Webdiary - Founded and Inspired by Margo Kingston |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
The gutsy Kevin Rudd
The Gutsy Kevin Rudd
Below is Rudd's full speech to the Chinese students at Peking University delivered in Mandarin. Not included in this translation is a joke told by Rudd to the students that goes something like: "Not afraid of the heaven, not afraid of the earth, but afraid of an outsider speaking in Chinese language". The rhymin' is somehow lost in translation.
One thing you can't accuse of our Dear Leader is that he is lacking guts. Not only delivering his speech in Mandarin, he again repeated his concern about Tibet. A real surprise is the mention of the so called May 4th Movement of 1919.
This was the first ever student led movement that was "anti-imperialist, cultural, and political movement in early modern China. Beginning on May 4, 1919, it marked the upsurge of Chinese nationalism, and a re-evaluation of Chinese cultural institutions, such as Confucianism. The movement grew out of dissatisfaction with the Treaty of Versailles settlement, termed the Shandong Problem. Coming out of the New Culture Movement, the end result was a drastic change in society that fueled the birth of the Communist Party of China (Wiki)".
And some of the writers he mentioned were not exactly Communist writers, they were more of the progressive writers. Some of them were criticised during the cultural revolution for being too "bourgeois". Yes, our Dear Leader has got the TICKER.
His reference to Tao - “Harmony in the Natural Environment. Our shared future is not only one about harmony between nations and peoples. It is also about harmony with nature — the “Unity of Man and Nature” — a concept with ancient roots in Chinese thought” is again reflected here, as there was an article about this just before the election in the SMH by Annabel Crabb.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=BKmXSYi49IU
Yes, our Dear Leader has got the TICKER and brain.
***
A conversation with China’s youth on the future (by Kevin Rudd)
9 April 2008, Peking University
I begin by congratulating Peking University which this year celebrates its 110th anniversary – making this university three years older than the Commonwealth of Australia.
Peking University is the most famous in China. And it has played an important part in modern Chinese history. In the early 20th century, when China was going through a period of rapid transformation, it was Peking University that led movements for a new era in Chinese educational, cultural and political life. Peking University was at the centre of the May 4th Movement. The May 4th era — for I realise that it was a transformative decade from 1917 to 1927 — was one of crucial and lasting importance in the emergence of a modern China.
Many famous figures in this period were active at your university. One thinks, for example, of Cai Yuanpei, Chen Duxiu, Hu Shi, Li Dazhao and Lu Xun. This year, 2008, is the 90th anniversary of some key events of the May Fourth era: — through his essays for the major magazine New Youth the writer and educator Hu Shi successfully advocated the use of modern vernacular Chinese in education and the media. This helped bring about a major change in the way that the young people of China expressed themselves to their compatriots.
Also the writer Lu Xun published the first, and justifiably famous, story in modern Chinese, Diary of a Madman. I would also note that Lu Xun’s design for the school crest of Peking University is still in use. Indeed, you, the students of Peking University today, are heirs to a great tradition of intellectual engagement with your country.
Studying China. This is not the first time I have visited Peking University. But it is the first time I have given a speech here. It is a great honour for me. And it is a great honour for me to address the students of this university because you are an important part of China’s future. I first started studying China and the Chinese language in 1976.
It was a different China back then. Zhou Enlai had just died. Mao Zedong was still alive. And the Cultural Revolution had not concluded – indeed our Chinese language textbooks were still full of class struggle.
Some have asked me why I decided to study Chinese. I had grown up on a farm in rural Queensland where China seemed very remote.
I remember as a teenager following closely the visit of Australia’s Prime Minister Gough Whitlam to China on television in 1973 after the Australia Labor Government recognised China in 1972. I remember watching the footage of him meeting Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping escorting his party on a tour to the Great Wall.
That visit inspired my interest in this extraordinary country. When I went to university I knew that I wanted to study China.
I went to the Australian National University in Canberra. And for the next four years I studied Chinese language, Chinese history and Chinese literature together with Japanese and Korean history as well. I even studied Chinese calligraphy, but my calligraphy was ugly then – and it is even uglier now.
Later I became a diplomat. Because I was a graduate in Chinese, the then Australian Government decided to send me to Sweden – where in those days I could barely find a decent Chinese restaurant. I eventually made it to China in 1984 when I started work at the Australian Embassy. But I did not remain a diplomat.
I wanted to enter politics. I was elected to Australia’s Parliament in 1998 and after serving in parliament for nine years in opposition, my party won the general election last year and I had the honour of becoming 26th Prime Minister of Australia.
Australia and China. Some people think that Australia and China are new friends. But in fact our history is already long. Chinese settlers came to Australia first in the nineteenth century. When gold was discovered in Victoria and Queensland in the 1850s, the first major group of Chinese migrants came to our shores. We now have over 600,000 people who claim Chinese ancestry.
