full
Episode 414 - Trump Disrupts Established Power
In this episode we discuss:
(03:00) Aus Open Tennis
(13:44) Housing Report
(20:31) Trump
(35:57) Greenwald on Power
(42:51) News Corp Captured
(44:34) UK Poll
(45:18) Taiwan
(50:19) China's Economy
(53:56) USA Announces Aus Foreign Policy
Chapters, images & show notes powered by vizzy.fm.
To financially support the Podcast you can make:
- a per-episode donation via Patreon or
- one-off donation via credit card; or
- one-off or regular donations via Paypal or
- if you are into Cryptocurrency you can send Satoshis.
We Livestream every Monday night at 8:00 pm Brisbane time. Follow us on Facebook or YouTube. Watch us live and join the discussion in the chat room.
You can sign up for our newsletter, which links to articles that Trevor has highlighted as potentially interesting and that may be discussed on the podcast. You will get 3 emails per week.
We have a website. www.ironfistvelvetglove.com.au
You can email us. The address is trevor@ironfistvelvetglove.com.au
You can send us a voicemail message at Speakpipe
We have a sister podcast called IFVG Evergreen. It is a collection of evergreen content from the weekly podcast.
Transcripts started in episode 324. You can use this link to search our transcripts. Type "iron fist velvet glove" into the search directory, click on our podcast and then do a word search. It even has a player which will play the relevant section. It is incredibly quick.
Transcript
Suburban Eastern Australia, an environment that has, over time,
Speaker:evolved some extraordinarily unique groups of homosapiens.
Speaker:But today, we observe a small tribe akin to a group of meerkats that
Speaker:gather together atop a small mound to watch, question, and discuss the
Speaker:current events of their city, their country, and their world at large.
Speaker:Let's listen keenly and observe this group fondly known as the
Speaker:Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove.
Speaker:Hello and welcome back.
Speaker:Yes, the Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove podcast in our new time, Monday nights.
Speaker:8pm, if you're in the chat room, eventually, say hello, we'll try
Speaker:and incorporate your comments.
Speaker:I'm Trevor, with me as always from regional Queensland,
Speaker:Scott the Velvet Glove.
Speaker:How are you, Scott?
Speaker:Not too bad, Trevor.
Speaker:I hope everyone's well, but I'm starting to look with concern over the
Speaker:tropical cyclone that's on its way.
Speaker:And it's, Looking like it's, well, the center of the prediction is it's going
Speaker:to actually cross over at Townsville.
Speaker:The most northerly part of it is it's still predicted to hit Innisfail at
Speaker:the north or Ely Beach in the south.
Speaker:Now, I would like it to be further north from where I'm sitting right now
Speaker:because that will reduce the rain and everything else which is going to come.
Speaker:And it could actually also cock up my travel plans for Thursday afternoon.
Speaker:There.
Speaker:So I'm down to Brisbane next weekend, so yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Book an earlier flight if you can, Scott.
Speaker:I reckon.
Speaker:Yeah, . Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:It's always a possibility.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Good luck dodging that.
Speaker:So, yeah, it's been a stinker in Brisbane today.
Speaker:Oh God.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:38, 39 degrees, depending on where you are.
Speaker:And I'm in air conditioned comfort at the moment.
Speaker:Looking forward to chatting with you, Scott, about what's going
Speaker:on in the world and we'll try and solve a few problems one by one.
Speaker:Let's start with, well, what's on the agenda, dear listener?
Speaker:We're going to talk about, Australian Open tennis.
Speaker:No Russian flags, you might have noticed.
Speaker:a little bit on housing.
Speaker:A fair bit on Trump and trying to explain the Trump phenomena because, let's face
Speaker:it, that's starting to get some Momentum and traction and we'll all be talking
Speaker:about Trump over the next 12 months or at least nine months So we need to
Speaker:really understand Donald Trump Little bit about Taiwan and China And maybe Yemen.
Speaker:Finish up with the Lord's Prayer and Stephanie Rice, depending how we go.
Speaker:So, Landon Hardbottom.
Speaker:He's in the chat room.
Speaker:He says it's minus 15 in Beijing.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:So I think he's actually trying to actually pay out on us there by saying,
Speaker:look at me, I'm up here in the cold and you're down there in the heat.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:So, good on you, Landon.
Speaker:Now, Scott, you been watching the tennis at all?
Speaker:No, I don't really watch any sports.
Speaker:You know, I do watch a little bit of rugby when it's on, but I haven't,
Speaker:I don't watch, I do watch the Rugby Union, not the Rugby League.
Speaker:So, yeah.
Speaker:I was watching a little bit just the other night and, Medvedev was playing.
Speaker:He's Russian.
Speaker:And on the screen where they've got their name and the score and beside their name
Speaker:is usually their flag of their country.
Speaker:But in Medvedev's case, being Russian, no flag.
Speaker:So, at the Australian Open, they've decided that they're not going to show the
Speaker:flag of any Russian or Belarusian players, and Scott, got any opinion on that?
Speaker:I can understand where it's coming from because they, they've taken
Speaker:the view that, Russia's invasion of Ukraine was completely unprovoked
Speaker:and everything else, so they had to, they had to take a stand against it.
Speaker:I'm not a big fan of stans and that sort of stuff on those sorts of things,
Speaker:because I think to myself it's only sport, so they've just got to deal with it.
Speaker:it is what it is.
Speaker:It looks like it's a fairly muted approach by the tennis Australia, but
Speaker:it is something that they could do to Effectively protest against Russia's
Speaker:invasion of Ukraine, but it wasn't, you know, it's not really barring the
Speaker:players from competing or anything else.
Speaker:I gather they can still take their prize money back to Russia.
Speaker:Can they?
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:So.
Speaker:It's no big deal then.
Speaker:It's just, it is what it is.
Speaker:It's, it's just, it's just blocking the national identity of the country and
Speaker:that sort of stuff that they're from.
Speaker:The problem with these things is once you do it once, you've got
Speaker:to be consistent in applying it.
Speaker:Yeah, so you're going to say that they should remove the American flag, are you?
Speaker:Well, I was thinking Israel.
Speaker:I mean, what's, what are they saying here?
Speaker:If you invade another country Then we're not gonna let you have your
Speaker:flag of your athletes, so, well, you know, Israel, is Israel not invaded?
Speaker:No, not really.
Speaker:They're actually trying to Palestinian land.
Speaker:They're actually trying to keep the, what is currently in
Speaker:Israel's borders under control.
Speaker:Now, you know, that's, that's what Russia would say.
Speaker:Yeah, that's what Russia would say.
Speaker:But Ukraine has been an independent state since 1989.
Speaker:It's just one of those.
Speaker:Here's my point.
Speaker:But do you agree with the point though, that if you're going to
Speaker:have laws, Yeah, you're going to have to apply equally to everybody.
Speaker:So what is the law?
Speaker:If you've invaded another country, you, athletes, you know, no flag.
Speaker:Exactly.
Speaker:So what you then have to decide has Pellet, has.
Speaker:Israel actually invaded another country.
