China: The Unsatisfied Power

[Edison Chen]

Of course it is about the vote, or more precisely, the qualification of an individual to have his/her say into his/her government. The broader the voting base and the more in-depth the vote into government, the more democratic the country is perceived. For the West, the voting base is broad and the vote's penetration into government is more than what the average Chinese citizen is allowed. For the US, we have the popular vote for the Presidency. For some European parliamentary system, some PMs are voted by their party members, some are popularly elected. But overall, everyone will judge and be judged based upon inured experience. China is no exception.


Look at the relationship between a government and the citizenry as analogous to that of husband and wife. In any multi-party relationship, and a traditional man-woman marriage does qualify as multi-party because there are two persons involved, there must be a final authority figure, so let us stick with the tradition of that figure being the man (husband) for now. Incidentally, I had a non-American idiot who insists that two does not equal to multi. Freaking moron he was.

Anyway...There is a great difference between contestant policies and contestant ideologies.

To use the marriage analogy, contestant policies is when the husband want steak for every dinner but the wife want chicken and fish for financial and health reasons. Contestant ideologies is when the husband want an 'open marriage' but the wife want absolute fidelity. The latter strikes at the foundation of the relationship.

For the US, contestant ideologies would be democratic vs Marxism. Contestant politics would be Democrat vs Republican. Or in the case of this guy...

Rent Is Too Damn High Party - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nobody at the national level took Jimmy McMillan seriously. But the bottom line is that in the interests of preserving US multi-party politics, he must be allowed to present himself.

The US does not have contestant ideologies, not because we legally banned any ideology, take note that the Communist Party of the USA is free to conduct its businesses openly, but because we expect any ideology that want to challenge the norm to make its case directly to the people because we believe the people should be the source of our government. So if the CPUSA or The Rent Is Too Damn High Party managed to convince enough voters to send a few to either houses of the Congress, we will see a new arena of contestant politics and may be a change in ideology. But before all of this -- the people must be convinced.

Your China does not even allow contestant politics from the people and whatever contestant policies there are inside the Chinese Communist Party, they are debated behind closed doors among the select few. That is like the husband debating the issues with the voices in his own head and declaring his decision -- dry aged prime rib steak every night -- to be 'democratic'.

So yes, your China IS a dictatorship.

We don't like your system, don't talk like I am dying tp enjoy your democracy very much. There is always reasons for something to be like it is, China performs very well with current system, so Chinese adopt the best plan for herself. China is more like a state of centralized power or authorization, and we have been like this since hundreds of years ago, this system has foundation in China. Democracy is an alien thing. China is a society of rule by man, China is not ruled by the law. Still today many Chinese do not have the sense of democracy, some of us don't know how to fulfil social responsibilities, they only hate the corruption while they don't know the right solution is to how to lock the abused power into the cage, they will do worse if they got the power than the current officials. You guys always criticize China for allowing vote power while you have no clue about how the vote will be like in China once it's started, it's gonna like a comedy, while the powerful parties will remain so because they have the control of current system. Now I ask you what's the aim of getting the power of vote? It's to moniter and restrian the power of government. The real problem is how to restrain the abuse of power in China, so vote could be one solution, but definitely not the only one, the best solution is the amendment of constitutions, make common people more familiar with the constitution. If Chinese grow up with proper education or influence a system of justice with the guarantee of law, they will have the conciousness of being the real masters of the country. I am glad after taking down hundreds of corrupted officials, Xi destroyed the obstacles coming from different interest groups, Xi is now popularizing the constitution education to all the middle schools and high schools in China, all the students must learn the constitution, all the new promoted officials must make a vow in front of the constitution, unlike in the old days, the they only report to higher authorities rather than the massives. China is changing to a society of justice, the real justice. Just a piece of vote means BS, means nothing if the most people do not have the correct sense.

