CHINA IS A DEMOCRACY!!!

[BigBallinStalin]

Considering the history books show that China was a democracy, the onus is yours to prove it wasn't.

Considering that the democracy was put in place, supported by the west and continues to receive support from the west, it's up to to prove it was not if that is what you wish to contend.

I did not say that European powers controlled communist China in the 50's. What I did say is that China didn't shake western influence until the 60's. Being that you have talked shit up to this point, again it's up to you to prove otherwise.

Challenge accepted!

Here's me not "talking shit":

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=207303&view=unread#p4543686

1. Since "up to this point" includes that post,
2. and since that is not "talking shit,"
3. then it follows that I have not talked shit up to this point.

QED.


Suck my logic, shickbrits.

[Gillipig]

Given how poorly our western style democracies are working right now I find it difficult to argue that anyone should adopt it. Before I can recommend my country's form of government to other people I need to believe it's a) competent, and b) sustainable, and it's neither of those two.

[BigBallinStalin]

Given how poorly our western style democracies are working right now I find it difficult to argue that anyone should adopt it. Before I can recommend my country's form of government to other people I need to believe it's a) competent, and b) sustainable, and it's neither of those two.

"Poorly"? Do you realize how rich you are compared to the rest of the world? You're wealthy despite the incompetence of democratic governments because markets are mostly pulling the deadweight of politicians, bureaucrats, interest groups, and especially ungrateful voters.

Liberal democracy is a form of government in which representative democracy operates under the principles of liberalism, i.e. protecting the rights of the individual, which are generally enshrined in law. It is characterised by fair, free, and competitive elections between multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society, and the equal protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties, and political freedoms for all persons.

That's generally what I mean by 'democracy'. We know what institutions are conducive to freedom and prosperity, but we don't know how to transplant those institutions. Giving post-war Iraq the US Constitution doesn't really work (nor did occupying it and forcing democracy on it for 8+ years). China's ongoing prosperity was mostly from freeing up its markets. South Korea and Taiwan were ruled by military dictatorships up until roughly the 1980s, and they're the starlings of prosperity in that region.

In other words, institutional change toward greater prosperity is not as simple as copying Western democratic policies, but it is as simple as accepting that liberalism granted under markets is incredibly beneficial. The issue is what's the best way to support markets in order to enable people to improve themselves, and there's no clear answers (because any political process is inherently corrupt, inefficient, and retarded).

[Gillipig]

Given how poorly our western style democracies are working right now I find it difficult to argue that anyone should adopt it. Before I can recommend my country's form of government to other people I need to believe it's a) competent, and b) sustainable, and it's neither of those two.

"Poorly"? Do you realize how rich you are compared to the rest of the world? You're wealthy despite the incompetence of democratic governments because markets are mostly pulling the deadweight of politicians, bureaucrats, interest groups, and especially ungrateful voters.

Again, we live on the fruits of yesterday, our countries were not always this incapable, and that is why in the current day we have what we have. But what we do today is what determines how our lives will be tomorrow. Tomorrow does not belong to us because we are doing so many things wrong today. Your country should be the most worried because you're doing so many things wrong, but you are the least worried, namely because you're americans, so you live in a country with an astonishingly low ability of self reflection and criticism. Criticism is critical, hence why when something is critical, it is crucial. Optimism on the other hand, well that's optional .

[shickingbrits]

BBS, if you can convince 1.6 bn people that Mao and the CCP didn't fight against democracy because it wasn't your version of democracy and that they should be democratic according to your version without being forced to by you but merely because you are right, then all the more power to you. Bring WWIII on.

[BigBallinStalin]

Given how poorly our western style democracies are working right now I find it difficult to argue that anyone should adopt it. Before I can recommend my country's form of government to other people I need to believe it's a) competent, and b) sustainable, and it's neither of those two.

"Poorly"? Do you realize how rich you are compared to the rest of the world? You're wealthy despite the incompetence of democratic governments because markets are mostly pulling the deadweight of politicians, bureaucrats, interest groups, and especially ungrateful voters.

Again, we live on the fruits of yesterday, our countries were not always this incapable, and that is why in the current day we have what we have. But what we do today is what determines how our lives will be tomorrow. Tomorrow does not belong to us because we are doing so many things wrong today. Your country should be the most worried because you're doing so many things wrong, but you are the least worried, namely because you're americans, so you live in a country with an astonishingly low ability of self reflection and criticism. Criticism is critical, hence why when something is critical, it is crucial. Optimism on the other hand, well that's optional .