Speaker:Not really, because it is, it is part of Israel.
Speaker:However, it is also a border of a potential Palestinian state.
Speaker:Now, if it actually becomes an official Palestinian state, then
Speaker:Israel has clearly invaded them.
Speaker:So that is something that I do think that they're going to have to
Speaker:look at and actually get it right.
Speaker:Okay, but I guess the rationale is, if a country does something really bad, then
Speaker:we're going to punish that country by not allowing their athletes to use the flag.
Speaker:And so, you know, arguably, even if you don't think it's an invasion as
Speaker:such, what Israel's done is really bad.
Speaker:Oh no, it is.
Speaker:It is.
Speaker:It is terrible.
Speaker:You know, I have never defended Israel.
Speaker:I've only, they do have the right to defend themselves.
Speaker:So would you be happy if they also decided, okay, no Israeli
Speaker:flags for Israeli tennis players?
Speaker:You'd be happy with that.
Speaker:Do you think there'll be a fifth?
Speaker:That if they're going to have it for Ukrainian and Belarusian players,
Speaker:do you think, just as a matter of equality and consistency, that
Speaker:that should be what they would do?
Speaker:Yeah, would have thought so.
Speaker:Okay, there we are.
Speaker:We're in agreement on something, Scott.
Speaker:Yeah, I know.
Speaker:We agree on some things occasionally.
Speaker:Yeah, it's one of those things.
Speaker:I have never defended Israel.
Speaker:You know, it's I'm not saying you are.
Speaker:No, it's you know, according to what's his name, the guy that actually sent me
Speaker:that message last week, Andrew, wasn't it?
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah, noisy Andrew.
Speaker:It's one of those things.
Speaker:I have never actually defended Israel.
Speaker:I have always said that a terrible, terrible mistake was made in 1947.
Speaker:And you know, we've got to live with that now.
Speaker:It's one of those things.
Speaker:And I did actually ask the question.
Speaker:It really wouldn't worry me if we actually created a state of Israel
Speaker:in Australia that became part of the Commonwealth of Australia, but
Speaker:it was just one of those things.
Speaker:I don't think you'd ever be able to get that across from Gina
Speaker:Reinhardt or anything like that.
Speaker:She'd really crack the shits about that, but it is what it is.
Speaker:Landon's in the chat room.
Speaker:Landon, what do you reckon, Landon?
Speaker:If it's good enough for Ukraine and Belarus, then Israel?
Speaker:And Israeli athletes, I'm keen to know, Mr Hardbottom, what your
Speaker:hard opinion might be on this one.
Speaker:Are you going to live up to your name or not, Landon, or are you just going to
Speaker:be, you know, Mr Soft Mr Soft something?
Speaker:I think he'll probably back Israel, but anyway, we'll see what he says, yeah.
Speaker:I did a quick Google before it started, Scott, just to check on whether any other
Speaker:sports had followed a similar practice.
Speaker:And what I found was that with the Olympics in, Paris, that, similar thing,
Speaker:Russian and Belarusian athletes, won't be able to represent their nations.
Speaker:They'll be sort of neutral athletes.
Speaker:And that's been decided by the International Olympic Committee.
Speaker:and, so there was a, a, a poll in the UK, by the YouGov in UK, about Whether
Speaker:UK citizens agreed with this, and okay, the responses overall, actually I think
Speaker:I can put this up on the screen for you, Scott, so let me just find this one here.
Speaker:There it is, so, should be allowed to compete in their own national teams.
Speaker:That's what 14 percent of UK people think.
Speaker:Should be allowed to compete but only as neutral athletes, 34 percent think that.
Speaker:Shouldn't be allowed to compete at all was 33 percent and a don't know of 19.
Speaker:So, um, that was the, the figures.
Speaker:Interestingly On age, the older demographic was more likely to say,
Speaker:should not be allowed to compete at all.
Speaker:So, they were the ones with the, sort of, harder opinions about that.
Speaker:The older you were, the more likely you were to say that, Ukrainian,
Speaker:Russian and Belarusian athletes shouldn't be allowed to compete at all.
Speaker:So Well, one other thing to myself, I think I should That would probably
Speaker:be a fairer system if you're going to actually balk them from doing anything,
Speaker:then you shouldn't allow them to compete.
Speaker:You know?
Speaker:It's You think that's fairer?
Speaker:Well, I think it is, because it's just Well, it's like, you
Speaker:know, the They're just innocent.
Speaker:The Yeah, okay.
Speaker:They're just innocent.
Speaker:They might be objectors to the whole I know that.
Speaker:situation.
Speaker:They could well be, but then they're part of a country and all that sort of stuff.
Speaker:Yeah, it's exactly the same thing that is being done, that was done
Speaker:To the Springboks and everything else, we didn't allow them to compete
Speaker:internationally because we were, we found their whole racist system repugnant.
Speaker:And I agreed wholeheartedly with that.
Speaker:It's one of those things we've actually got to actually say.
Speaker:My question for the Olympic Committee would be, is it really that bad
Speaker:that Russia has invaded Ukraine?
Speaker:And if it is, then I think we should actually back up the 47 percent and
Speaker:not allow them to compete at all.
Speaker:But then at the same time, look around the world and what countries
Speaker:are doing to other countries.
Speaker:Yeah, I know.
Speaker:Is anybody doing anything as bad around the world?
Speaker:Because if you're going to start doing it to one country, for one
Speaker:reason, you have to look at them all.
Speaker:And then, you know, you probably We're going to reach the point where we're
Speaker:not going to have many people I want to compete if we're going to start
Speaker:banning individual athletes because their countries have bombed somebody.
Speaker:You're probably going to end up that you'd only have the Olympics
Speaker:involving, well, Europe, except for the United Kingdom, Western Europe.
Speaker:And well, through the way, through to the East and that sort of stuff,
Speaker:you'd have those sorts of countries.
Speaker:You'd have most of Africa.
Speaker:Possibly not the North of Africa and that type of thing because they
Speaker:have been involved in some pretty bad stuff in the Middle East.
Speaker:You'd have to look at there and that sort of stuff.
Speaker:You'd actually say, well, we shouldn't allow them.
Speaker:You wouldn't have Australia.
Speaker:I mean, if you looked at what we've been involved with.
Speaker:Yeah, I know because we, you know, we invaded Iraq and everything else.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:So, I mean, the whole idea of the Olympics, to some extent, is
Speaker:a gathering of people from all over the world, converging in one
Speaker:place, in friendly competition.
Speaker:It sort of defeats the purpose if you're going to start bringing
Speaker:politics into it, I think.
Speaker:Well, it's one of those things, you've actually got to decide where you're
Speaker:going to have your politics, don't you?
Speaker:You know.
Speaker:And not on the sporting field.
Speaker:Well, I can appreciate that, but then would you allow, would you have
Speaker:allowed the Springboks to compete at the time that their country
Speaker:was involved in racist politics?
Speaker:yeah, good question.
Speaker:And, good question.
Speaker:If it was the Olympics, it's like everybody's supposed to be there.
