Tainari88 wrote:This is precisely why I am pro-independence for Puerto Rico. You can't rely on some people who use and abuse you for their own ends and means to be making sound decisions for your own group. You have to be independent in decision-making. Otherwise, you spend a lot of money on defending the interests of people who are only really there to exploit your group.
Yes, we have terrible leadership in general. Only really opportunistic foolish people seem to make it in politics. I assume it is because decent people with decent values are dedicated to less profane endeavors than political posts.
I never got my genes mapped out in one of those gene things. But my sister did. And she stated she has a large percentage of Lithuanians, then Syrian, then Moroccan, then Kenyan, then Arawak in a small percentage. I have zero anything from Irish or English or any of that. The Syrian, Moroccan is really about being of Southern Spanish stock. The Kenyan is East African and it means my African ancestry about 12% was a free African and not a slave African. It was recent and that African ancestry was interesting. Since most African blood in Puerto Rico is from West Africa. Genes interest me in anthropology. Syria is extremely ancient, so is Morrocco and so is Kenya. Lithuanians are about 3% of Europe has that genetic base. I got a little bit of everyone. That is the Caribbean islands Wellsy. We often reflect the history of the nation we are from genetically. Our children often reflect our parents and their grandparents too.
And add to this the Americans don’t even know what the bloody hell they’re doing. What is their strategy? It’s been ambiguous at best and at the moment it’s been former Aussie PM Kevin Rudd trying to spearhead an idea of how to engage China.https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/kevin-rudd/the-avoidable-war/9781541701304/
We’ve shackled ourselves to the presently blind and we’re playing a dangerous game for what? Does the US actually want to control China’s periphery? And how? And why? What the hell are we doing but knee jerk reactions at this point which shows our lack of self control and direction.
And the warhawks who rattle the saber and say we’re going to invaded are the same bastards who put forth conscription, doubling the military budget and are in bed to arms manufacturers and dealers. They want to profit from death and idiots will damn well let them lead us to ruin.
Fair enough if things come to a head, but to just tun into it unnecessarily, eugh.
Though our labor party are soft social democrats for the most part, they do still seem to hold a sense of being public servants while I believe the Libera and National Coalition in Australia have been left so unaccountable in the media that they do whatever the hell they want.
But labour is still a sucker to Murdoch’s media which they need ti be more brazen about pursuing their own interests and setting their own stories.
The state premier of Victoria has nothings but excelled in popularity with his pursuit of policies and handling of the covid lockdown inspite if a press onslaught of his character.
They can be responsible adults but seem to be scared to go big on things at times. I think a lot of shitsticks go into politics because it can benefit them personally to do sweet deals with big money. They see personal advantage in their position and they can achieve it through bullshit.
Australia has been more insulated, especially with the policies near its founding (1901) seeking to expel everyone not considered white enough i.e English. There were also progressive ideas around social welfare and the like but to be limited only to white people. It makes some somewhat suspect of the historical tendency of social democracy to be successful where societies are most homogeneous and less so when racial antagonisms can be drummed up to attack social welfare.
Our immigration only shifted further east into Europe and South East Asia decades later while initially only promoting British immigration. We have different diasporas through different wars. Much of Australian cuisine in pubs seems defined by Italians with Chicken parmigiana being standard everywhere. They brought a bit of flavor beyond the dullness of some of our English dishes.
Actually here’s a fun bit about an Australian Greek in my hometown:
Though I do miss my parents’ Sunday lamb roasts. Lamb is a lot less common here in the US, especially as I’m surrounded by cattle ranches and Australia developed economically through wool to England. My city of Geelong itself was a port to send off wool.
I wasn’t surprised by my regional genetic ties as being primarily and largely from the UK and Ireland is about as much diversity I expected. Though I do wonder about the veracity of tying genes to a region and how it is delineated.
Closest I find to a critique of Keating’s position is K. Rudd.https://amp.abc.net.au/article/102074010
Rudd responds to Keating's criticisms
Mr Rudd disagreed with former prime minister Paul Keating's long-standing critique of US policy, in which Mr Keating described the US trying to contain China.
Mr Rudd argued for a realistic reading of the situation on the ground.
"I would suggest that it's important for us also to analyse how the strategic environment in Asia and the Indo-Pacific, and for that matter globally, is changing because of China's own military rise," he said.
"The response to [China's increased military expenditure] from the United States, and by various US allies including Australia, has been somewhat late in coming, to be frank."
Last year, Mr Rudd published a book titled The Avoidable War on the danger of catastrophic conflict between the US and China.
He said it was part of Australia's role to work with China to deter that country from taking, "...premeditated military action against Taiwan which would be a fundamental destabilisation of the status quo."
My impression is people take Keating’s approach is similar to Britain trying to appease Hitler and Nazi Germany.
But implicit is the assumption of Chinese expansion beyond its own borders and surrounding sea.
The assumption that defines the difference is the threat assessment and also our capacity to respond.
Keating is cynical that the US could beat China in the seas surrounding it because with satellites and other tech, ships and the like can be detected long before they get any where near the enemy and sunk.
The fear is also is the US gives up in East Asia, they bugger off back across the sea, we’re still in Asia. We’re far away but not like the US. And it looks like we have buggered our mutual defense pact with Indonesia with John Howard and now we have this sub debacle.
Looks like we are running headlong into shit and bad decisions that don’t best defend us if it really blows up.
Keating argues that it need not be a cold war as China is not ideological as the USSR and is part of world institutions. And he makes a point for its interests for self sufficiency being based in westward infrastructure expansion. This sounds more plausible then directly confronting South East Asian nations at a high cost.
Edit: Defense Minister Richard Marles claims the subs are to defend our trade routes in the north.https://amp.smh.com.au/politics/federal/new-submarines-will-deter-blockades-that-cut-us-off-from-the-world-marles-20230316-p5css4.html
Defence Minister Richard Marles says Australia’s fleet of nuclear-powered submarines will help deter a foreign adversary from launching a shipping blockade which could cut off the country’s trading routes from the rest of the world.
This sounds sensible but I hope its been negotiated with the leadership of the Islands to our north such as Indonesia who had conflict with us over East Timor.
This is much better than Keating’s concerns.
Edit 2: and boom Indonesia doesn’t like this.https://amp.smh.com.au/world/asia/aukus-created-for-fighting-push-for-indonesia-to-refuse-access-to-subs-20230314-p5crzz.html
Singapore/Jakarta: A senior Indonesian official says the country’s sea lanes should not be used by Australian nuclear-propelled submarines because “AUKUS was created for fighting”.
Blindsided by the original announcement of the AUKUS agreement in September 2021, Indonesia had warned Australia’s acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines could instigate a regional arms race that would heighten tensions in the Indo-Pacific.
On Tuesday, South-East Asia’s largest nation was the first in the region to react to the detailing of Australia’s $368 billion submarine plans, with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese attempting to soften the blow with an early phone call to Indonesia President Joko Widodo amid a blitz of briefings of world leaders.
“Indonesia has been closely watching the AUKUS security partnership cooperation, particularly the announcement regarding the path AUKUS will take to reach a critical AUKUS capability level,” the Indonesian Foreign Ministry said.
“Maintaining peace and stability in the region is the responsibility of all countries. It is critical for all countries to be a part of this effort.
Further fuck ups by stepping on the toes of the worlds largest Muslim nation in trying to salvage the white elephant.
For the laughs of what a mess it is.
-For Ethical Politics