After English, Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese) is the most widely spoken language in Australia. The Chinese community has deep roots in Australia and is an important part of modern Australian society. It includes people like Dr John Yu, one of Australia’s leading surgeons and Australian of the Year in 1996. And the young mathematician, Terrence Tao, who I met recently.
The flow of people has not all been in one direction. Some Australians – though a smaller number – have made China their home.
George Morrison is one such person. Morrison first came to China in 1894. He lived here for 20 years. In Australia, he was known as “Chinese Morrison”. And here in Beijing, during the Republic of China, Wangfujing, home to George Morrison, was known as “Morrison Street”.
It is easy to see why people become fascinated with China. China has thousands of years of continuous recorded history, but it is a country of constant change. When I look at the China of 2008, I see a very different country to the one I studied in the late 1970s and the one I lived in during the mid 1980s.
China and the World. The changes in China since the 1970s have been remarkable. And the change in China has led to a profound evolution in the relationship between our two countries. China’s policy change 30 years ago this year to “reform and open up” was the start of your country’s re-connection with the world. China’s companies began trading with others. China’s people began to travel. China’s students began going overseas to study in greater numbers.
The world began to see China, and the people of China began to see the world, in new ways. This institution, Peking University, through its teaching, research and search for knowledge has also had a profound influence on China’s changes. Its graduates have made a big contribution to your country’s engagement with the world.
To many people in China, these changes bring a better and richer life. People are able to make decisions about where they work, how they live and set their own goals. They can build their own businesses. At the same time, there are still many problems in China – problems of poverty, problems of uneven development, problems of pollution, problems of broader human rights.
It is also important to recognise that China’s change is having a great impact not just on China, but also on the world. The scale and pace of China’s economic development and social transformation is unprecedented in human history. Never before have so many people been brought into the global economy in such a short period of time.
Just look at some of the figures. China is now the world’s third-largest trading nation. Its exports are growing at over 30 per cent per year. GDP per capita has nearly doubled in the past five years. People in Australia and around the world recognise that China’s economic development is having a profound global impact. They understand that China’s demand for resources is driving global growth.
But China’s growth can also cause anxiety. Some people are concerned about their jobs moving to China. When people overseas are faced with big changes and uncertainties like these they get nervous. We all need to appreciate these anxieties and their origins. Today I would like to make a suggestion.
I think that you – the young people of China, the generation that will see China’s full integration into global society, the global economy and the overall global order – have an important role to play in the life of the world. The global community looks forward to China fully participating in all the institutions of the global rules-based order, including in security, in the economy, in human rights, in the environment. And we look forward to China making active contributions to the enhancement of that order in the future. It is a necessary task of responsible global citizenship.
It is a big responsibility you have. You are the product of China today. And you are the representatives of China’s tomorrow. You will be the ones who define how the world sees China. “Harmony” was the dream and hope of that great Chinese thinker and activist Kang Youwei. The Hundred Days reform movement, like Peking University, also marks its 110th anniversary this year.
Kang proposed a utopian world free of political boundaries. China has variously articulated its approach to development as one of “peaceful rise”, “peaceful development” or more recently that of a “harmonious world”.
In 2005 the then US Deputy Secretary of State Bob Zoellick spoke for his part of his concept that China would and could become a responsible global stakeholder. As I said last week in a speech to the Brookings Institution in Washington, it is worthwhile thinking about how to encourage a synthesis of these concepts of a “harmonious world” and the “responsible stakeholder”.
The idea of a “harmonious world” depends on China being a participant in the world order and, along with others, acting in accordance with the rules of that order. Failing this, “harmony” is impossible to achieve. “Responsible stakeholder” contains the same idea at its core – China working to maintain and develop the global and regional rules-based order.
This year, as China hosts the Olympics, the eyes of the world will be on you and the city of Beijing. It will be a chance for China to engage directly with the world, both on the sports field and on the streets of Beijing. Some have called for a boycott of the Beijing Olympics because of recent problems in Tibet.
As I said in London on Sunday, I do not agree. I believe the Olympics are important for China’s continuing engagement with the world. Australia like most other countries recognises China’s sovereignty over Tibet. But we also believe it is necessary to recognise there are significant human rights problem in Tibet. The current situation in Tibet is of concern to Australians.
We recognise the need for all parties to avoid violence and find a solution through dialogue. As a long-standing friend of China I intend to have a straightforward discussion with China’s leaders on this. We wish to see the year 2008 as one of harmony, and celebration – not one of conflict and contention.
Harmony in the Natural Environment. Our shared future is not only one about harmony between nations and peoples. It is also about harmony with nature — the “Unity of Man and Nature” — a concept with ancient roots in Chinese thought. We all share responsibility for the future. One of the big future challenges for Australia and China is climate change. Australia is committed to strong action domestically and internationally on climate change.