Speaker:Then I'd say, yes.
Speaker:You know, the Springboks were just in a, a sport which was Between, what,
Speaker:half a dozen different countries?
Speaker:Yeah, exactly.
Speaker:It's one of those things.
Speaker:It was pretty small and that sort of stuff, so Australia could take its
Speaker:principal stand and that sort of thing and say, no, we're not going to allow it.
Speaker:You know, it's, it's one of those things, I, I, I don't know where I draw the line,
Speaker:you know, and Landon's actually saying if we're being consistent, then the U.
Speaker:S.
Speaker:flag should be missing from a few international competitions.
Speaker:True, he's right there, you know, if we are being consistent,
Speaker:we've got to actually keep the U.
Speaker:S.
Speaker:out.
Speaker:You know, it's one of those things.
Speaker:I'm not sure where you draw the line though.
Speaker:Hmm.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:Whatley's joined.
Speaker:He's late again, but, all right.
Speaker:So that was, flags of Russians and Belarusians at the tennis in the Olympics.
Speaker:Scott, a bit on housing, came across, this came Crikey, which referred to a.
Speaker:Report by Mary Azizi and looking at housing and, let me just bring up,
Speaker:again, one of these slides on this one.
Speaker:So, um, looking at the screen, dear listener, is a chart.
Speaker:There's a blue line that's just a slow growth.
Speaker:There's a red line that accelerates quickly.
Speaker:The blue line is average weekly earnings and the orangey red line is house prices.
Speaker:And that sort of is a indication of How the house prices have accelerated,
Speaker:beyond how wages have accelerated.
Speaker:And, And that growth in it was around about 2001, was it?
Speaker:That's, when it really started to take off.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:And that was ridiculous because that was also the time that the Howard
Speaker:government actually took away the old way of calculating capital gains tax and
Speaker:then did a 50 percent discount on it.
Speaker:Hmm.
Speaker:So since the 1990s, house prices have risen.
Speaker:from two and a half times annual household income to over six times today.
Speaker:So, I can remember, dear listener, when, my wife and I, I was, we weren't even
Speaker:married, we weren't even engaged, but she bought a house on a teacher's wage.
Speaker:I think the teacher's wage was maybe 18, 000, 20, 000, and that
Speaker:worker's cottage in, Newmarket.
Speaker:Right on the train line was like forty, forty five thousand, maybe
Speaker:it was fifty, something like that.
Speaker:Pretty much the sort of two and a half times her wage.
Speaker:And, you know, if the medium wage now is 80, 000, there's no way you can
Speaker:buy something like that for 200, 000.
Speaker:It just doesn't exist.
Speaker:So, still running into boomers who say, these young people today, they
Speaker:want everything fancy, they want the best house, and I just say to
Speaker:them, they'd buy a shitbox if it was available, a small workers cottage.
Speaker:They're just not there.
Speaker:So, so anyway, that was, that statistic in this report.
Speaker:And the other interesting part of this report was looking at What it's costing
Speaker:us, might be hard to read on that screen, but, the cost of the tax concessions,
Speaker:so negative gearing deductions and the capital gains tax exemption,
Speaker:remembering that capital gains is halved.
Speaker:it's a 50 percent discount.
Speaker:So, in 2021 2022, Scott, Is that the actual negative gearing tax deduction
Speaker:that the people are claiming, or is that the That's what it's costing
Speaker:the government in lost revenue by allowing negative gearing deductions.
Speaker:And in 2021 2022, it was 3.
Speaker:7 billion, and the capital gains tax was 4.
Speaker:7 billion and looking at the next year, so 2023 to 2024, the cost
Speaker:to the government of providing negative gearing deductions is 6.
Speaker:6 billion.
Speaker:And the capital gains tax is 4.
Speaker:7.
Speaker:So those two things together are worth more than 10 billion
Speaker:a year to the budget, Scott.
Speaker:It's one of those things, you know, negative gearing is a result of interest
Speaker:charges and all that sort of stuff.
Speaker:Now the interest rates have been rising, so that's going to result in
Speaker:higher losses for rental properties.
Speaker:So that will result in a larger amount of government Government
Speaker:missing out on revenue.
Speaker:So as, as prices have increased, gains have increased, you're right,
Speaker:the government is foregoing even more tax revenue, as a result of the
Speaker:boom that's effectively taken place.
Speaker:So, so we're at the point where the negative gearing And the
Speaker:capital gains tax is, is costing the budget 11 billion a year.
Speaker:Scott, I always think of things in terms of submarines, because it's
Speaker:hard to keep track of billions and what they're actually worth.
Speaker:So, you know, you could, you could buy 11 Japanese submarines for this.
Speaker:Yeah, well, the Jap ones, let's say they were one and a half.
Speaker:Okay, well then you'd buy seven of them.
Speaker:Yeah, we could buy six or seven Japanese subs.
Speaker:For the cost of one year of negative gearing and CGT deductions.
Speaker:Of course, we'd only get one fifth of an American sub, but that's
Speaker:a different matter altogether.
Speaker:just goes to show, like, we could have our subs and, be done with it for one
Speaker:year of forsaking these sorts of rorts.
Speaker:So, it's a huge hit to the budget.
Speaker:And, I hadn't seen those figures before, but, There we are.
Speaker:So, link in the show notes to the report and, the source for that projected
Speaker:cost, so the one I'm just mentioning now of 11 billion, that comes from
Speaker:the Parliamentary Budget Office.
Speaker:So, that's the source of where it comes from.
Speaker:So, yeah, okay.
Speaker:That's housing.
Speaker:That's the cost to Australia's budget.
Speaker:Nobody, of course, is going to be going to do anything about it because we're now
Speaker:locked into this disastrous system, but we are hooked on it, you know, as a country,
Speaker:we are hooked on real estate investment.
Speaker:Now, I know I've bought a couple of rental properties and all that
Speaker:sort of stuff, but I can afford it.
Speaker:So I've just bought them and, you know, if they do go up in value, well
Speaker:and true, that'll be great for me.
Speaker:But right now I'm just, I'm just counting the rent.
Speaker:Yeah, I'm probably going to make more money out of the place at South Ripley
Speaker:than I will at up here in Mackay.
Speaker:But anyway, it is what it is.
Speaker:John in the chat room says I'm against negative gearing, but that doesn't sound
Speaker:much compared to the total economy.
Speaker:I reckon it's a fair whack.
Speaker:What you've actually got to look at, John, is you could buy a
Speaker:lot of social housing for that.
Speaker:Yeah, exactly.
Speaker:And that would actually then take the heat out of the property
Speaker:market because you'd reduce the, you'd be reducing demand for it.
Speaker:So I just think that, what you've actually got to look at there is
Speaker:it's not a, in part of the total economy that is quite small, but.
Speaker:I can't imagine another tax deduction costing us that much.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Alright, that was housing.
Speaker:Scott, I'd like to talk about Donald Trump.
Speaker:And we mentioned last week, I think it was So this is probably going to
Speaker:take us about half an hour, isn't it?
Speaker:Well, I don't know.
