The whole of western policy toward Asia is rooted in white supremacy.
Just like AUKUS how the Anglo nations think they should dictate too Asia what needs to be done.
Hell two of the three parties are half a world away not even part of the region.
Only a coalition based in western white supremacy can thinks of a idea like AUKUS as a good idea.
They didn't even collaborate with their QUAD allies or with ASEAN allies.
So Indonesia and Malaysia we will park some nuclear subs in your sea lanes of communication, don't care what you brown people think about it.
The thing is, the west has chosen the "Christian, white identity" for its "us vs them" political discourse.
Yes, their democracy does strive to push multiculturalism today (it didn't in the past), but politically this identity is important as only that spans borders and allows them to forge strong political ties. They need to because older civilizations like in Asia and the middle-east out number them. Apart from this, it's basic politics that you have to seem superior than others to wield power. Thus, imperialism spread the idea that the white christian was put on earth to educate the rest and even rule over them. That is why white colonies - like the US, Canada, Australia etc. had more freedom and rights than the occupied colonies like India, China, middle east, Africa etc whose citizen where heavily discriminated against by the conquerors.
In today's modern world, this superiority is showcased through technical advancement, peace and prosperity - thus, US and UK made a concerted effort to ensure that conflicts among European countries ended or became minor irritants, and they appeared united. Thus the US, Canada, Europe, Australia all together project a united front through a strong economic and military alliance. And they also make sure that their close allies (that allow a military base) also flourish economically - that is one of the reason why Israel, Korea and Japan have a thriving economy (but a not so independent military).
To reinforce this perception they also cause conflict among the weaker nations. The old British policy of divide and rule continues to strive as historical grievances between countries are used to keep them fighting each other - thus today conflicts continue in South America, Africa, Asia and Eurasia. And they are fueled by the west taking sides as they please.
Another major reason for creating conflicts is to ensure that their military continues to have fighting experience - thus they are also regularly send to these conflict zones. (Afghanistan, Iraq and now Syria being current examples. While it was Vietnam and Korea in the past).
The biggest fear of the west is an Asia without conflict - If India and China and Japan resolve their differences, and work together, the age of the west as we know it will be over. Hence their desperate attempt to manipulate and push China into more and more conflict with India, Japan and Korea. And try to get these countries to agree to a military alliance with the west (the quad alliance - US, India, Japan and Australia ... India is the only holdout here).
Can you expand on what you mean by western chauvinism? My time in eastern Asia has taught me that many of them see members of others Asian (and non-Asian) races/countries as inherently inferior.
DEI is a tactic to prey on white/western guilt and weaken western countries and nothing will convince me otherwise.
I've spent some time in Asia. There's no DEI here, and they're better for it. Seeing DEI from outside the western world just makes it more obvious what it is: a divide and conquer strategy.
Asia really should unite and push to deprecate this term. There’s practically nothing we share all across this so-called Asia metaregion, except it’s neither the West nor the Africa.
West has demonstrated the ability to coalesce massive, unprecedented, response to illegal wars was always possible, but they simply do not care enough about non-white people. Even now, shaming, condemning and pressuring neutral countries for importing wheat or gas to feed and heat their own. Seems like even non-white diaspora in the west are seeing past the charade.
You nailed it. I continue to be shocked by the naivete of the West in all things Asia--work practices, education, rule of law, protection of IP, role of women in society. This after having lived and worked in Eastern China for 3 years. Those abroad just don't get it. And with such a behemoth as a world partner, they aren't changing fast nor need to.
I get that. But a lot of the time the drive to enforce Western values does way more harm than good. The obvious example is the Vietnam war (and the US treatment of Cambodia that lead directly to the horrors of the Khmer Rouge). But less obviously, championing a "reformist" in Myanmar lead to a complete mess (and arguably genocide).
Maybe if we started with the point of view that SE Asians have the right to determine their own government, and that may not look like our western ideas of "acceptable" government, instead of starting with the assumption that these people need saving from tyrants and monsters?
Right now the status quo in most of SE Asia is rapidly accelerating wealth. In Europe that brought the kind of social changes that demanded democracy. Maybe leaving them "undisturbed" is exactly the right thing to do...
Please explain which Asia? The Asia which has generations of poverty and casting and wants to do nothing about it? The asia that is largely influenced by super radical islamic clerics? The Asia that will die off soon because its birth rate is so low that it won't replace its aging population? Or the Asia that is so reliant on American and other Western consumers that they have to continuously deflate their currency in order to keep their citizens from revolting against what is one of the largest plutocracies of all time?
Sure the west has problems but nowhere near Asia's.
The third paragraph is most crucial. Having said that, as an Asian I'm super puzzled with Western countries tendency to moralizing and lecturing other countries internal matter.
The West has also squandered its opportunity in the name of “non-discrimination” and “political correctness”. The right (with hindsight) response would have been to ban all flights / arrivals from China / Asia, but I guess that’s wrong-speak in the age of “open borders” as the only non-Nazi political option.
It seems that you agree that Western values are important, so you couldn't attack that part of the argument, and instead had to twist my speech into something that I never said, so that you could then attack what I never said. You have no credibility.
Only a coalition based in western white supremacy can thinks of a idea like AUKUS as a good idea. They didn't even collaborate with their QUAD allies or with ASEAN allies.
So Indonesia and Malaysia we will park some nuclear subs in your sea lanes of communication, don't care what you brown people think about it.
reply