Because we know that climate change is the great moral, economic and environmental challenge of our time – one that all nations have to work together to overcome. That’s why climate change will be an important part of my discussions with the Chinese leadership this week. It is important that China play an increasingly prominent role on climate change. An effective global response to climate change will require the active participation of all major emitters.
I also believe it is important for China’s own future. Unless we are successful, China will face increasing pressure on its water supplies, changing rainfall patterns and rising sea levels. A strong relationship, and a true friendship, are built on the ability to engage in direct, frank and ongoing dialogue about our fundamental interests and future vision. In the modern, globalised world, we are all connected; connected not only by politics and economics, but also in the air we breathe.
A true friend is one who can be a “zhengyou” , that is a partner who sees beyond immediate benefit to the broader and firm basis for continuing, profound and sincere friendship. In other words, a true friendship which “offers unflinching advice and counsels restraint” to engage in principled dialogue about matters of contention. It is the kind of friendship that I know is treasured in China’s political tradition. It is the kind of friendship that I also offer China today.
 |
 |
 |
| © 2006, Webdiary Pty Ltd |
| Disclaimer: | This site is home to many debates, and the views expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the site editors. Contributors submit comments on their own responsibility: if you believe that a comment is incorrect or offensive in any way, please submit a comment to that effect and we will make corrections or deletions as necessary. |
Where angels fear to tread
Kathy, as much as I like my ego massaged (especially with perfumed oil), I’m struggling to come to terms with your concept of our Kev. Charisma? Are we talking about the same bloke? In the words of that doughty old left wing warrior, Alan Ramsey, he is a prissy, precious, prick (and a nerd to boot). That said, he has certainly covered himself with glory with his os trip. Even Annabelle Crabb (the thinking man’s crumpet; such wit, those dimples! She certainly puts the grrr in what’s left of my tiger) has tempered her satire. An aside here; you’ve got to love her comment about Kev’s decision to maintain control of security for the Olympic torch procession: the Chinese know how he deals with short men in track suits. Whether or not his address to the students of Peking university was a calculated risk or a case of “fools rush in” remains to be seen.
One thing is certain though, the Chinese politburo would have been totally non-plussed; they have never seen anyone remotely like him. Patently fluent in Mandarin and steeped in Chinese culture and history, they knew they had to deal with him differently. Whatever, I can only see good coming from his performance. A Foreign Affairs success story, how he fares on the domestic front is yet to be determined but I have little faith from what I have seen so far.
This 2020 thing I’m afraid is not going anywhere, just another bunch of conventional thinking based on the past when what is needed is a mob of nutters with far out ideas that can inspire “lateral thinking”. Hmmm, are you married?
Manufactured Charisma
Rudd is a"prissy, precious, prick.( and a nerd to boot.)"
You'll get no argument from me there, Scott! The fact remains, though, he is lovingly adored by many. The press in particular have an enthusiastic devotion to the man. In the opinion polls Rudd is the most popular PM in more than twenty years. I hear people talking about this nerdy little man in reverential tones, like he is some kind of saviour! Spare me! He can't "put a foot wrong." On the occasions that he has "put his foot in it", it has been conveniently overlooked or downplayed by the press.
Rudd has charisma alright, Scott, but it is a kind of manufactured charisma, as distinct from natural charisma. He is is a smart ambitious man, and has been cultivating this charisma for some time now. I think that it started way back on the Sunrise show, where he ingratiated himself with the viewers.
A slow methodical process, which culminated in Rudd achieving the coveted prize of Prime Minister!
Ready for another massage, Scott? I tend to agree that this 2020 thing will be going nowhere. Bit like Brendan Nelson, I reckon!
Looking on the bright side, I guess the prissy little nerd won't make too many waves while he is in office. He's much too diplomatic for that. Mind you, I don't expect any outstanding achievements from him either!
Hmmmm... I think I may have to start charging for these massages.
Richard: Kathy what do you think about the GG appontment?
1900
Kathy, get yourself one of these, you'll make a fortune. (Come to think of it no one out there in cyberland knows I'm a bloke, I know what blokes want, I'll do it myself.)
"Looking on the bright side, I guess the prissy little nerd won't make too many waves while he is in office. He's much too diplomatic for that. Mind you, I don't expect any outstanding achievements from him either! "
That's our problem, we need someone with foresight and the "guts" to make waves.
A test there is.....
There is no test for a "mindless idiot", fortunately. Many of us might fail.
There is in fact a test for the "mindless idiot" and yes many of us do fail.
It's called voting - a test I regularly stuff up with the grace and elegance of a moron, but at least I show up for the sausage sizzle.
QED.
Fiona: Clearly, Albatross, you have yet to master the gently subtle (almost Zen-like) art of voting below the line on the Senate ballot tablecloth. The trick is: decide which party or parties or individuals you most detest, then work backwards... Simple, really.
How do you pass the test as a "mindless idiot"?
A few have said the problem with democracy is that it gives the "mindless idiot" a vote. Can I suggest that this is the strength of a democracy?