Speaker:See how we go.
Speaker:last week Ron DeSantis has dropped out of the race.
Speaker:Yes, he dropped out.
Speaker:So I had the Iowa caucus and, really it's now pretty much down to just
Speaker:Trump and Nikki Haley, and she's just, it's only a matter of time because
Speaker:Trump's clearly going to win, so it's hard to imagine any other result.
Speaker:Just the Iowa caucus really confirmed that Trump is going to win.
Speaker:But, we mentioned last week about how the evangelical pastors were
Speaker:regretting their deal with Donald Trump.
Speaker:And people had kind of, they'd lost control of their flock, if you
Speaker:like, to Trump, who had taken over.
Speaker:So, just, this is something that I'm going to play a clip from Donald Trump's,
Speaker:Truth Social account, so this is something that he's played and also gets played
Speaker:at some of his, rallies, rallies.
Speaker:Thank you.
Speaker:That's the word, Scott.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:I don't know if we can play the whole two minutes of it, two
Speaker:minutes 40, but we'll see how we go.
Speaker:The, the audio isn't fantastic, but that's just the way it's come.
Speaker:It's meant to have this scratchy sound in the back of it.
Speaker:But, hopefully you can hear it okay, we'll, Anyway, have a listen to some of
Speaker:this if you've got a, have a bucket close by in case you feel ill, is all I'd say.
Speaker:And on June 14th,
Speaker:1946, God looked down on his planned paradise and said, I need a caretaker.
Speaker:So God gave us Trump.
Speaker:God said, I need somebody willing to get up before dawn, fix this
Speaker:country, work all day, fight the Marxists, eat supper, then go to the
Speaker:Oval Office and stay past midnight at a meeting of the heads of state.
Speaker:So God made Trump.
Speaker:with arms, strong enough to wrestle the deep state, and yet gentle
Speaker:enough to deliver his own grandchild.
Speaker:I like that bit, strong enough to wrestle with the deep state, soft and gentle
Speaker:enough to deliver his own grandchild.
Speaker:Is he claiming to have delivered his own grandchild at some point?
Speaker:I have heard this before and I just thought to myself,
Speaker:maybe he is claiming that.
Speaker:Well, somebody's claiming he did.
Speaker:Anyway, I'll keep going with it.
Speaker:To ruffle the feathers, tame Cantankerous World Economic Forum, come home hungry,
Speaker:have to wait until the First Lady is done with lunch with friends, then tell the
Speaker:ladies to be sure and come back real soon.
Speaker:And mean it.
Speaker:So God gave us That was a little serious.
Speaker:Wait for the First Lady to have lunch, and then Welcome her friends back another time
Speaker:and mean it in all seriousness and this isn't this wasn't done ironically This
Speaker:was done as as a fawning sort of thing.
Speaker:It's a load of shit, isn't it?
Speaker:It's it's a strange clip.
Speaker:I'll keep going I need somebody who can shape an axe but wield a sword Who had
Speaker:the courage to step foot in North Korea?
Speaker:Who can make money from the tar of the sand turn liquid to gold?
Speaker:Who understands the difference between tariffs and inflation will finish
Speaker:his 40 hour, week by Tuesday, noon, but then put in another 72 hours.
Speaker:So God made Trump.
Speaker:God had to have somebody willing to go into the den of vipers,
Speaker:call out the fake news for their tongues as sharp as a serpents.
Speaker:The poison of vipers is on their lips.
Speaker:And yet stop.
Speaker:So, ah, that'll do.
Speaker:There's another minute or so of it, but you get the, you get the flavor of,
Speaker:I think that was, It sounds very much like a video and that sort of stuff
Speaker:that came out many, many years ago.
Speaker:It was something and God made farmers, wasn't it?
Speaker:I don't know.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:But it's a real sort of ification of, of Donald Trump.
Speaker:Oh God.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:As sort of a savior figure.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:So, so that came associated with an article I was reading.
Speaker:in the New York Times.
Speaker:And I'll just read some excerpts from that article.
Speaker:So, Trump, his family and his supporters have been more than willing
Speaker:to claim that Trump is ordained by God for a special mission to restore
Speaker:America as a Christian nation.
Speaker:and in recent weeks, the former president posted a video called God Made Trump
Speaker:and he screened it at campaign rallies.
Speaker:And actually, the people who made it was, it was created by Dilly Meme
Speaker:Team, described by Ken Bessinger of the Times as an organized collective
Speaker:of video producers who call themselves Trump's online war machine.
Speaker:Anyway, they're the guys who created it.
Speaker:So Trump's, according to this article, Trump's evolution
Speaker:into a Jesus like figure.
Speaker:for some, but not all white evangelicals, began soon after he
Speaker:began his first presidential campaign.
Speaker:And there's a guy, a, David P.
Speaker:Gushie, Professor of Christian Ethics at Mercy University who explained
Speaker:that, some of Trump's Christian followers do appear to have grown to
Speaker:see him as a kind of religious figure.
Speaker:He is a saviour.
Speaker:I think it began with the sense that he was uniquely committed
Speaker:to saving them from their foes.
Speaker:Liberals, Democrats, Elites, Seculars, Illegal Immigrants, etc.
Speaker:And saving America from all that threatens it.
Speaker:In this sense, Gushy continued, a saviour does not have to be a
Speaker:good person, but just needs to fulfil his divinely appointed role.
Speaker:Trump is seen by many as actually having done so while president.
Speaker:This is an idea, Scott, that I hadn't really sort of paid attention
Speaker:to before, because you, you sort of look at it and go, how can
Speaker:these Christians Support this guy.
Speaker:okay, they did a deal.
Speaker:Get rid of Roe v.
Speaker:Wade and we'll do these other things for you.
Speaker:But the other part of that is that, you know, a sort of a saviour in
Speaker:a Biblical sense doesn't have to be a good person, just needs to
Speaker:fulfil his divinely appointed role.
Speaker:and this view is particularly strong in the Pentecostal wing of
Speaker:the conservative Christian world.
Speaker:is sometimes viewed there as an anointed leader sent by God.
Speaker:And, anointed here means set apart and especially equipped
Speaker:by God for a holy task.
Speaker:And sometimes the most unlikely people got anointed by God in the Bible.
Speaker:So Trump's unlikeliness for the role is actually evidence in favour
Speaker:that he's performing the role.
Speaker:And they go on to, talk about, let me just see here,
Speaker:oh, there's a particular character, um.
Speaker:Uh, yes.
Speaker:So, uh, white evangelicals refer not to Jesus, but to the Persian king Cyrus from
Speaker:the book of Isaiah in the Hebrew Bible.
Speaker:In that story, Cyrus is the model of an ungodly king.
Speaker:Who nonetheless frees a group of Jews who are held captive in Babel, in Babylon.
Speaker:So, sort of, trumps the fact that he is so unsavoury.
Speaker:Leads even more evidence for these people.
Speaker:But he is the real saviour, because in their biblical interpretations,
Speaker:that's quite appropriate, that the most unlikely people.
