What's new

Major difference between China meritocracy and many other autocratic countries.

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
3,713
-1
8,785
Country
China
Location
United States
China is meritocracy.

The difference between autocracy and meritocracy is where those elites come from, whom are they responsible for, who do the supervision.

Most of China elites in the government come from the bottom of the society. They climb the political career ladder like in any big enterprises. Performance, leadership, responsibilities, accountability are the KPIs.

In autocratic system, the elites may base on blood, nepotism, caste system, or theocracy. Those elites were born with a silver spoon in their mouth.

I think that's the major difference between China meritocracy and many other autocratic countries.
 
Last edited:

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
3,713
-1
8,785
Country
China
Location
United States
What is the ultimate test of a political system?

Selection and election: How China chooses its leaders


The three ‘genetic defects’ of the Western model

Is it fair for the West to criticize China's human rights record?
 

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
3,713
-1
8,785
Country
China
Location
United States
Selection and election: Accountability
USA and European democracy's accountability is after election, in which case, the mass may elect an a$$hole and regret to make him step down. In history there are quite some figures who are very good at manipulating the mass, such as Hitler, Mussolini, or Trump. When he step down, damage was made.

We can clearly see most of leaders in developing countries are not accountable at all comparing with China in recent 40 years. Many leaders in developed countries are opportunities, such as Sarkozy, Francios Hollande, Silvio Berlusconi and so on. George W. Bush has no brain, Obama is a typical politician who focus on votes only, and then Trump.

Selecting a wise leader in western political system is almost impossible after cold war. Most of the leaders only interested in either his own interest or party interest. Of course the mass can regret and abandon the politicians.

Italians abandoned their leaders repeatedly:
2011 Mario Monti 1 year, 163 days in office
2013 Enrico Letta 300 days in office
2014 MatteoRenzi 2 years, 294 days in office
2016 Paolo Gentiloni 1 year, 171 days in office
2018 Giuseppe Conte 1 year, 9 days in office

Japanese abandoned their leaders repeatedly:
1989 Sōsuke Uno 69 days
1989 Toshiki Kaifu 2 years and 88 days
1991 Kiichi Miyazawa 1 year and 278 days
1993 Morihiro Hosokawa 263 days
1994 Tsutomu Hata 64 days
1994 Tomiichi Murayama 1 year and 196 days
1996 Ryūtarō Hashimoto 2 years and 201 days
1998 Keizō Obuchi 2 years and 201 days
2000 Yoshirō Mori 1 year and 22 days
2001 Junichirō Koizumi 5 years and 154 days
2006 Shinzō Abe 1 year and 1 day
2007 Yasuo Fukuda 365 days
2008 Tarō Asō 358 days
2009 Yukio Hatoyama 266 days
2010 Naoto Kan 1 year and 87 days
2011 Yoshihiko Noda 1 year and 116 days
 

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
3,713
-1
8,785
Country
China
Location
United States
A good system should select leader more wisely. The west should learn from China on this regard.

China meritocracy has long history and use imperial examination system (科举制度) to select elites which is different from western one which is base on blood. China has been using imperial examination system since Sui Dynasty(隋朝) which is 1400 years ago.

The central goverment has schools(中央党校) and Organization Department(中共组织部). There is a TED video on youtube for this:


The mass enjoy the election show. But it's just an illusion that the public can make wise decision, most of them barely manage their own life. Half of the US marriage end up divorce. If half of the population do NOT have good judgement on husbands or wives, how can they manage the President position? The mass are neither professionals on economy, nor foreign policy.

The Chinese system has flaws, every system has it's pros and cons. We criticize our system more than anyone else on earth. We Chinese always self-check our system since Records of the Grand Historian(史记) in 94 BC. and Zizhi Tongjian(资治通鉴). That's our oldest tradition.

Culturally, Chinese are historians in the core.
 
Last edited:

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
3,713
-1
8,785
Country
China
Location
United States
Let's use US tracking record, see how well it works.

George W. Bush
Entered Afghanistan and invaded Iraq. The Bush Administration planned to take out 7 countries in 5 years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Lybia, Somalia, Sudan, Iran.
The Plan -- according to U.S. General Wesley Clark (Ret.)