One man's "mindless idiot" is another man's ideal president. Bush is an excellent example.
In any society even the weak and "mindless" deserve a say. If you don't believe that then you don't believe in democracy.
There is no test for a "mindless idiot", fortunately. Many of us might fail.
Rational arguments?
Alan, I understand that you have operated a successful business, and so I assume that you are in some ways a rational and practical person.
Is it, therefore, possible that you could put forward rational arguments to support your views, rather than this kind of graffiti: "Barmy Bob?"
One Party Is Here
Kevin Rudd basically said it before the election: you get all the best of the Howard government but with compassion, ie, real compassionate conservatism - the kind that Bush tried to sell and that Americans fell for .
Scott Dunmore's a change of management is correct and hopefully without the reactionary radicalism of Howard or the attack on rights (although the last sounds suspiciously like it will shuffled away in the bottom drawer).
From Plato to Franklin: From Tao to Dow.
Even "mindless idiots" get to vote.
Plato would be nodding, John.
I suppose that's the problem with democracy or one of them . Plato states that every form of government eventually destroys itself with an excess of its basic principle.
Including democracy where all the dumbed down punters get a chance to vote.
Plato stated yonks ago that democracy, giving all and sundry the right to hold office, was a first glance a wonderful arrangement.
Unfortunately the mug punter who is not properly educated or informed would simply end up regurgitating the "mantra" their leaders repeated.
Eventually through fear and manipulation the mug punters would eventually elect the "wiliest" and most "unscrupulous flatterer" calling himself the "protector of the people".
Sounds familiar?
Now to paraprashe Ben Franklin (I think).
Eventually the mug punter will elect the village iodiot to rule us.
Ben no doubt read The Republic.
From Plato to Franklin to GWB; maybe the mug punter will some day take notice.
But for the past 2,500 years nothing much has changed, as far as our collective mindset goes.
Fear for the political insecure becomes a convenient weapon; a weapon we have seen all too often lately.
Kevin Rudd (who for some reason has always made me cringe) has at least avoided playing the fear card; rather he has been a "little bit" fearless.
For this he has my respect.
The Chinese government will respect him in the manner of Con the professor.
Then they will send him on his journey, back to obscurity, while they ride the global tsunami as men of the Tao.
Or bloody Wall Street Bankers.
My money is on both, and that, like the Tao, has its contradictions, hey PF.
A Very Poor State Of Affairs
John Pratt: "About a one party system: have you noticed the sky falling in since Rudd took over?"
In a one party state the sky eventually always falls in. People should be constantly hammering politicians for better outcomes. They most definitely shouldn't be singing their praises at every given opportunity.
"That is why I think the Greens are the real opposition: they actually have alternative views."
Australia (and all western nations) should also have a truly economic neo-liberal party (if only for choice). A party that speaks semi-educated truth (about policy), rather than abject crap. The problem is that elections are an end in themselves - people only wish to be elected, and they'll do and they'll say anything to that end.
"It seems the major difference between Labor and Liberal is a charismatic leader."
If people need "charisma" they should go to a Gwen Stefani concert or some such.
"Paul, the good thing about democracy is that the "mindless idiots" have a vote. Even if you are not interested in them."
I would suggest this is the bad side of democracy. And a good reason why we're all subjected to inane (touchy feely) drivel about lowering gas, produce, and housing prices - instead of concentrating on issues that should be concentrated on. Such as why these things are going higher, and the policy mistakes that will result in them going even higher again.
That's Not Democracy
Scott Dunmore: "The general feeling in the community leading up to the last election and its inevitable result was one of "business as usual, just a change of management"."
Who's fault is that? John Pratt called the current situation the "middle ground", and apparently it makes everyone happy. Why would anyone bother wasting their time putting something forward in a one party state? If nothing has changed excepting the rhetoric, why should people believe change is wanted?
There's a whole host of problems facing western society. And if people think those problems will be solved by leaders dribbling (nice sounding) incomprehensible crap, then perhaps, people deserve the problems they face.
Western society and its problems
Paul Morrella, you say that: "There's a whole host of problems facing western society."
Paul, what are the top 10 problems from your perspective?
Welcome To East Berlin?
Michael de Angelos, not wishful thinking (I really don't care); just trying to add some balance. Idolising any politician is a sickening spectacle, and not something that is particularly good for any system. Democracy is built upon a constant need for new, and different ideas, moving forward.
A situation such as this would mean Australia is now a one party state. People who think this is a good thing don't deserve democracy. Ideas constantly become stale, and it is the duty of democracy (and those that profess a belief in it) to be always critically appraising them. Any person not wishing to look at alternatives is a disgrace to any pretence of a democratic system.
Saying that one party should accept the beliefs of another party isn't democratic. It's a sham, and it treats people as little more than mindless idiots. The sort of mindless idiots that I've little interest in.