Speaker:Perform roles anointed by God, and that's actually a good thing.
Speaker:Wow.
Speaker:I think they're actually concentrating far too much on the Old Testament there.
Speaker:You know.
Speaker:But there's a means of justifying themselves.
Speaker:Yeah, I know.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Mmm.
Speaker:Um.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Now, Because, you know, I would have thought that if you're a Christian
Speaker:and that sort of stuff, you should have more of an emphasis on the
Speaker:New Testament than you would on the Old Testament, but apparently not.
Speaker:Hmm.
Speaker:So, yeah, there's an important idea here that I've just got to get to.
Speaker:so there's a guy, Jim Guth, political scientist at Furman
Speaker:University, an expert on the role of religion in politics, apparently.
Speaker:And by populist, he means more likely to favour strong leadership, to distrust
Speaker:government, to see the country on the wrong track, and to think that
Speaker:the majority should always rule.
Speaker:And Guth found that another trait of political populist is the willingness
Speaker:to ignore democratic civility.
Speaker:he says, we conduct, we constructed a rough politics score.
Speaker:from the following items, whether protesters deserve what they get if
Speaker:they hurt in demonstrating, whether the country would be better off
Speaker:if it got rid of rotten apples.
Speaker:and whether people are too sensitive about political discourse.
Speaker:And what they found was that with evangelical affiliation,
Speaker:evangelical identity, and biblical literalism, predicts that you'll
Speaker:agree with those assertions.
Speaker:Those, that rough politics.
Speaker:So the evangelicals like that sort of strong man, better off
Speaker:without those rotten apples.
Speaker:don't be so sensitive kind of attitudes and, and what he goes
Speaker:on to say is that essentially not only were the evangelical leaders
Speaker:doing a deal with Trump about Roe v.
Speaker:Wade, but it actually just aligned with evangelicals.
Speaker:Trump aligns with evangelicals.
Speaker:In that characteristic of wanting a strong man who, who gets rid of rotten
Speaker:apples and believes the majority should rule over the minority.
Speaker:So there was, there's that sort of characteristic trait of
Speaker:evangelicals, which let's face it, is a pretty ugly trait.
Speaker:It's incredibly ugly.
Speaker:And he's essentially saying that when you're studying religious
Speaker:groups, you'll find that trait.
Speaker:Over represent all those traits, overrepresented in evangelicals.
Speaker:And so Trump is actually a psychological match for these people.
Speaker:It's not just cutting a deal for Roe v.
Speaker:Wade and putting up with his shit, if you like.
Speaker:They actually like that shit, because it matches up with
Speaker:their psychological profile.
Speaker:With their view of the world.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:So, so there you go.
Speaker:Add that to your kit bag of understanding of the Trump
Speaker:phenomena in American politics.
Speaker:yeah.
Speaker:Um, and, and really saying in that article, There's no scope in the
Speaker:evangelical movement to move towards a softer line, that any leaders who have
Speaker:tried to do it have basically been run out of town, run out of the evangelical
Speaker:world, and it's just got harder and harder in those populist policies.
Speaker:Is what he's saying in that article.
Speaker:So anyway, I thought that was an interesting one and
Speaker:makes all sense to you, Scott.
Speaker:Yeah, it does.
Speaker:I just hope that, I hope that it continues that, ever since Roe v
Speaker:Wade was overturned and that sort of stuff, we've seen in the States and
Speaker:that sort of stuff, that the number of Republicans being elected to those state
Speaker:legislatures has actually been reduced.
Speaker:Now, one would hope that that continues under the Federals and all that sort
Speaker:of stuff, and maybe Biden will actually win a thumping majority of the, of
Speaker:the, what's it called, the, well, whatever, whoever selects the President.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Electoral College.
Speaker:Yep.
Speaker:I hope that he does, but I'm not convinced that he will.
Speaker:You know, from the vantage, from here in Australia, I don't
Speaker:think it makes any difference whether Trump wins or Biden wins.
Speaker:Like, in fact, we're probably, as I said before, Trump sort of is less likely
Speaker:to get involved in, in sort of wars.
Speaker:Yeah, I agree, you know, cause he's more likely to pull out of stuff and
Speaker:less likely to I think he'll actually, cause he did actually, when they
Speaker:actually used, cruise missiles against Syria and that sort of stuff, he
Speaker:had, Xi Jinping was over visiting it.
Speaker:And he said, he actually quoted to him, he says, Oh, you know, we've
Speaker:just, we've just dispensed with those Syrians by using our cruise missiles.
Speaker:So I think that would actually be something that would appeal to him.
Speaker:He would actually use those sorts of things.
Speaker:I don't see him putting boots on the ground or anything else.
Speaker:Hmm.
Speaker:Just a The odd assassination here or there, he'd like
Speaker:that, he'd be up for that.
Speaker:I think he did that with the Iraqi general or something like that or an
Speaker:Iranian general or something like that.
Speaker:Yeah, there was probably that that was killed by a predator
Speaker:drone and that sort of stuff.
Speaker:But I think overall, Scott, like he'll cancel Orcus for sure.
Speaker:Yeah, for sure.
Speaker:And that's a good thing for us.
Speaker:But if, if you're looking at just policies, what policy can you
Speaker:think of that Trump would promote?
Speaker:that affects the rest of the world.
Speaker:I think you leave Ukraine on its own, I don't even think that he would have
Speaker:the balls to actually stand up to Vladimir Putin and say to him, look,
Speaker:you can keep Donetsk, but you've got to actually stay out of the rest of Ukraine.
Speaker:I think he'd just walk away entirely and just leave Ukraine to fend for itself,
Speaker:in which case Ukraine would collapse.
Speaker:Of course, you know, I can't really list any stated policies of Donald
Speaker:Trump and I wouldn't bother relearning them because whatever he states
Speaker:his policy is, it's all bullshit.
Speaker:No guarantee that's what he's going to do.
Speaker:So you just look at his past practice and, and think, well, he's probably
Speaker:going to do pretty much the same.
Speaker:And really, other than maybe being less inclined to be involved in wars.
Speaker:The actual day to day running of the country, ignoring all of the crazy
Speaker:personal shit, but just the way the country functioned, was it, is it
Speaker:any that much different policy wise?
Speaker:Well, it depends, it depends on actually what actually does on that, I can't think
Speaker:what it's called, but the Republicans do actually have a book and that sort of
Speaker:stuff that they've actually put together about what, what a first day Trump 2.
Speaker:0 will look like.
Speaker:And they've actually gone through and actually said that they're going
Speaker:to Sack the public servants and they're going to move into the from
Speaker:the jobs of life, that sort of stuff.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:You know, he is gonna sack them and get in, put in sick offense, which would be
Speaker:ridiculous if they actually did that.
Speaker:Mm-Hmm.
Speaker:Here's, I honestly believe that we would have to be very concerned about that.
Speaker:Mm-Hmm.
Speaker:Here's a clip from a podcast, which has, now what's this guy called?
Speaker:green Greenwald . This is something from Land and Hard Bottom, he says, yeah.
Speaker:Putin has the Trump kiss tape.
