Sydney University is one of the Big 8 universities most infected by both communist Chinese influence and addiction to international students’ money. It has been infiltrated by the agents of qiawou and the faculty isn’t the least bit bothered as long as the scrilla keeps pouring in.
What is this qiawou (pronounced chiow-wu)? It means ‘overseas management of China’s affairs’, and its practical translations involve co-opting every level of the host society to a favourable view of China. The long-term purpose is to beguile that host nation into a pliant, obsequious servant state. So far, the Chinese diaspora promoting quiawou has been going great guns in our top universities.
Little surprise then that Sydney University rag Honi Soit, has published a propaganda piece purporting to be a ‘quantitative analysis’ of the supposed media bias against Chinese students.
For those lucky enough not to have attended university, a ‘quantitative analysis’ means they read a bunch of newspapers and underlined whatever passage they figured used slanted terminology. Thus exposed, they uncovered the “hidden ideology” in patterns of language, all which point to us Australians being bad. One wonders how many passages would have been underlined in a Chinese state newspaper given it’s all commie-speak, but we digress.
This exercise resulted in their deducing three key media representations of Chinese students: “commodity”, “aggressor” and “victim”. By reducing Chinese students to these three criteria they concluded that Australia is xenophobic, racist, and unable to empathise with people here to take everything we’ve got.
But it wasn’t just the scrutiny of news speak in this observational study which helped the Honi Soit kids reach their conclusions, they also used their own “gut feeling”. And here we were convinced they don’t have any guts.
The Chinese have a word for those politically-correct bozos over at Honi Soit — ‘Baizuo’ means the ‘white left’ who ‘only care about topics such as immigration, minorities, LGBT, and the environment’. This is the opinion of the majority of Chinese students, it is the ‘minority’ which sides with their global-leftist perspective.
When they use this word, they are usually laughing derisively. The only other time Chinese laugh is when tiny animals are being tortured.
Yet, it goes over the heads of those SJW saps at Honi Soit just how perverse it is that the Chinese have come to exploit democratic principles such as free speech to advocate against free speech. It is double the strength lead-balloon-effect they don’t realise how they’re actually enabling them by suggesting there is something parochial and unreasonable in querying the intentions of Chinese students. This is despite all we’ve come to know about their cheating, bullying, bloc building and scamming their way to permanent residency.
In fact, the article’s authors had the baffling density to write, “While Chinese interference in Australia seems all-pervasive and ever-present, it is actually a very recent national worry.”
Well, knock us down with a feather! Things were OK until the “Sinophobic” media began actually reporting on this stuff. We guess this is Honi Soit’s ‘out of sight, out of mind’ philosophy of willing non-resistance.
Another doozy is “Instead of featuring a protestor explaining their reasons for protesting, it [the media] outsources this work to official sources, the Chinese ambassador, thus framing the protestors as devoid of any real agency or independent thought.” Heaven forfend — imagine a mob of pro-Beijing protestors being devoid of any real agency or independent thought! That would make them model citizens of Communist China!
The whole article is assembled with this waterboard logic and it’s extremely disturbing given that these propeller heads are slated to be future influencers and Beijing already owns them by the brain straps.