Even "mindless idiots" get to vote.
Paul, the good thing about democracy is that the "mindless idiots" have a vote. Even if you are not interested in them.
About a one party system: have you noticed the sky falling in since Rudd took over? If all we have seen from Labor is window dressing then what are the real differences between the Labor Party and the Liberal National coalition? Both parties are from the centre right. That is why I think the Greens are the real opposition: they actually have alternative views. It seems the major difference between Labor and Liberal is a charismatic leader.
Mindless idiots
John Pratt,: "That is why I think the Greens are the real opposition: they actually have alternative views".
You cannot be serious about this. Can you imagine Barmy Bob and his amateurs running the economy and foreign policy?
I'm not interested
Understood Fiona, I'll italicise that which I need.
John, I have to take you to task for this: "the good thing about democracy is that the "mindless idiots" have a vote."
That's the bad thing about democracy; to paraphrase Winston Churchill "democracy is the worst form of government except for all other systems.."
Some years ago I wrote something to the effect that I did not appreciate having my life ordered and regulated by a body which, statistically, was a long shade of odds against of having any of its' individual members being more intelligent than myself. Of course I wore the brickbats; "Ego on a stick" was one but it, (my comment,) was merely a statement of fact. Intellectual politicians are a rarity; some I haven't recognised by their low media profile but of the ones I know only Gough, of course (but desperately marred by his conceit,) Don Dunstan, Faulkner and the inimitable Barry Jones stand out. In the case of the latter, he was a constant thorn in the side of Hawke and marginalised.
Paul, for the most part we seem to be in agreement.
"Whose fault is that? " If you wish me to apportion blame then I lay it squarely at the feet of the mainstream media. I’ve said this before. When the only form of information (and propaganda,) dissemination was by word of mouth or print there was a balance. Communists could publish on a commercially viable basis. The world changed with radio technology; the airwaves became the mainstream medium; years agoGovernment intervention had to occur; you couldn’t have a situation whereby different organisations shared the same frequencies in local areas so licences to broadcast were issued and became commercial assets. With deregulation there was a natural concentration of control whereby only powerful, (and very vested interests) remained. Bias can achieved by omission far more effectively than commission, which can be refuted, which is why the left has been bereft of any meaningful voice for almost four decades.
"John Pratt called the current situation the "middle ground", and apparently it makes everyone happy. Why would anyone bother wasting their time putting something forward in a one party state? If nothing has changed excepting the rhetoric, why should people believe change is wanted? "
The answer to this, Paul, is “leadership”. Howard was/is a liar and while the attitude of the majority of the electorate was “so what, all politicians are liars,” it got to the point where the electorate switched off. No one was listening anymore and Rudd offered a fresh approach.
“And if people think those problems will be solved by leaders dribbling (nice sounding) incomprehensible crap, then perhaps, people deserve the problems they face.”
Please don’t start your sentences with conjunctions (just joshing and I know Fiona will have a wry grin on her face), but I am in total agreement. Ruddspeak, for different reasons, is as incomprehensible with his somewhat pathetic attempt to appear knowledgeable by the use of obscure acronyms and convoluted terminology, as Bob Hawke’s tortured syntax. At least Howard kept it simple but then he is a simple man.
Some people deserve the problems they face.
As best we can, Paul, we should strive for open mindedness; we are all subject to our prejudices and preconceptions. I’ll let Oliver Cromwell have the last word. “Gentlemen, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong.”
Fiona: The grin is indeed wry, Scott. More to the point, however, please let me know if I have mangled your post in any way. I am still having problems stripping unwanted formatting.
One party state
Get a grip Paul, we and many others have been effectively one party states for a long time as far as social and economic policy is concerned. The only thing that essentially differentiates one political entity from another is ideology or philosophy if you like and where have we seen that? The general feeling in the community leading up to the last election and its inevitable result was one of "business as usual, just a change of management".
Wishful Thinking
Paul Morrella, the two things you mention haven't a hope of making any impact within the next few years and will have absolutely nil effect upon the next election.
And we now have a centre right government - the ALP, as opposed to the far right government of Howard's. What the other mob are is anyone's guess. Not only do they have to sort out who is their leader - the likeable but unelectable Nelson or the clever and unelectable and highly unlikable Turnbull - they have to actually enunciate what they stand for as a party having spent eleven years bathing in the glow of Howard. If you think the public is going to ditch Rudd for a bunch of throwbacks you are dreaming.
And if the economy dips the voters will always cling to a Labor government - if it doesn't then Rudd looks like a winner. The Opposition can look forward to a long spell where they are: they need it, they deserve it and we haven't done anything to deserve having them back.
Wishful thinking
Michael de Angelos, "And if the economy dips the voters will always cling to a Labor government" just like they did with Whitlam and Keating!
On Sunday, as Kevin Rudd got off the plane at Canberra airport, he was carrying a baby piglet under each arm.