Yes, but just because there are institutions and a "system", that does not mean that those in government respond to the will of the people or that people are free to express their opinion about the government. Those provincial leaders and local leaders are the same ones that often face riots when they legally steal land from the people right? That means that people are not actually represented in government and their interest is taken into account by the government since as it is well know, the system is corrupted to the core and responds mainly to money and power.

President Xi has been engaging in an anti corruption drive where he clearly shown that high leaders consolidated power by giving positions and rewards (bribes) to those on their side or to get others on their side, so thereby exposing the mechanism of power in China as it is very clear to anybody without bias, those politicians stay in power and place others in power by instruments of corruption and there is nothing that the chinese people can do about that. If you complain against those in government, then you become a desident and you go to jail.

Its clear that the system does not follow the will of the people and that there is no system of checks and balances in order for people to control the government. If people have no legal way to make any effect on government (other than riots), then clearly this is not a representative system of government and that its called a dictatorship. It stays in power by the use of the organs of security of the state (police, army, censorship, etc, etc). Again, that is a dictatorship. Just because other dictatorships are worse, does not make the chinese system any less of a dictatorship.

Taiwan on the other hand, just 3 days ago, the people showed their displeasure with government and threw out those that they felt didn't represent the interests of the people at the local level and it will exercise that right again in1.5 years with respect to the central government. Its clear that Taiwan's people are in control of their government, that's why that system is called a democracy. The difference between the 2 systems is very clear.

 

[Carlosa]

We don't like your system, don't talk like I am dying tp enjoy your democracy very much. There is always reasons for something to be like it is, China performs very well with current system, so Chinese adopt the best plan for herself. China is more like a state of centralized power or authorization, and we have been like this since hundreds of years ago, this system has foundation in China. Democracy is an alien thing. China is a society of rule by man, China is not ruled by the law. Still today many Chinese do not have the sense of democracy, some of us don't know how to fulfil social responsibilities, they only hate the corruption while they don't know the right solution is to how to lock the abused power into the cage, they will do worse if they got the power than the current officials. You guys always criticize China for allowing vote power while you have no clue about how the vote will be like in China once it's started, it's gonna like a comedy, while the powerful parties will remain so because they have the control of current system. Now I ask you what's the aim of getting the power of vote? It's to moniter and restrian the power of government. The real problem is how to restrain the abuse of power in China, so vote could be one solution, but definitely not the only one, the best solution is the amendment of constitutions, make common people more familiar with the constitution. If Chinese grow up with proper education or influence a system of justice with the guarantee of law, they will have the conciousness of being the real masters of the country. I am glad after taking down hundreds of corrupted officials, Xi destroyed the obstacles coming from different interest groups, Xi is now popularizing the constitution education to all the middle schools and high schools in China, all the students must learn the constitution, all the new promoted officials must make a vow in front of the constitution, unlike in the old days, the they only report to higher authorities rather than the massives. China is changing to a society of justice, the real justice. Just a piece of vote means BS, means nothing if the most people do not have the correct sense.

What you don't understand is that only when people are free to control the government and can elect and outs government officials, that's when you can fight corruption. In a system where citizens are able to question government officials and demand an investigation, etc if they suspect corruption, you keep corruption to a minimum. You don't understand that because you don't have the experience of living in a western country.

There is corruption everywhere at some level, but there is a big difference between corruption that happens in big deals behind close doors that is difficult for people to know about and everyday corruption at every level that people can see easily as in China where the whole system is corrupted from the top to the lowest levels, but people can't do anything because they have no control. The system in place controls everything, have absolute power and uses its power to make sure that no one can interfere or complain and if you dare to complain, you go to jail.

You can also tell me that I don't know China, but actually I did spend the equivalent of 3 years in China and even that I don't know it like a Chinese, I can see enough to be clear about my viewpoint.

The truth is that chinese people are quick to complain and to react to things that they don't like and that's what is needed if they live in a system that allows them to control the government. They can see the corruption that its happening everywhere, but they don't have the power to do anything.