Clinton couple who are deeply corrupted.
Clinton Foundation

Obama, whose cabinet are fulfilled by Citigroup.
Citigroup chose Obama’s 2008 cabinet, WikiLeaks document reveals

The elites sold ordinary Americans out. The Rich get richer, the poor get poorer. Who represent the ordinary Americans? The congress?
U.S. Congressional Approval Stable at 21%

The way US select president can be traced back in Acropolis of Athens in mid-4th century BC, with thousands of citizens who can vote. Even though, Socrates was sentenced to death. Direct election may work with very small population who knew the candidates very well, it won't work with population in US scale. More likely opportunist again and again.

A book recommend:
The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind.

In 5th century BC, Confucius said: "民可使由之不可使知之", it means the government should let the mass live freely, the politics should be handled by professionals, not the mass.
 

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
3,713
-1
8,785
Country
China
Location
United States
Democracy =/= western democracy =/= US democracy.

US democracy is the worst form of democracy. The US founders will strongly disagree current US democracy practice if you have ever read The Federalist Papers

What US and west in general political system right now is Moneyocracy. It's almost impossible to get rid of money influence if you combine capitalism and western democracy together. Once you get on that train, you have no chance to get out of it.

US Tripartite System, the separation of political power among a legislature, an executive, and a judiciary looks very good. It was designed by US founders with idealism. It's not something evolved naturally in human history, it's was born in a very special environment which is Free North America.

What I mean Free North America is:
1, Completely genocide native American Indians. You get a land without historical disputes, without race divergence, without language divergence, without regional conflicts, without religion conflicts.
2, Full fill this land with labors from Europe, which has been civilized for thousands of years.
3, Unlimited natural resource comparing with the total population during industrialization. Especially oil, coal, iron, water.
4, Isolated environment and protected by 2 oceans

In such a special environment, they made US constitution, Tripartite System. With European citizens which were civilized for thousands of years, they apply Rule of Law on this continent.
 

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
3,713
-1
8,785
Country
China
Location
United States
The democracy ideology was initially invented in small city like Athens. UK Great Charter limited the power of King by parliament and introduced Rule of Law. US introduced tripartite system which distributed the power further.

From historical perspective, it's progressive. Better than Kingdom of course.

But regarding social development and stability for developing countries, it might lead to disaster. The tripartite system was designed to limited the power of President/Prime Minister. The check and balance mechanism use certain process to make sure it works within the law. All seems very good and reassuring.

But who limit the power and viciousness of media and MASS?

The tripartite system provide a perfect platform for party struggle. The medias have been weaponized and play a key role to add fuel to the fire. Money is so important in modern elections that politicians bow to tycoons. The party struggle is not only between parties, but also incite their voters and fight with each other.

In old days, the medias are more or less controlled or influenced by the country. Nowadays, new media dominate the market, Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Reddit, and many others. All those new medias are controlled by multinational corporations, especially US corporations.

As a developing country, how to survive?
 

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
3,713
-1
8,785
Country
China
Location
United States
All establishment will try to grab as much interest as possible in every countries throughout human history. It can be a political group, or intellectual elites, or clergies, or super rich.

The political structure of US is one of the best bed to breed those interest group. The so called one man one vote is easy to manipulate, many Americans are mostly brainwashed either by liberal or conservatives. The so called tripartite political system give interest group enough leverage to play against ordinary Americans. The so called democracy became vetocracy. The so called freedom of speech became conspiracy and propaganda colosseum. The so called uncensored media are corrupted and consolidated by a few companies.

upload_2020-8-14_0-36-38.png
 

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
3,713
-1
8,785
Country
China
Location
United States
Most intellectuals from western countries can only think of 2 stereotypes:
  • Democracy
  • Dictatorship
Haven't anyone tell them there are more than 20+ types of governance even by the western standard?

List of forms of government
upload_2020-8-14_0-42-56.png



Back 2500 years ago, those intellectuals even knew there are at least 6 types of governance.
In book Politics (Aristotle), there are 6 types of governance.

君主制、共和制、贵族制、寡头制、民主制、僭主政体(专政)
Monarchy, Republic, Aristocracy, Oligarchy, Democracy, Tyrant

More importantly, westerns can only think form of government, they didn't know there are something on top of form of government.