The guard snaps to attention, salutes, and says, 'Nice pigs, sir.' Kevin Rudd replies, 'These are not pigs; these are authentic Arkansas Razorback Hogs given to me by G.W.Bush. I got one for Julia Gillard and I got one for Wayne Swan.'
The guard again snaps to attention, salutes, and says, Excellent trade, sir.'
Change - the one constant
Of course the world has changed, Paul Morrella. And is changing at present. And will continue to change.
I'm interested in finding out:
This kerfuffle is reminiscent of the action when the USSR got the Olympics x years ago, which made it obvious that the Olympic Games are a western gig, pretending to be international.
Can you please outline the "untold damage to the Olympic movement" that you are predicting, and your predicted consequences of that? As well as responding to points 1 and 2.
A Poor Decision Made By A Dysfunctional Organization
Awarding the Olympics to China was always a disaster in the making. The upcoming games will do untold damage to the Olympic movement. The Olympic Games has been on the slide for a while - and these games will only hasten that slide. The world has changed, and unfortunately the Olympics hasn't kept pace with those changes.
A Lot Can Happen In Four Years
Mr Rudd most definitely can be defeated in one term. He's made two terminal political errors in my opinion.
The first error makes a complete mockery out of promises to reduce prices (completely idiotic). The opposing party needs only to place the before and after election figures into the spotlight, and ask one simple question: Do you feel financially more comfortable?
The second error (whilst being good policy) is a political death trap. It spits directly in the face of those (middle types) he claims to be trying to help - especially if China doesn't have the equivalent carbon taxes. You cannot take away people's living standards, and employment, and be expected to be loved - or even be liked. These of this nature hurt center left parties much more than center right parties (of which hard nosed finance is expected).
The center right party only needs to be showing why it is different. It shouldn't be copying or even agreeing with bad policy (such as carbon taxes). The upcoming Australian budget is fraught with massive political danger. Whilst it would be politically difficult to blame the current government for problems it inherited, it won't be difficult to blame them for problems they cause - or even problems they appear not to be solving.
Fiona: Paul, may I suggest that you inspect these links to discover the difference between commas and semicolons.
The Cradle of Revolution
John, God bless his soul, good ole Greg has got it right for a change. The Beijing University is the cradle of movements against existing regime or authority from the 1919 May Fourth movement against the then feudal Manchu Empire, to anti Japanese invasion and last but not least the 1989 Tiananmen movement. This really makes Rudd's speech and where he made it so remarkable and gutsy. Is he planting the seed for a new movement by the current students of Beijing University to the current regime? We do live in an interesting time.
Rudd may have transformed the way the world deals with China.
Rudd transforming the world, not bad for his first overseas trip as PM.
As a 15 year old schoolboy Kevin Rudd asked Prime Minister Whitlam how he could become a diplomat.
Whitlam's advice and legacy have produced another Prime Minister with "genuine guts".
My Boycott
I'll be boycotting the games, Eliot Ramsey, but only because I find the whole thing boring and always have.
Bob Brown is being a bit too Tasmanian in his approach to the Tibet issue and China isn't going to take notice of anyone - it will do what it wants. As for an "ineffectual gesture" I think you are misreading what Rudd is up to - it's nothing to with Tibet - that's a side issue. It's all about Australia's relationship with China.
Nothing succeeds like failure
I had to laugh this morning when on ABC radio news Bob Brown was:
There's nothing like a ineffectual gesture to impress the likes of Bob Brown and his admirers, is there?
Bob Brown
I heard that interview with Bob Brown on Radio National this morning and he did congratulate Kevin Rudd on his stance with China over the Tibet issue.
Senator Brown did not say that Rudd's stance achieved nothing, and although he did tell Kevin Rudd to up the ante over Tibet, he did not tell him to boycott the Olympics.
The ABC's reporting says:
Boycotting of OG's OC
Via Foreign Policy this morning I came across this:
So even if President Bush refuses to attend he'll be doing what every other President has always done when a Games is held outside of the US. Essentially boycotting the Opening Ceremony is saying "We're treating your Games the same as we did Sydney, Athens and everyone else...but for a different reason, OK?"
I wonder how many Australian PMs have been to the Opening Ceremonies of non-Australian Olympic Games. Perhaps our 'sports mad' culture might have convinced a few to go, especially to Atlanta in the lead up to the Sydney games. Anyone know or remember?
Bush on Boycotting the Games
"So even if President Bush refuses to attend he'll be doing what every other President has always done when a Games is held outside of the US. "
Not quite. Other Presidents didn't make public statements prior to the Games like President Bush has; statements such as:
The Wacky World At News Ltd
You have really have to read the Asian press to gauge how Rudd's China visit has been perceived to get proper comment - here you will get a view to correspond with every prejudice, sometimes from the same newspaper, if not the same writer.