Corruption doesn't get fixed from the top (where almost everybody is corrupted anyway), it gets fixed from the bottom, but only if people are in control, not under control.

One example from my own experience in China. I used to have an small factory in guangzhou for 3 years. One day, pay day, one lady worker was assaulted in her room by a guy wanting to steal her pay, she fought him and she got knife cuts on her hands and face. The next day we took her to the police to report the crime. The police did arrest the guy. Everything was ok. Next day, the police comes to the factory and tells the lady to pack up her things and leave immediately to her home province and never come back again or she will have a big problem. The thief had paid off the police and the victim ended up having to run away. Nice huh? That would never happen in a western country, but happens in China all the time because people have NO POWER to do anything and it will stay that way until the system changes. Period.

@gambit Agree? Anything to add?

 

[TaiShang]

One example from my own experience in China. I used to have an small factory in guangzhou for 3 years. One day, pay day, one lady worker was assaulted in her room by a guy wanting to steal her pay, she fought him and she got knife cuts on her hands and face. The next day we took her to the police to report the crime. The police did arrest the guy. Everything was ok. Next day, the police comes to the factory and tells the lady to pack up her things and leave immediately to her home province and never come back again or she will have a big problem. The thief had paid off the police and the victim ended up having to run away. Nice huh? That would never happen in a western country, but happens in China all the time

Nice story. But even as an imaginary scenario you just crafted, it happens everywhere. Including the West.

 

[Carlosa]

Nice story. But even as an imaginary scenario you just crafted, it happens everywhere. Including the West.

What is the imaginary scenario that I just crafted?

I said there is corruption everywhere, but there is a big difference of degree. If you don't see that, then you are living in self delusion.

 

[TaiShang]

What is the imaginary scenario that I just crafted?

I said there is corruption everywhere, but there is a big difference of degree. If you don't see that, then you are living in self delusion.

Anyways. I can also make good stories.

Probably agree to disagree is the best now that everybody is pretty sure and confident about their way of governance.

That's why I advice you to never copy China's system. And we will never copy yours. Problem solved.

 

[Zsari]

What you don't understand is that only when people are free to control the government and can elect and outs government officials, that's when you can fight corruption. In a system where citizens are able to question government officials and demand an investigation, etc if they suspect corruption, you keep corruption to a minimum. You don't understand that because you don't have the experience of living in a western country.

There is corruption everywhere at some level, but there is a big difference between corruption that happens in big deals behind close doors that is difficult for people to know about and everyday corruption at every level that people can see easily as in China where the whole system is corrupted from the top to the lowest levels, but people can't do anything because they have no control. The system in place controls everything, have absolute power and uses its power to make sure that no one can interfere or complain and if you dare to complain, you go to jail.

You can also tell me that I don't know China, but actually I did spend the equivalent of 3 years in China and even that I don't know it like a Chinese, I can see enough to be clear about my viewpoint.

The truth is that chinese people are quick to complain and to react to things that they don't like and that's what is needed if they live in a system that allows them to control the government. They can see the corruption that its happening everywhere, but they don't have the power to do anything.

Corruption doesn't get fixed from the top (where almost everybody is corrupted anyway), it gets fixed from the bottom, but only if people are in control, not under control.

One example from my own experience in China. I used to have an small factory in guangzhou for 3 years. One day, pay day, one lady worker was assaulted in her room by a guy wanting to steal her pay, she fought him and she got knife cuts on her hands and face. The next day we took her to the police to report the crime. The police did arrest the guy. Everything was ok. Next day, the police comes to the factory and tells the lady to pack up her things and leave immediately to her home province and never come back again or she will have a big problem. The thief had paid off the police and the victim ended up having to run away. Nice huh? That would never happen in a western country, but happens in China all the time because people have NO POWER to do anything and it will stay that way until the system changes. Period.

@gambit Agree? Anything to add?