Hey! Your comment gave me a great idea for a new marketing campaign:

Sweden: Land of the Ungratefuls.

But yeah, most people should be critical of their governments, but the payoff is very low--especially in regard to voting for the appropriate change, so we get this negative feedback loop of stupidity. Another issue is that sustained criticism falters because very few citizens investigate the legislative acts of politicians. Instead, voters demand "change," and politicians say, "you got it, buddy!" but then draft legislation which favors various interest groups (especially producers). Voters fail to follow through as they nap on their couches in front of Fox News or CBS.

[mrswdk]

BBS, if you can convince 1.6 bn people that Mao and the CCP didn't fight against democracy

Who is saying that Mao 'fought democracy'? According to China's constitution (which was written by Mao) China still is a democracy.

In fact, at present China has 9 different political parties. The only snag is that you can't join any of them without CCP approval

tl;dr no one in China is saying that Mao fought against democracy except you

[BigBallinStalin]

BBS, if you can convince 1.6 bn people that Mao and the CCP didn't fight against democracy because it wasn't your version of democracy and that they should be democratic according to your version without being forced to by you but merely because you are right, then all the more power to you. Bring WWIII on.

Are you mentally well today? The only input I have of your mental status is your comments and your avatar. I hope that it's nothing serious.

[PLAYER57832]

Considering the history books show that China was a democracy, the onus is yours to prove it wasn't.

You must mean those published in recent China, approved their government.

Disproving that just requires reading other sources...[I will leave that to BBS and the like, since I think they can more quickly point you to some good, verified source]

[shickingbrits]

Why do I need to disprove it?

If democracy as qualified according to BBS is to reach China, it depends on the potential electorate. The potential electorate was raised believing that Mao overcame democracy and the CCP has brought the Chinese people out of oppression and to the forefront of our times.

If this is what the electorate believe and they basically feel that China is doing better than any other country, why would they revert to what they saw was a failed form of government?

Although Mrswdk OP is probably (?) a joke, it's not far from what people in China do believe, that the CCP not only defeated Taiwan militarily, but have a stronger form of government currently as well. When Taiwan does, if ever, return to China, then that will signal the final defeat of democracy for China. Its not an armed defeat. During the economic crisis of 2008, the Taiwanese voted in a pro-China government and since then many cross border agreements have been set up for the benefit of the failing Taiwanese economy. Taiwan found a new daddy.

Since the return of HK and Macau to China, they have sought to bring Taiwan back into the fold. Its only really a matter of time.

BBS and others seem to want to impose just the opposite on China which the Chinese populace want for themselves, with a different understanding than the Chinese have and with his own failing country as an example of why not to be democratic.

[BigBallinStalin]

Why do I need to disprove it?

If democracy as qualified according to BBS is to reach China, it depends on the potential electorate. The potential electorate was raised believing that Mao overcame democracy and the CCP has brought the Chinese people out of oppression and to the forefront of our times.

If this is what the electorate believe and they basically feel that China is doing better than any other country, why would they revert to what they saw was a failed form of government?

Although Mrswdk OP is probably (?) a joke, it's not far from what people in China do believe, that the CCP not only defeated Taiwan militarily, but have a stronger form of government currently as well. When Taiwan does, if ever, return to China, then that will signal the final defeat of democracy for China. Its not an armed defeat. During the economic crisis of 2008, the Taiwanese voted in a pro-China government and since then many cross border agreements have been set up for the benefit of the failing Taiwanese economy. Taiwan found a new daddy.

Since the return of HK and Macau to China, they have sought to bring Taiwan back into the fold. Its only really a matter of time.

BBS and others seem to want to impose just the opposite on China which the Chinese populace want for themselves, with a different understanding than the Chinese have and with his own failing country as an example of why not to be democratic.

Understand this post:

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=207303&view=unread#p4543998

Then correctly update your post.

[shickingbrits]

Look, I don't know what you think this is, but it isn't that.

China will not of itself become democratic for a very long time to come. Its not in its own interests and since the people are quite content, they don't feel its in their interests. They have been brought up in a different world from you and me. They don't want our world, they actually look down on it.

Now correctly update your post.

[BigBallinStalin]

Look, I don't know what you think this is, but it isn't that.

China will not of itself become democratic for a very long time to come. Its not in its own interests and since the people are quite content, they don't feel its in their interests. They have been brought up in a different world from you and me. They don't want our world, they actually look down on it.

Now correctly update your post.

What is "this," "that", and "it"?

