authors (in fact, any author): That they are prejudiced against China. Such may very well be the case. However, the real question should be if there is any truth to what has been written. There is no doubt that some authors cannot find anything good to write about China. But, what if an article has an element of truth? Should the whole article be rejected and everything the author has ever written be suspect?
That is something you have to figure out for yourself. Sometimes, even in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence, people continue to believe what they want to believe. It is no longer a matter of fact or fiction; it has become an emotional issue. And it is difficult to reason with anyone who is ruled by emotion.
So, let's accept that John Garnaut is rabidly prejudiced against China. Where in this particular article are the lies, the twists of the truth, the deliberate attempts to villify with incorrect facts?