinese guy say in Empire of Dust?

If Africa develops, it will only be after the Chinese replace all meaningful labor and oversight with Chinese people. And Africans aren't going to be okay with that, just like they weren't okay with European colonialism. Uh... and I don't think the Chinese colonialism is going to be any nicer than the European colonialism. They have to do it themselves in these African nations or it is never going to stick. The Chinese are wasting huge amounts of money on this project and the result is going to be a lot of broken toys and suicidal thoughts.

I do wonder how it'll play out. China isn't nice like Europe and they don't care about racial guilt. Africa won't be able to play on their conscience like they can with Westerners. For China it'll come down to cost vs benefit I guess? But they're going to enslave them all over again....

 

[Radioactive Man]

So what is Australia going to do about Daniel Andrews? If they seriously wanted to show the Chinese, they'd kick Andrews out and veto his BRI plan.

That's exactly what should happen, after that send him to trial as a traitor and string him up.
After that every time they put another bullshit sanction against us we seize another of their local assets.

 

[ditto]

These are their princeling kids who have 100% drunk the Kool-Aid and who came of age before widespread access to modern education in China. They do not make good decisions.

And their recent capitulation to Xi by making him Mao 2.0 has only cemented that bad leadership for the next 20 years at least.

At least the USSR had primitive mechanisms in place to get rid of Berias and Khrushchevs. The Chinese system remains politically Stalinist.

 

[Radioactive Man]

PM announces new restrictions on foreign investment in Australia

https://youtu.be/fVofhw9aI6o (ABC News)

PM and the treasurer both made a point of praising David Irvine, current head of the foreign investment review board and formerly head of ASIO and before that director general of ASIS and was the Australian ambassador to China from 2000 to 2003.

Claims that new policy was developed by Australia for Australia and not at all influenced by trying to maintain "accepted foreign state investor status" with the USA.
No mention of Victoria, Andrews, or the BRI.

Spoiler: Key points

PM ScoMo
Investment in Australia must be on our terms, on our rules and in our interests.
Need to be more careful of foreign investment in sensitive businesses, critical infrastructure, data centers.
Australia has the most liberal set of investment rules in our part of the world.
50 mil for ensuring agencies can enforce compliance in foreign investment rules.
Does not see any reason why these new policies might increase tension with China.
Port of Darwin was not sold with approval or authority of the Commonwealth Government, at the time of sale in 2016 was not required for states/territories to have approval from foreign investment review board or the treasurer to sell assets.
Jobs and growth.
Keep off the grass.

Treasurer
1 in 10 Australian jobs created by foreign investment.
Of the 4 trillion in foreign investment in Straya, more than 20% comes from the USA, more than 10% from each UK and Japan. Oh and a little over 5% from China.
Technology evolving, geo-political climate more complex, world over govts seeing foreign investment being used for strategic objectives, not purely commercial ones.
Most significant reforms to foreign investment act since established in 1975.
Three key areas of change..

• Creating new national security test for foreign investors trying to invest in sensitive areas, telecommunications, critical infrastructure, energy/utilities, defense supply chain, and businesses that collect store and own data. Exact businesses still to be determined.
• Treasurer also has new power where (s)he can "call in" an investment if it creates a risk but is not already covered by policy.
• Treasurer will also have last resort power to vary or impost conditions or as a last resort force divestment "in limited number of exceptional cases".

Intend to pass changes by end of 2020 and implement by Jan 1st 2021.