Killarney

You get any collection of old people together and they'll talk about the Good Old Days. Rose coloured glasses.

Hence the days of Comrade Stalin or Mao are remembered fondly by weirdos.

They'll also predictably say the Young Are Not As Good/Tough/Fit As We Were.

In my day we trusted that churches were full of good people that you could trust with children.

Um, er, yes well....
Apparently Knox Grammar Headmaster has been found to lie - he knew about a number of cases of teachers abusing boys. The church and the school pretended it hadn't happened.

How many other cases?

And these people are going to preach at us about the sacred bonds of marriage, chastity, God, etc?

The good old days- yeah.

Peter,

Embracing China involves risks for Australia [05/05/2008] Peter Coates [Plantagenet].

The fall of Fitzgibbon? [31/03/2009] As above.

Thanks for directing me to your two treatises. I read them and a few of the comments with interest. It was somewhat disturbing to read how some posters so eagerly strive to demonstrate a deplorably meagre and superficial knowledge of East Asian and western Pacific history during the 20th century, a subject of abiding interest to me. Any historian worth his salt is fully aware that it was the communists who were the main assailants of the Japanese forces who occupied China. Chiang occupied himself committing rapine, pillage, torture and a multitude of other awful atrocities on his own people in southern China trying to rid himself of communists. He committed the same crimes on the native malay peoples who occupied much of Taiwan. Even the Americans were sickened by Chiang's ruthless occupation. He exemplified the worst in the warlord tradition. Only recently has the Taipei government issued a comprehensive apology to the descendants of the native inhabitants of Taiwan for the treatment they suffered under Chiang and his Kuomintang.

These events are not in dispute, but the problem is that they hardly ever become public knowledge because the victor writes the history and issues the communiques.
"The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth"? The best that can be said is that it's someone's truth.........just not everyone's.

Waverley, Tuesday, 13 September 2016 8:36:32 AM

"When did communists become more or less OK?"

Not so much OK, but not quite the dangerous overbearing big brother that capitalist powers threatened us with unless we razed village after village with napalm, poisoned thousands of acres of forests and agricultural land with chemical warfare weapons like agent orange and bombed the bejeezus out of bordering lands of peoples not involved in the conflict.

"When did communists become more or less OK?"

When people perceived that communism was not so much of a threat to our way of life, especially since the collapse of the Soviet Union and its progress toward a capitalist economy. But they are doing it from a perspective of history vastly different from other capitalist economies. We become suspicious and apprehensive when their view of their destiny differs from our view of their destiny and vice versa. This applies to the reunification of Germany to a large degree.

"When did communists become more or less OK?"

When it became apparent that communism was not quite so much conforming with the cartoon representation of a map of S.E.Asia with huge arrows pointing south to a vulnerable empty Australia, accompanied by some doom-laden headline about "yellow peril" or "red menace".

"When did communists become more or less OK?"

When the communist-governed nations of Vietnam, Kampuchea and Laos are pursuing capitalist development at every turn and pay lip service to communist doctrine.

"When did communists become more or less OK?"

When the world's policeman decided that the new bogeyman of a nuclear-armed Islam is a far greater threat than a nuclear-armed communist. Cont.......

Cont..........."Why do we have to kneel down and give China whatever it wants?"

By "we" do you mean the whole of humankind that is not Chinese or just Australians? Assuming the latter, I think you are becoming a little xenophobic. Just recently China was denied a large investment proposal [as was one from Vietnam and I must admit this was a bit of a surprise]. Your complaint is symptomatic of a latent fear that there are millions to our north who are prepared to work harder than we do, who will do whatever work is necessary, who have centuries-old traditions of working co-operatively, who are clever and innovative. It unsettles us that the prospect of an easy life to a government-funded pension is vulnerable to change more so now than at any time in our history. Tremendously costly hot warfare is becoming an anachronism. Economic power is accomplished with far less cost and with virtually no disruption to mercantile progress. It is only if we fall behind in the race for education that we should be afraid.

"...now it's turning from the South China Sea (so called) to Japan?"

There's an irony in that which the Japanese will appreciate to their chagrin. After the brutality, atrocity, slaughter, rapine and plunder they perpetrated now a rejuvenated and powerful China turns its attention to Japan, the old antagonist for 14 years [1931-45]. If anyone deserved a shared occupation of Japan with the USA it was China. But that's another story entirely, one that I would enjoy discussing with other interested parties should the opportunity present itself.

Killarney, Wednesday, 14 September 2016 12:29:00 AM

"'Yes, none of us like communism and would not choose to live the communist life.'

That is very much a learned (brainwashed) belief in the West under capitalism, but it doesn't hold up to scrutiny."

Touche Killarney, indeed my observation was held up to scrutiny and was found to be not only incorrect but dogmatic. But I'll not spend more than a few moments of regret and self-recrimination.

I have seen video news interviews with elderly Russian citizens who harken for the Golden Years of Stalinism. I'm pretty sure it was about the time that Boris Yeltsin was in contention for the premiership. A few elderly people spoke of the Stalin years. Your admonition brought back the memory.

Of course when we consider the polls you present [2010 to 2013] and those who effect a nostalgia for earlier regimes, it should be remembered that a substantial [but forever indefinite] number could well be counted among those caught up in the Gorbachev institutions of "perestroikha" [1986] and especially "glaznost" in 1988 and the subsequent throwing off of the communist yoke thus giving voice to nationalist aspirations among the various members of the union. The turmoil that followed involved bloody conflict and social upheaval that very few were ready for. It is not so surprising then that the experience aroused a cynical view of a largely unregulated market driven economy as opposed to the highly regulated one that could be relied upon, even if people had to wait hours in a queue for a few loaves of bread in some places.

For a great majority of those directly involved an almost mystical certainty was replaced by uncertainty. Supply and demand was driven by the personal profit motive and not by a state imposed work ethic.

I think legitimate questions may be raised as to the bias of many who voted. I firmly believe that their children will benefit well from the sacrifices of their parents