Also, how do you know the preferences of one billion Chinese people? Did you conduct the world's largest but least known survey?

And after discovering their preferences, did you stop and think: well, wait a minute, are the current institutional outcomes determined only by the preferences of civilians--or does an autocratic government, which is less beholden to the public, somehow have something to do with the current outcomes? Maybe the government actually shifts the preferences, or it prevents certain preferences from being realized...

[oVo]

Given how poorly our western style democracies are working right now I find it difficult to argue that anyone should adopt it. Before I can recommend my country's form of government to other people I need to believe it's a) competent, and b) sustainable, and it's neither of those two.

Human participation, corruption and the financial elite
make a legitimate democracy impossible.

Communism has the same problem.

[mrswdk]

The potential electorate was raised believing that Mao overcame democracy

So you didn't read the bit where I explained that China's current constitution, written by Mao, says that China is a democracy?

the CCP... defeated Taiwan militarily

The CCP 'fought Taiwan'? I don't have nearly enough hands to perform the facepalm that comment deserves.

Looks like you're going to have to take your Modern Chinese History module again next semester. Bad luck.

[Mr Changsha]

Look, I don't know what you think this is, but it isn't that.

China will not of itself become democratic for a very long time to come. Its not in its own interests and since the people are quite content, they don't feel its in their interests. They have been brought up in a different world from you and me. They don't want our world, they actually look down on it.

Now correctly update your post.

I would think the vast majority of chinese would love China to become more democratic. I base that comment not on some argumentative hunch, but rather having lived in China for 11 years and spoken to thousands of them, I actually have something of a handle on the chinese.

Now that is not to say they want to copy the american or european systems. They no doubt want democracy 'chinese style' just as they want socialism in the same way and I can't say I blame them for that at all.

Personally (and it is just my opinion you understand) I think that the chinese may begin to vote on their national leaders (say choosing the chairman) within a few decades if things stay stable and peaceful. Quite possibly the choice will be of candidates pre-approved by the party. Will it be perfect? Of course not but franky the american system is a disgrace at national level as well so lets all try to find a large country that does operate in any way democratically and fairly.

Finally, it is quite insulting to the chinese to stupidly assume they don't want or get democracy. That is utter bollocks to be honest with you. The vast majority of them were peasants (with all that term implies) until relatively recently. Yet, as I see this huge and powerful property-owning middle class forming I know clearly that as more people feel invested in the future of China they will want and demand representation.

And they will get it inevitably and in some form. It won't be perfect but then nothing is really, is it?

[shickingbrits]

Look, I don't know what you think this is, but it isn't that.

China will not of itself become democratic for a very long time to come. Its not in its own interests and since the people are quite content, they don't feel its in their interests. They have been brought up in a different world from you and me. They don't want our world, they actually look down on it.

Now correctly update your post.

I would think the vast majority of chinese would love China to become more democratic. I base that comment not on some argumentative hunch, but rather having lived in China for 11 years and spoken to thousands of them, I actually have something of a handle on the chinese.

Now that is not to say they want to copy the american or european systems. They no doubt want democracy 'chinese style' just as they want socialism in the same way and I can't say I blame them for that at all.

Personally (and it is just my opinion you understand) I think that the chinese may begin to vote on their national leaders (say choosing the chairman) within a few decades if things stay stable and peaceful. Quite possibly the choice will be of candidates pre-approved by the party. Will it be perfect? Of course not but franky the american system is a disgrace at national level as well so lets all try to find a large country that does operate in any way democratically and fairly.

Finally, it is quite insulting to the chinese to stupidly assume they don't want or get democracy. That is utter bollocks to be honest with you. The vast majority of them were peasants (with all that term implies) until relatively recently. Yet, as I see this huge and powerful property-owning middle class forming I know clearly that as more people feel invested in the future of China they will want and demand representation.

And they will get it inevitably and in some form. It won't be perfect but then nothing is really, is it?

After living in China for 14 years and in Asia for 20 plus, marrying a Chinese woman, spoken to thousands of Chinese in two dialects, I would say your hunch that I've stupidly assumed based on an argument hunch is wrong.

While the vast majority of Chinese people would like and perhaps will vote in the chairman in a few decades, the vast majority are afraid of the vast majority.

"Yet, as I see this huge and powerful property-owning middle class forming I know clearly that as more people feel invested in the future of China they will want and demand representation."

That property ownership came through the CCP. What you are saying is that the CCP who created the framework for China's wealth will somehow lose the confidence of the people for making them wealthy. I would say that most Chinese people are quite content and the suggesting that China will become democratic is like saying the US will become communist.