Speaker:Trump will do whatever he's told to do.
Speaker:Could be the case.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Could be the case.
Speaker:So this is Glenn Greenwald from System Update podcast.
Speaker:This is talking about power and whether there's any difference between Trump.
Speaker:It's an interesting idea of why, I'll play it.
Speaker:I think this is quite instructive.
Speaker:Have a listen to this, Scott.
Speaker:Just to, to close this point about the dynamic of the race and the fact that
Speaker:the establishment in Washington is so clearly enthusiastically supportive
Speaker:of Nikki Haley, and when I asked Congressman Douglas that, I think he
Speaker:gave an interesting answer, which is absolutely right, that she represents
Speaker:business as usual, that there will be very little change to the way
Speaker:things are done in Washington if she's elected or if Joe Biden is re elected.
Speaker:That's what they look for more than anything.
Speaker:That's the reason they found so Trump threatening, Trump so threatening,
Speaker:not because of any one particular The view he expressed or policy he
Speaker:advocated, although I think secondarily it became about that as well, I just
Speaker:think in general, he represented this threat to continuity, this just
Speaker:subversive energy that threatened to shake up their very comfortable game.
Speaker:Washington is where their power and wealth comes from.
Speaker:They're very, very protective of that.
Speaker:And the person who sits nominally at least at the top of that pyramid
Speaker:Who doles out enormous amounts of opportunities and contracts for that
Speaker:person to be overtly hostile to sectors of the establishment is their biggest
Speaker:fear, way more than which party wins or loses, which ideology prevails.
Speaker:And Trump was such an outsider in terms of Washington, he had never
Speaker:occupied political office before.
Speaker:They've.
Speaker:Just feared the fact that he didn't rely on their standard group of lobbyists.
Speaker:They saw the writing on the wall that their normal consultants and others who
Speaker:were careerists would be out of power.
Speaker:It was the only time, Trump's election was, in the last 25 years, that Nikki
Speaker:Haley, that, that, Victoria Nuland did not occupy some important and
Speaker:influential foreign policy position.
Speaker:She was there in the Clinton administration.
Speaker:She then served as Dick Cheney's top foreign policy advisor
Speaker:throughout the Bush administration.
Speaker:She then became the ambassador to NATO when NATO was recklessly
Speaker:expanding eastward in a way that was threatening Russia.
Speaker:She then began running important parts of the State Department under
Speaker:Hillary Clinton and then was put in charge of Ukraine under John Kerry.
Speaker:Only when Trump was president for four years, she was out, Biden gets
Speaker:re elected, she's right back in, now she's been promoted once again to the
Speaker:highest level of the State Department.
Speaker:So just, in, in Victoria Nuland, you see the point I'm emphasizing,
Speaker:which is that these people thrive and prosper and maintain power no
Speaker:matter the outcome of political elections, as long as both parties
Speaker:nominate somebody who plays the game.
Speaker:And Nikki Haley is clearly somebody.
Speaker:Who, as much as any politician I've ever seen, is more than willing to
Speaker:play whatever game she's told to play in order to benefit herself.
Speaker:She's an absolute empty vessel, a puppet who believes in nothing.
Speaker:I thought that was a good example, the Victoria Newland one, where, didn't
Speaker:matter Republican or Democrat, she gets a job, gets a role, and It's only
Speaker:when Trump's in that she doesn't, and there'd be lots of people like that who
Speaker:suddenly lose their, their power, so.
Speaker:Yeah, for sure, it's just, it is one of those things, that is one
Speaker:area that you can actually point to Trump and actually say, well, that
Speaker:would be a good thing, because you wouldn't have this hawkish sort of
Speaker:NATO expansionism and everything else.
Speaker:That's only one thing, you know, the rest of it is a concern.
Speaker:You know, it's, it's like, you know, I think you're looking for
Speaker:Republican policies that don't exist.
Speaker:Because, you know, they, you know, and he said, you know, she's an empty vessel.
Speaker:Well, that could be argued about any Republican.
Speaker:They are all empty vessels.
Speaker:They haven't actually got to be, they haven't actually got anything
Speaker:that they actually hang their hat on or anything like this.
Speaker:Now, you know, Reagan, who I did disagree with a hell of a lot, you
Speaker:could actually at least hang his hat on something and say, well,
Speaker:this is what he actually believes and this is what he's going to do.
Speaker:This current lot, I don't think he could actually say the same thing.
Speaker:You know, it's Anyway, it's an interesting idea that, that the sort
Speaker:of, the establishment, is particularly keen for Nikki Haley over Donald Trump
Speaker:because it's a continuation of, of power for a lot of people who, who.
Speaker:Expect to use power, irrespective of whether Democrats or
Speaker:Republicans win, so, yeah.
Speaker:It's like one of those things, like, you know, as bad as George W.
Speaker:Bush's presidency was, at least It was something that you could hang your hat on
Speaker:and say, Well, I actually agree with that.
Speaker:Or I disagree with most of what he's saying, but there's a few things that do
Speaker:come up that you think, just as, okay, he's got us there, you know, but it's
Speaker:just one of those things with this idea.
Speaker:I just don't think we're going to get anything that any of us could agree on.
Speaker:You know, you're probably going to be very happy if he does actually cancel August.
Speaker:I'd be delighted.
Speaker:You've got to remember, you've got to remember that AUKUS
Speaker:stands for Australia, UK, and US.
Speaker:So, the UK could still actually sell us some nuclear submarines from that.
Speaker:Well, the whole deal would then be done, would be over, because it relies so much
Speaker:on the US as part of the whole shebang.
Speaker:It couldn't, it couldn't just Well, I think that, I think that Australia
Speaker:would be waiting until the 2040s for our next lot of submarines.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:We're never going to get them.
Speaker:It's just We'd have to, we'd have to wait until the UK was ready to produce
Speaker:them and that sort of stuff, then we'd end up buying them from there.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Yeah, and we've still got to work out what the hell we're going
Speaker:to do with the spent fuel and everything else that comes from them.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:Because the UK hasn't actually decommissioned any of their
Speaker:submarines that they've ever had.
Speaker:I think they're just sitting in a dock somewhere.
Speaker:Yeah, they are.
Speaker:Rusting away.
Speaker:Yeah, they're rusting away.
Speaker:They're keeping the, they're keeping the power and everything on them and that sort
Speaker:of stuff so they don't actually blow up.
Speaker:Mm.
Speaker:But it's just one of those things.
Speaker:It's, they haven't worked out how to safely dispose of the Nuclear reactors.
Speaker:Yeah, so anyway, Trump's also got news caught by the bulls.
Speaker:So according to an article from Crikey, with Lachlan in charge, they're sort
Speaker:of recognizing that their audience that they want to try and keep are
Speaker:Trump lovers and therefore they have to comply with Trump demands and
Speaker:DeSantis, Ron DeSantis accused Fox, of just being Trump's Praetorian Guard.
Speaker:And he said they don't hold Trump accountable because they're worried
Speaker:about losing viewers and they don't want to have their ratings go down.
