Arjay,
Fair enough mate, that wealth didn't trickle down very far in my life, I can assure you, however, you do raise an interesting point. We DS's don't have any of that nasty Stalinist B/S to us, like Sweeden for the previous 25 years until recently, we believe in humanitarianism, elegatarianism, and a decent standard of living for ALL.

Something that could not be said of our current regieme, we are moving closer to the U.S.A. every day in some small way, I believe we have lost our true Australianism, by being so far up GW's bum. We seem to be a different type of people these days inflenced by U.S.A. consumerism, so much so that our personal overseas debt has hit a trillion, for on 20 million people, eventually it will all come crashing down, and people will say "we weren't warned"

Then old Pete "have one for the country mate" Costello will have the smirk on the other side of his face, if he does not manage to get out of Treasury before the collapse. The yanks have a huge budget deficeit, which Australians are told is bad, must depend on who you are I guess. If I'm still alive in the morning, please shoot me.

Onya Ben -so now I'm a kook and a maniac ? :) I'll add those to Ifry's list of names for me.

I feel our Western decline should be further explained.
-Economic decline
-Social decline

Economic, is based on the points I raised, with the emergence of the Asian tigers, though Malaysia and Singapore and Korea are hardly competitive these days on labor rates. The main problem is China and India, with Indonesia straggling along in the rear.

Our Economic decline should be segmented.
-'Manufacturing/Value added'
-'Agricultural'.

The current situation is that our government is couching the vested interests of the mining/resource/agricultural sector in terms of 'National Interest' when in reality its 'vested' interest.
They are blatantly sacrificing our industrial/manufacturing to this interest. Given that 'our' resources are being shipped out, and value added goods shipped back, being the price of getting access to markets for the mining/resource/agricultural it wreaks of 'raw power' at work rather than national interest.

Our social decline (as I see it) is where we have drifted from "Father knows best" to "DINK" Dual income no kids or a couple of inconvenient ones and 2 stressed out people who are mostly interested in personal existential fulfillment than true family life.

I accept the tag 'mania' re Christian values. I am indeed passionate about their value. There are 2. Love God, Love your neighbour. Most will accept the second, but not the first. I simply say that without the first the 2nd degenerates to 'love of convenience & opportunity'.

"Only one life, twill soon be past, I better start living hard and fast" ?

Humanism in my view is misguided sentimentality with no real foundation other than opinion.

Reg,

Interesting article but as noted above, why assume Confucianism to be at the locus of entrepreneuralism? The Shang (merchants) historically were outside the Examination/Agrianian system, which was buttressed by Confucianism. Poplar books on Conficianism, Guangxi and the 36 Strategies, side-step many historical realities, relating the nature (including the deceptive nature)of the Chinese merchant classes. Corrupt businessman could prove to be a major problem for the Chinese Communist Party, where regional developers, pronvincial mayors and the like create internal economic communities outside the centralised system. Your comment?

"Maybe, a new trade system (1933, 1944, 1973, now ?) or a war would save the West". By war, I don't mean the West with China. China is likely to watch Western/Islamic events, before it would set its eyes on Taiwan or Viet-nam. Historically, China wanted deference, rather dominance, except for near territories. I think Oz can readily be good friends with China and remain allies with the US/Eurpore (our civilization).

On the other hand, Diaspora countries, like Singapore, might try to ruin relationships with divisive comments about the West, while staying in the Commonwealth and under the Five Power Defence Pact.

However, economically, China needs to be only one-fifth as productive as the US to achieve the same GDP. This situation needs to managed towards mutual benefit.

China needs to self-generate innovation and be self-productive; else the US needs to retain its economic dominance. A large unproductive, non-innovative China and a failing US economy would be destabling: That new World order [c. 2030] might not be very nice.

In history, it is not unkown for the more advanced society to loose out to the less developed invader [military or economic].

Reg,

Your further comment on the above might stimulate this forum.

Also, note that Chinese "technology" tended not to be theory-based and pulse upwards mainly during periods of unification (Jin). Ancient China turned its back on the Mohists and the Greeks.

Needham's inventory catelogues technical achievement and scientific progress. While China did not go through a Dark Ages similar to the West, it didn't have a civilizational/progressive equivalent to applying Greek thought to practice.

I found this most interesting and will go and buy the book A Confucian Daoist Millennium. Where do I get a copy. Can Reg or someone refer me to a website.
Thanks
Sion