[shickingbrits]

The potential electorate was raised believing that Mao overcame democracy

So you didn't read the bit where I explained that China's current constitution, written by Mao, says that China is a democracy?

the CCP... defeated Taiwan militarily

The CCP 'fought Taiwan'? I don't have nearly enough hands to perform the facepalm that comment deserves.

Looks like you're going to have to take your Modern Chinese History module again next semester. Bad luck.

Sorry, I forgot how fragile you were. The CCP fought the KMT. The CCP being the current PRC and the KMT more or less being their equivalent in Taiwan.

[shickingbrits]

Look, I don't know what you think this is, but it isn't that.

China will not of itself become democratic for a very long time to come. Its not in its own interests and since the people are quite content, they don't feel its in their interests. They have been brought up in a different world from you and me. They don't want our world, they actually look down on it.

Now correctly update your post.

What is "this," "that", and "it"?

Also, how do you know the preferences of one billion Chinese people? Did you conduct the world's largest but least known survey?

And after discovering their preferences, did you stop and think: well, wait a minute, are the current institutional outcomes determined only by the preferences of civilians--or does an autocratic government, which is less beholden to the public, somehow have something to do with the current outcomes? Maybe the government actually shifts the preferences, or it prevents certain preferences from being realized...

There was an article published in one of the most popular Chinese rags yesterday saying the US should convert to communism. My wife thought this was a brilliant idea. You see how much trouble the Americans have and how good China is, she said.

What this is, is you doing that. It's you thinking how great BBS's thinking and knowledge and understanding is and how the rest of the world should benefit from it. Just as diametrically opposed as you would be to communism, so are most Chinese people to democracy. Whereas you are from a failing nation, and the Chinese are from a thriving nation, I would suggest your attempts to encapsulate China within your ideals, which are so prominently failing, is misguided.

That you can't grasp that people have different and by the evidence better concepts of government than your own is quite astounding.

[Mr Changsha]

Look, I don't know what you think this is, but it isn't that.

China will not of itself become democratic for a very long time to come. Its not in its own interests and since the people are quite content, they don't feel its in their interests. They have been brought up in a different world from you and me. They don't want our world, they actually look down on it.

Now correctly update your post.

What is "this," "that", and "it"?

Also, how do you know the preferences of one billion Chinese people? Did you conduct the world's largest but least known survey?

And after discovering their preferences, did you stop and think: well, wait a minute, are the current institutional outcomes determined only by the preferences of civilians--or does an autocratic government, which is less beholden to the public, somehow have something to do with the current outcomes? Maybe the government actually shifts the preferences, or it prevents certain preferences from being realized...

There was an article published in one of the most popular Chinese rags yesterday saying the US should convert to communism. My wife thought this was a brilliant idea. You see how much trouble the Americans have and how good China is, she said.

What this is, is you doing that. It's you thinking how great BBS's thinking and knowledge and understanding is and how the rest of the world should benefit from it. Just as diametrically opposed as you would be to communism, so are most Chinese people to democracy. Whereas you are from a failing nation, and the Chinese are from a thriving nation, I would suggest your attempts to encapsulate China within your ideals, which are so prominently failing, is misguided.

That you can't grasp that people have different and by the evidence better concepts of government than your own is quite astounding.

Ah...so you've gone completely native?

Where are you based in China? I can't help but notice the canadian flag on your profile but one must assume you are using a proxy?

[shickingbrits]

I was mostly based in Guangzhou. I brought my family to a tranquil Canadian village because of my son's asthma.

[TA1LGUNN3R]

Look, I don't know what you think this is, but it isn't that.

China will not of itself become democratic for a very long time to come. Its not in its own interests and since the people are quite content, they don't feel its in their interests. They have been brought up in a different world from you and me. They don't want our world, they actually look down on it.

Now correctly update your post.

What is "this," "that", and "it"?

Also, how do you know the preferences of one billion Chinese people? Did you conduct the world's largest but least known survey?

And after discovering their preferences, did you stop and think: well, wait a minute, are the current institutional outcomes determined only by the preferences of civilians--or does an autocratic government, which is less beholden to the public, somehow have something to do with the current outcomes? Maybe the government actually shifts the preferences, or it prevents certain preferences from being realized...

There was an article published in one of the most popular Chinese rags yesterday saying the US should convert to communism. My wife thought this was a brilliant idea. You see how much trouble the Americans have and how good China is, she said.