Speaker:And his complaint followed Fox's pathetic surrender to Trump earlier in the week by
Speaker:agreeing to a live town hall discussion.
Speaker:At a time and in a format demanded by the former president to spike the
Speaker:official Republican debate on CNN.
Speaker:So, basically they agreed to Trump's terms and, they're rolling over
Speaker:and, Kowtowing to Trump because he controls their audience.
Speaker:So just like the evangelical pastors, News Corp have created
Speaker:a monster that now controls their flock and they're having to now.
Speaker:do his bidding, so.
Speaker:Well, one would hope that the lawsuits and everything like that against, against
Speaker:Fox News is actually going to actually control their behaviour next time
Speaker:when the election needs to be called.
Speaker:Yes, they won't be doing the same thing in terms of the vote counting,
Speaker:but there's all the soft sort of stuff of assisting Trump along
Speaker:the way, is what they'll be doing.
Speaker:So, yeah, Yep.
Speaker:Just away from Trump now, UK poll.
Speaker:So, there was a YouGov survey, 14, 000 people, extrapolating the results,
Speaker:and predicts the Conservatives will retain only 169 seats, which is 196
Speaker:fewer than they hold at the moment.
Speaker:Then Labor would take 385, so.
Speaker:Um, a big wipeout of the Conservatives in the UK seems all but certain, Scott.
Speaker:Yeah, it does.
Speaker:We're just going to have to wait and see, you know, because like Joe was saying last
Speaker:week that there's hope that the Liberal Democrats will end up with a balance
Speaker:of power, but it doesn't sound like it.
Speaker:Hey, Scott, you should, you know, I did that one on the book by
Speaker:Yasha Monk about identity politics.
Speaker:So Yasha Monk has a podcast and I was just listening to it today.
Speaker:I'm just going to try and find you the name of it.
Speaker:it's called The Good Fight and he just did, an episode on Taiwan.
Speaker:Interviewed a guy who's, some university professor, I think, or
Speaker:something like that, in Taiwan.
Speaker:So, anyway, gave a good background of, of Taiwan's history and where they're
Speaker:at in terms of the recent elections.
Speaker:So, um, so, you should listen to that, because I know you're keen on visiting
Speaker:Taiwan at some stage in the near future.
Speaker:Okay, Albert Wu.
Speaker:Yeah, that's it.
Speaker:So have a look at that.
Speaker:That was an interesting one.
Speaker:in the John Menardew blog, there was an article by Wang Wen, a
Speaker:professor and executive dean of the Chongyang Institute for Financial
Speaker:Studies, Renmin University of China.
Speaker:So he's mainly in China.
Speaker:he was basically saying that, um, uh, actually I'll just
Speaker:quote some of the article here.
Speaker:Some surveys show that 51 percent of young people in Taiwan like to use
Speaker:Mainland apps such as TikTok and Red.
Speaker:They envy the mainland's high speed rail system that can zip people
Speaker:across the country for business or travel or just for the weekend.
Speaker:They see new breathing space with the rapid rise in standards of
Speaker:living and the great potential for continued economic progress.
Speaker:he says, that is why two of the three parties in Sunday's election made it clear
Speaker:they do not support Taiwan independence or even talking about reunification.
Speaker:And, he says, it seems that the Chinese economy will surpass
Speaker:the United States around 2035.
Speaker:Dear listener, if you use Purchasing Power, Purchasing Power Parity?
Speaker:China's already overtaken.
Speaker:They've already overtaken the US.
Speaker:Yeah, and he says in the future the envy and worship young people in Taiwan have
Speaker:for the mainland will only strengthen.
Speaker:in the past Taiwanese people have had a sense of superiority over their higher
Speaker:living standards, but now the GDP of its west coast neighbor, Fujian province,
Speaker:exceeds Taiwan's and he says Taiwan's standard of living was 10 times higher
Speaker:than Fujian's 30 years ago, but now many Taiwanese are reflecting on why their
Speaker:island is slipping as Fujian grows even though they share a regional culture.
Speaker:This is my tip Scott, in the long term.
Speaker:It's just economically, the Taiwanese will want to join China because their
Speaker:economy will be crushed by various forces.
Speaker:And if that, if that is something the Taiwanese people want to actually do,
Speaker:then they will accept one country, two systems, but they haven't shown a great
Speaker:deal of acceptance of that because they've seen how one country, two
Speaker:systems has played out for Hong Kong.
Speaker:You know, it's, yeah, it'll take a while, but you know, I'm not saying
Speaker:this is going to happen next year.
Speaker:But it's, it's, this is a decades, over the coming decades, over
Speaker:the next 20, 30, 40, 50 years.
Speaker:Yeah, which China can wait that out because they, you know, they could wait
Speaker:that out and all that sort of stuff.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:Do I actually see the Taiwanese people accepting that very gracefully
Speaker:and all that sort of stuff?
Speaker:No, but I could actually see it happening at some stage in the future.
Speaker:Wasn't it one of Mao's generals who was asked, what did you think
Speaker:of, what do you think of what happened in the French Revolution?
Speaker:And he said it's too early to say.
Speaker:I think it was one of Mao's generals.
Speaker:So.
Speaker:It really wouldn't surprise me because they do have that, they do have that
Speaker:very long term view of the world.
Speaker:And they just think, you know, they honestly believe that their civilization
Speaker:has been there for thousands of years and all that type of thing.
Speaker:So they honestly think that they are the longest serving country in the world.
Speaker:Yeah, so Landon Hard Bottom had made that comment about, about the fist tape
Speaker:and, and Russia controlling, Trump.
Speaker:And just looking at the chat, they're saying that Landon's
Speaker:comment didn't survive in YouTube.
Speaker:Oh, it didn't show up.
Speaker:Oh, really?
Speaker:It got kicked straight up on our screen, but not on the tube.
Speaker:So, fair enough.
Speaker:I'm a bit worried that this, for the second time, Landon
Speaker:might cause a censorship.
Speaker:One of our episodes.
Speaker:I might have to make this one a private one.
Speaker:Yeah, I don't get censored by YouTube again So yeah, because it was Landon
Speaker:who his joke about The laser beams.
Speaker:What's Charlie that got us into trouble last time?
Speaker:That was Landon's fault again, so yeah Yeah, anyway, just quickly back to China
Speaker:still and their economy In the Chinese car industry, John Pilger, recently deceased,
Speaker:he nailed a set of crucial reasons for the Western world maintaining such distorted,
Speaker:low success expectations of China.
Speaker:Pilger argued convincingly that the Global West and its mainstream Western
Speaker:media Unceasingly demonise Beijing because today China has matched
Speaker:America at its own great game of capitalism, and that is unforgivable.
Speaker:He says the same Western media has played a new yellow peril role in turning the
Speaker:extraordinary industrious community that is the real China into a fantasy based
Speaker:monster trying to take over the world.
Speaker:And in less than a decade, the good China's been airbrushed and
Speaker:the bad China has replaced it.
Speaker:Scott, I keep recalling how Tony Abbott invited Xi Jinping and he
Speaker:spoke in the Australian Parliament.