Although to be kind it's more likely the pesky headline writers who are at fault, that just isn't good enough especially at publications like the Australian that once prided itself as the nation's best newspaper.
Denis Shanahan has two pieces running at the Australian's website with headlines Kevin Rudd has put Australia's trading relationship with China ahead of concerns about human rights abuses but on his blog that morphs into Rudd Treads Wisely. Then again it's only five weeks since Denis had Rudd's reputation in tatters.
What can one expect from a newspaper organisation with a declining readership ?. Yesterday their silly sister tabloid ran a story headlined Sophie Monk Attacked By Tramp although upon reading the story one discovered the poor lass was actually shielded by a homeless woman from a pack of marauding paparazzi. Black truly is white at Murdoch publications. The recovery from the Howard years is proving to be long and painful for them.
Attitude to women
I understand that the Dalai Lamas' attitude to women, rarely expressed, is unacceptable in our western world.
The Dragon bites back
China tells the IOC what she couldn't say to Kev...
Thanks Fiona
Thanks for putting me in my place Fiona!
Guess I'm an ass, eh?
My apologies to F Kendall, for assuming.
Fiona: Not at all, Kathy. Meanwhile, that's it from me for tonight - it's been a relatively hard day editing Webdiary, or maybe I'm just feeling grumpy.
I don't call you a cynic
Kathy, I don't call you a cynic, even tho' you ask me to. But, I do know that for the last x+ months, since before the last election, you have been hammering, on several talkboards, the same lines against Kevin Rudd ... the same words, the same ideas, the same cliches, on and on, again and again.
"Talk...don't amount to a hill of beans". You seem to mistake Hollywood screenplays for real life here, Kath.
I'm consistent
Ah, F Kendall, at least I am consistent. My view has not changed.
I was not impressed with Howard, nor am I impressed with glib Kevin from Heaven. Don't know about hammering on several talk boards though? I have expressed an opinion, as we all do. I don't see anything wrong with that, do you?
Remember too, I am not the Prime Minister of Australia. What I do "don't amount to a hill of beans " anyway.
What Rudd does can make a difference, however. If he has the guts!
The Lost Horizon
Unfortunately the West still likes to view Tibet through what I call the romantic "Shangri-La" prism. How many people really know about the historical interactions between Tibet and the Chinese dynasties over thousand of years. Tibet has been in and out of the Chinese orbit ever since the year 680AD when the then Tang Dynasty founding Emperor married off one of his princesses to the King of Tibet. One may very well ask also how did Hawaii ever became part of the USA and how much the Hawaiians had a say.
Rudd's speech yesterday at the Beijing University will go down as one of most significant Sino related foreign affair speech ever. As now, its depth is simply too much for the MSM to digest and understand, but it will be studied and dissected in detail by any serious students of Sino affairs.
Critical mass?
Yeah, talk can be 'empty', but then it can also have consequences. Kev may well be more talk than action — as if he, for all his charms, could 'make' the Chinese government change its ways — but the PM's shit-stirring in relation to Tibet may have contributed in some small way to the latest IOC communique to China:
You Are Missing The Point
Your point about Rudd travelling the "world stage" Alan Curran is just silly - it's part of a PM's job to get about there and be known especially after a change of government . Making a telephone call from Canberra is not the same as making a speech in China. It's a calculated move on Rudd's part and he's placed himself now as possibly one of the western world leaders that the Chinese will listen to. Yes, speaking Mandarin will make a difference.
You are completely ignoring the cultural differences between the Chinese people and the West which Rudd is now showing he has experience in and at the right time. He is demonstrating where his experience as a true diplomat lies.
Anyone who thinks Kevin Rudd can actually get the Chinese to change tack with Tibet at present is living in a dreamtime and again - completely misjudging the manner in which you must deal with the Chinese nation.
In this, Rudd has taken exactly the right steps - he has expressed a belief to China that abuses are happening. He has done it at a university forum and most importantly in China - not abroad. and not at a formal function If you don't understand the cultural sensitivities here you just do not know who you are dealing with. This is how you approach a problem with China - you express an unhappiness about a problem - you never insult, you never humiliate. It's as though Rudd has studied a thousand years of Chinese history.
Senator Bartlett may be correct by stating "decades of diplomacy have produced virtually nothing " but he's showing that Chinese history just isn't his forte. The Chinese think in terms of millenia when it comes to change. And lost in all this clamour is the Dalai Lama himself calling for peace amongst demonstrations with threats to resign.
The way to judge Kevin Rudd's trip to China is to read the Asian media reports and bypass the pathetic Australian childish and simplistic take on events.
All Dawn Fraser has done is insult her fellow Chinese athletes. This isn't the '36 Berlin Olympics, this isn't the South African Springboks tour - this is China and a whole different nation. It doesn't back down, it doesn't bend, and it doesn''t take orders from the west - and it has a lot of nuclear weapons.