Form of government is just a tool to rule. Different countries and people can have same form of government, but the outcome can be completely different. Take Philippines and Japan as example, Both Philippines and Japan constitution and political system are designed by Americans, the difference is so large, their government efficiency and outcome has nothing in common.

On top of Form of government is Government Principle, it's more abstract. The difference between China and many other countries is not the Form of government but Government Principle.

Same tool in different hands. It's the people, the party and Government Principle determine the destiny of the nation.
 

Song Hong

FULL MEMBER
Jan 4, 2020
1,660
-5
2,704
Country
Viet Nam
Location
Viet Nam
Japan and all western nations are aristocracy under the democracy avatar.

In the past, China has a meritocratic imperial exam system (科举), and before that was aristocratic nomination 皇族世家 九品中正. The imperial exam system is an instrumental reason that China further transit from feudalism to centralized imperial government.

Right now it is a mixture of exam system and nomination system.
 

Song Hong

FULL MEMBER
Jan 4, 2020
1,660
-5
2,704
Country
Viet Nam
Location
Viet Nam
I am thinking if China would be better if Mao make China a hereditary empire and Mao Anying assume as the next emperor. The Mao family becomes the board of director and the rest be the professional managers/CEO.

Right now every leadership transition period results to instability.

Ok forget it... one should adhere to Marxism instead of promoting hereditary wealth and power.
 
Last edited:

Nan Yang

SENIOR MEMBER
May 1, 2010
3,652
-1
6,898
Country
Malaysia
Location
Malaysia
Selection and election: Accountability
USA and European democracy's accountability is after election, in which case, the mass may elect an a$$hole and regret to make him step down. In history there are quite some figures who are very good at manipulating the mass, such as Hitler, Mussolini, or Trump. When he step down, damage was made.

We can clearly see most of leaders in developing countries are not accountable at all comparing with China in recent 40 years. Many leaders in developed countries are opportunities, such as Sarkozy, Francios Hollande, Silvio Berlusconi and so on. George W. Bush has no brain, Obama is a typical politician who focus on votes only, and then Trump.

Selecting a wise leader in western political system is almost impossible after cold war. Most of the leaders only interested in either his own interest or party interest. Of course the mass can regret and abandon the politicians.

Italians abandoned their leaders repeatedly:
2011 Mario Monti 1 year, 163 days in office
2013 Enrico Letta 300 days in office
2014 MatteoRenzi 2 years, 294 days in office
2016 Paolo Gentiloni 1 year, 171 days in office
2018 Giuseppe Conte 1 year, 9 days in office

Japanese abandoned their leaders repeatedly:
1989 Sōsuke Uno 69 days
1989 Toshiki Kaifu 2 years and 88 days
1991 Kiichi Miyazawa 1 year and 278 days
1993 Morihiro Hosokawa 263 days
1994 Tsutomu Hata 64 days
1994 Tomiichi Murayama 1 year and 196 days
1996 Ryūtarō Hashimoto 2 years and 201 days
1998 Keizō Obuchi 2 years and 201 days
2000 Yoshirō Mori 1 year and 22 days
2001 Junichirō Koizumi 5 years and 154 days
2006 Shinzō Abe 1 year and 1 day
2007 Yasuo Fukuda 365 days
2008 Tarō Asō 358 days
2009 Yukio Hatoyama 266 days
2010 Naoto Kan 1 year and 87 days
2011 Yoshihiko Noda 1 year and 116 days
Australia just join this club.
 

vi-va

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 23, 2019
3,713
-1
8,785
Country
China
Location
United States
I am thinking if China would be better if Mao make China a hereditary empire and Mao Anying assume as the next emperor. The Mao family becomes the board of director and the rest be the professional managers/CEO.

Right now every leadership transition period results to instability.

Ok forget it... one should adhere to Marxism instead of promoting hereditary wealth and power.
I would prefer Philosopher King

In dynasty China, actually the rulers are the Emperor and Scholar-Official class(士大夫阶层) combined.

"Theoretically, this system would create a meritocratic ruling class, with the best students running the country. The examinations gave many people the opportunity to pursue political power and honor — and thus encouraged serious pursuit of formal education. Since the system did not formally discriminate based on social status, it provided an avenue for upward social mobility."

In contrast, ancient India adopted a system base on CASTE, which formally discriminate based on social status. Caste system blocked an avenue for upward social mobility.
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Similar threads

Top