Speaker:And it was all happy days.
Speaker:We love China.
Speaker:How can we possibly make things even stronger?
Speaker:Julia Gillard had organised joint military exercises.
Speaker:And then Trump comes along and says, China bad, China bad, and everybody followed.
Speaker:Yeah, and Morrison followed and all that sort of stuff.
Speaker:And here we are.
Speaker:That's, that's where we're at.
Speaker:And in that time, China did nothing!
Speaker:Nothing.
Speaker:Oh, that's true.
Speaker:They haven't done anything, you know, except they did fly very closely
Speaker:to Taiwan and that sort of stuff.
Speaker:They have forced the Taiwanese to expend a hell of a lot of aviation
Speaker:fuel and that type of thing to keep it, to keep a check on their borders.
Speaker:They have also, you know, done live fire exercises very close to Taiwan.
Speaker:You know, it's one of those things.
Speaker:I do honestly believe that Taiwan is an independent country though.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:In the scheme of things, thinking Israel and Gaza, nothing.
Speaker:China's done nothing.
Speaker:Anyway.
Speaker:Yeah, I know.
Speaker:Fair enough.
Speaker:Still in the same article, China is now the world's biggest
Speaker:car exporter, electric, hybrid and conventional combined.
Speaker:It's ahead of Japan and Germany as a car exporter.
Speaker:Five years ago, China only shipped 25 percent of Japanese automotive
Speaker:exports, and now It's the world's largest, ahead of Japan and Germany.
Speaker:Chinese maker BYD, Build Your Dreams, is now outselling Tesla
Speaker:globally with pure battery cars.
Speaker:Huge success story.
Speaker:Yeah, and actually, Deepthroat has just bought a BYD.
Speaker:Did he?
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Ah, was he happy with it?
Speaker:Well, no, he was happy with it when he, when he sent me an email about it.
Speaker:Okay, there you go.
Speaker:It's one of those things, I just think to myself that, eventually
Speaker:we're going to have, well, if we can't get hydrogen up and that sort
Speaker:of stuff, this country will have long, What's the word I'm groping for?
Speaker:Long distance EVs.
Speaker:You know, we will actually get there one day.
Speaker:It's going to take a little bit of time, but we'll get there one day.
Speaker:Or, we could have met with hydrogen vehicles.
Speaker:I don't know.
Speaker:But the internal combustion engine has got a lifespan on it.
Speaker:Except for dickheads like me who've got a 1969 MGB in their garage.
Speaker:Right.
Speaker:You know?
Speaker:A 1969?
Speaker:Yeah, a 1969 MGB.
Speaker:Wow.
Speaker:I don't know.
Speaker:Okay, just briefly, you know how we had apparently participated
Speaker:in the bombing of Yemen?
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:And the way we found out about it, dear listener, is the Americans told us.
Speaker:Our own government didn't tell us that it was involved in the background in
Speaker:assistance with the US bombing Yemen.
Speaker:We had to find out from the Americans.
Speaker:So as Anne Pavitt says in the John Menendee blog, is
Speaker:this a constitutional crisis?
Speaker:On Friday, 12th of January, 2024, a USA official spokesman announced
Speaker:that Australia was to provide a support role for the UK and USA
Speaker:troops who were about to attack Yemen.
Speaker:No announcement had been made to this effect by the Australian Government.
Speaker:The Australian people had to wait for the next day to know definitely if, in
Speaker:fact, such a decision had been made.
Speaker:How is it possible for the USA spokesperson to announce an Australian
Speaker:policy decision on going to war against another sovereign state, no
Speaker:less, before it had been declared by the Australian government?
Speaker:Oh, she's got a point there.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:You know, I think our government should have actually come forward
Speaker:and actually said, look, Australia is providing a support role
Speaker:right now for the UK and the US.
Speaker:It's just so commonplace to bomb somebody.
Speaker:It's one of those things, I just think to myself that I agree with you that
Speaker:the, you know, the war powers and that sort of stuff should be actually a whole,
Speaker:should involve the entire parliament, both houses, not just the cabinet.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:You know, so you'd actually have a debate about it in Parliament,
Speaker:which the Greens would be the only ones that would be opposed to it.
Speaker:And, you know, but at least it would be out there and that sort of stuff.
Speaker:You'd have some argument before you actually declared it.
Speaker:Yes.
Speaker:Yeah.
Speaker:So, um, it's, it's extraordinary.
Speaker:I mean, we should bring both houses of parliament together before we assist,
Speaker:before we bomb any other country or assist our allies in bombing another country.
Speaker:You would think it's such a serious thing that we could at least gather together.
Speaker:I mean, Scott, they're bringing together, the Labor caucus.
Speaker:It's all gathering in parliament.
Speaker:Even though Parliament's not sitting to discuss the sort of cost of living crisis.
Speaker:Well, we can do that, but we can't bring everyone together to
Speaker:talk about whether we're going to bomb another country or not.
Speaker:Yeah, exactly.
Speaker:It's like those, you know, when the cabinet, when the cabinet papers
Speaker:were declassified and that sort of stuff, because they were 20 years old.
Speaker:That was over John Howard's decision to And it was basically John Howard's
Speaker:decision to invade Iraq, you know, he, it was him and Peter Costello and a few
Speaker:others and that sort of stuff that were involved in a very, well, not an informal
Speaker:chat because it was actually minuted.
Speaker:And they just said, well, we're going to go and do it.
Speaker:And I thought to myself, you know, there was never any real discussion of that.
Speaker:You know, there was, there was probably an argument for getting involved
Speaker:with the intelligence that had, had been provided to us, which has proven
Speaker:since then to be false, that there was an argument that we should be
Speaker:involved, but that was an argument that they should have been prepared to
Speaker:prosecute publicly, but they weren't.
Speaker:Simon Crane was prepared to say.
Speaker:He was the Labor Leader the Opposition, he said that I support
Speaker:you but I don't support you going.
Speaker:Mm, so good on him.
Speaker:Ah, Scott.
Speaker:I got some other stuff there but I reckon that's an hour.
Speaker:And I'm trying to keep it to an hour, these podcasts now, so we
Speaker:can put some more Yemen stuff on the back burner until next week.
Speaker:I think Joe's back next week, dear listener.
Speaker:Temporary UK correspondent will be back.
Speaker:yeah.
Speaker:If you've got any interesting articles or things going on, send them to me
Speaker:and they might make it on the podcast.
Speaker:And if the people in the chat room, thanks for your contribution.
Speaker:I think this episode I'm going to, I think I'm going to make it private or
Speaker:something just so that YouTube doesn't.
Speaker:Give me another censorship tap on the shoulder.
Speaker:It'd be a real shame to lose it.
Speaker:So, yeah, I think, I think I will delete it just for that reason.
Speaker:Audio only.
Speaker:Alrighty.
Speaker:Thanks for listening, dear listener.
Speaker:We'll be back next week.
Speaker:Bye for now.
Speaker:And thanks very much for tuning in.
Speaker:Bye now.