Asian media
Michael de Angelos: "The way to judge Kevin Rudd's trip to China is to read the Asian media reports and bypass the pathetic Australian childish and simplistic take on events."
I have just been reading the Shanghai Times on line and there is not a mention of little Kev or his missus.
Too Clever By Half
Come Alan, you are playing games. Not the Chinese media - the Asian media. And the more serious writers, not reporters with fevered imaginations with deadlines and alarming headlines to fill, like our lot.
There are always two sides
There are always two sides to a coin. I agree with Michael Backman here: the Chinese are often their own worst enemy. They might be the best manufacturers in the world, but when it comes to PR and spin they still have a lot to learn.
A small wager...
Alan, would you like to bet money on your prediction that "by the end of the week he will be seen for what he is: a 'dud' who speaks Mandarin"?
I would be interested in taking you up on this in a small wager.
At the same time, I wonder whether, when you speak of "by the end of the week", you realise that you are speaking of the day after tomorrow?
I've read many of your posts over time, Alan, and I regret to say that such posts as that above are simply silly.
No point
You're wasting your time F Kendall, (have you got a first name?), I offered Alan a bet on the outcome of the last election six months out at better odds than Betfair and Margo vouched for. Did he take it? Nah, he's all mouth and trousers.
Undiplomatic and different
Hey Kathy, do you think that the Tibetans started suffering at the same time as the Rudd election? The "undertrodden in Tibet" got no mention at all by the previous government, as I am sure you know.
As you said, "decades of diplomacy have produced virtually nothing".
Rudd has done something undiplomatic and different..
Give the guy a chance. His predecessor didn't even put the Tibetans on the radar. Let's see what results.
Call me a cynic
Hey F Kendall, the Tibetans have been a long suffering people, mate.
This is not a contest. Rudd is not doing any better than the previous mob, simply because he cajoles and caresses the populace.
Call me a cynic, but talk , be it undiplomatic , diplomatic or even different, "don't amount to a hill of beans," as Bogey would say.
Fiona: I'd hesitate before calling you a cynic, Kathy; perhaps you should also pause before making assumptions about F Kendall's given name.
Hi Fiona
Hi Fiona.
I have been reading WD with interest for many years now and knew that F Kendall was Felicity Kendall. Was not making assumptions. Unless of course there are two F Kendall's who have commented at WD over the last few years.
Felicity addressed me by my Christian name and I responded automatically.
Ya not gonna hang draw and quarter me are ya?
eg Remember Byan Law's Pine Gap thread back in Feb 2007 - one of his comments was tiltled Thanks Felicity (Felicity Kendall).
Fiona: No, I'm not into cruel and unusual punishments, Kathy. However, F Kendall never stated that his/her given name was Felicity - that was an assumption made by a couple of Webdiarists.
Silly?
F Kendall, the silly part is that Rudd is strutting the world stage wasting taxpayers' money. By the end of the week he will be seen for what he is: a "dud" who speaks Mandarin. If the Chinese won't listen to him about human rights, what chance has he got talking about climate change? He is a legend in his own mind. I suppose the next thing we will hear is those two silly old farts Keating and Whitlam saying their piece.
Go he must
Rudd must go to the Opening. He has to go, as "A true friend is one who can be a “zhengyou”". Rudd has made his point and it's time that he shows China that he is indeed a true friend.
If he goes, he will show that he is not responding with knee-jerk reaction as shown by the piss-weak like Brown or Sarkozy. That way, he can really play a bridging role by bringing the Beijing regime and the Dalai Lama together.
Silly
Alan, do you know that some of what you say is just silly?
Doing the hard yards
"for the Australian Right, at least, this bloke (k rudd) is way too brainy." -, The Guardian, 10/4/08
Dawn is a lovely woman, as everyone who knows her attests, (in my experience), but reality is that she has prominence not because of her intelligence, her judgement, her knowledge, but because of her past ability to swim fast. I'm with the Chinese letter-writers in the SMH, who plead for people to attend the games to show the Chinese people the western world that censorship hides from them.
Just imagine if other world leaders acted like Kevin and interacted honestly with each other! Talk is cheap? Maybe: but honesty, that Rudd is exhibiting, is rare and precious.
Richard: I'm inclined to agree. Cracks in the veneer are diffficult to find. Maybe that's being too optimistic..
Talk is still cheap!
No one is saying that Rudd is not smart. On the contrary he is a very smooth and suave operator. He knows how to work the crowd (especially the Chinese, it's his forte). Certainly a damn sight more cunning and calculating then his predecessor. The fact is, though, no matter how "honest" one may think Rudd to be, this particular quality is of no use to the poor suffering Tibetans.
Dreaming of world leaders acting like Kevin Rudd is all well and good, too. But honestly, how is this doing anything for the rights of the undertrodden in Tibet?
Rudd's diplomat-speak = all talk with no action!
Just imagine if Rudd was a man of action, and not all talk. Now, wouldn't that be something, eh?