What this is, is you doing that. It's you thinking how great BBS's thinking and knowledge and understanding is and how the rest of the world should benefit from it. Just as diametrically opposed as you would be to communism, so are most Chinese people to democracy. Whereas you are from a failing nation, and the Chinese are from a thriving nation, I would suggest your attempts to encapsulate China within your ideals, which are so prominently failing, is misguided.

That you can't grasp that people have different and by the evidence better concepts of government than your own is quite astounding.

Awfully amenable attitude you have, considering you believe atheists/"evolutionists" to be lacking certain mores as well as responsible for so many atrocities.

This openness to the Chinese style of gov't or other cultures but disdain for the scientist I find interesting. Not to mention China's official atheism and especial scorn for the Abrahamic religions.

-TG

[shickingbrits]

I don't disdain scientists, as they study God. I disdain scientists who go against science itself to claim there is no God.

Democracy is the will of the people. As Vietnam showed, the will of the people was to be communist. As China shows, the will of the people is to be communist. I don't think that communism is necessarily the best solution, nor do I think being a unified entity is in the people of China's best interest. What I do think is that attempting to impose your beliefs on others is undemocratic and as such democracy cannot be thrust upon a people and still be democratic.

There are as many forms of democracy as there are democratic nations. Isn't this a good thing? Isn't it also a good thing that there are non-democratic countries? Doesn't this allow for competition in government policy whereby a nation's people can compare their own government and their own results to those of other nations?

The US, being exceptional, can't use the examples of other nations to compare themselves to. They are unequal to the US. This is what I object to in both nations and individuals. The US has given itself leave mainly due to its once dominant status to declare itself above accountability. This is no different from a person who chooses an ideology that declares themselves above others.

You could say that the CCP has done this. That the realms of power have been limited to the chosen few. Absolutely, but no more than the US. The average American has as much chance of wielding political power as the average Chinese person. The difference is twofold:

1. Without a competing body, the CCP cannot blame the results on a synthesis enforced by a second party,
2. As the sole authority, they cannot excuse their misdeeds through incompetence.

In short, China has to assume responsibility for their actions like a scientist who believes in God must assume responsibility for their actions. The US can "Do what it will" as anything it does can and is excused.

[BigBallinStalin]

Look, I don't know what you think this is, but it isn't that.

China will not of itself become democratic for a very long time to come. Its not in its own interests and since the people are quite content, they don't feel its in their interests. They have been brought up in a different world from you and me. They don't want our world, they actually look down on it.

Now correctly update your post.

What is "this," "that", and "it"?

Also, how do you know the preferences of one billion Chinese people? Did you conduct the world's largest but least known survey?

And after discovering their preferences, did you stop and think: well, wait a minute, are the current institutional outcomes determined only by the preferences of civilians--or does an autocratic government, which is less beholden to the public, somehow have something to do with the current outcomes? Maybe the government actually shifts the preferences, or it prevents certain preferences from being realized...

There was an article published in one of the most popular Chinese rags yesterday saying the US should convert to communism. My wife thought this was a brilliant idea. You see how much trouble the Americans have and how good China is, she said.

What this is, is you doing that. It's you thinking how great BBS's thinking and knowledge and understanding is and how the rest of the world should benefit from it. Just as diametrically opposed as you would be to communism, so are most Chinese people to democracy. Whereas you are from a failing nation, and the Chinese are from a thriving nation, I would suggest your attempts to encapsulate China within your ideals, which are so prominently failing, is misguided.

That you can't grasp that people have different and by the evidence better concepts of government than your own is quite astounding.

Oh, I get it. So, you didn't read my post.

Here ya go:

We know what institutions are conducive to freedom and prosperity, but we don't know how to transplant those institutions. Giving post-war Iraq the US Constitution doesn't really work (nor did occupying it and forcing democracy on it for 8+ years). China's ongoing prosperity was mostly from freeing up its markets. South Korea and Taiwan were ruled by military dictatorships up until roughly the 1980s, and they're the starlings of prosperity in that region.

In other words, institutional change toward greater prosperity is not as simple as copying Western democratic policies, but it is as simple as accepting that liberalism granted under markets is incredibly beneficial. The issue is what's the best way to support markets in order to enable people to improve themselves, and there's no clear answers (because any political process is inherently corrupt, inefficient, and retarded).


See the underlined parts?

See how they don't jive with your bolded summary of my views?

[shickingbrits]

China was never very liberal with its markets. Many factories receive export only status, multinationals found they, in general, could only profit in China by forming JVs, many industries are still government directed.

See the part of your underlined article that isn't underlined?