You are confusing the rule of law with democracy, one has little to do with the other. An authoritarian state like Singapore has the rule of law, whereas a democratic country like India still does not.
BTW, I find it very interesting that compare to the US government, the Chinese government is far more responsive to public sentiment and demands. Take example when the pork price spiked in China, the government actually got itself into the pork business, managing supply, controlling prices, even provided funding for companies to acquire foreign supplies.

 

[William Hung]

I want to make my last comment here in this thread.

We were originally arguing about what kind of path China is taking to become a super power (in a multi-polar future). What kind of actions China is currently undertaking and do they indicate that China will take a non-aggressive and stabilising path in the future. And whether this path will be successful in winning friends, allies, influences in the region without the need to resort to any form of coercions or threats.

My view has been basically opposite to the @Genesis.

However, I will give this little humble opinion of mine:

China can indeed achieve what @Genesis have described in the OP. It is possible. It is also possible for the US to voluntarily withdraw from Asia, and even become treaty allies with China.

But it is not possible with the kind of path that China is currently taking. For China to gain full trust and respect from all Asian countries, and from the US, China must change its way of diplomacy and governance. You cannot expect people in countries such as Japan and Korea who enjoy a lot of freedom and rights to fully trust a China that only allows its citizens a very limited amount of rights and freedom.

So what am I saying? China needs a big change, a big revolution. But as some PRC members has argued, democracy is something new and foreign to China, it might even fail if an inexperience China want to try it, just like Russia. So, China needs someone with governance experiences who could introduce this form of revolution smoothly. And the best candidate is the KMT.

In other words, to achieve the future that @Genesis dream about, China needs to kick out the CPC and welcome back the KMT.

I have no doubt in my mind that if this take place in the future, countries like Japan and Korea will fully trust and respect this new China. Even the US will fully trust and respect China then, and voluntarily withdraw from Asia, even becoming treaty allies with China.

These are my personal opinions, and will be my last comment in this thread.

@LeveragedBuyout, @Peter C @SvenSvensonov @gambit @BoQ77 @Soryu @NiceGuy @Carlosa @Viet @Ayan81 @Zero_wing @Cossack25A1 @Indos @madokafc @Reashot Xigwin @pr1v4t33r @Nihonjin1051, @cnleio @Sonyuke_Songpaisan @somsak @alaungphaya

what do you all think about this proposal? will China have more chances of gaining respect and trust from everyone (including the US) if a a big revolution were to take place where the CPC gets kick out and the KMT welcomed back? It is only under the leadership of the democratic KMT, not the CPC, will China be able to unify Asia and draw Asian countries voluntarily into its sphere of influence? I think so, what do you all think?

Should I make a poll?

 

[BoQ77]

to Blackflag, China would win other's hearts but it's not today China.

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

what do you all think about this proposal? will China have more chances of gaining respect and trust from everyone (including the US) if a a big revolution were to take place where the CPC gets kick out and the KMT welcomed back? It is only under the leadership of the democratic KMT, not the CPC, will China be able to unify Asia and draw Asian countries voluntarily into its sphere of influence? I think so, what do you all think?

Should I make a poll?

I don't think it's necessary for China to welcome back the KMT specifically, as long as it eventually reaches a point where an opposition party (or equivalent entity) can serve as a check on the CCP. Singapore is technically a democracy, but in reality, it's a single-party authoritarian state. My understanding is that the ruling party has been gradually losing popularity, however, and so it's not unimaginable that an opposition party will eventually take power. The same process happened in Japan with the LDP and the DPJ (although the DPJ was rather incompetent the first time around). I think as long as it's a gradual process, China will get there. And from all appearances, that sort of gradual transition seems to be what China has been achieving in the past 30 years, so I would say there is a better than 50% chance that China will someday have a loyal opposition party.

But that's the internal political structure of China. I'm not certain that the external relations will be improved by a democratic China, or even an authoritarian China, but with KMT as the authoritarian party instead of the CCP. I mentioned earlier that democracy could actually increase tensions, with the government pandering to the most base and extreme predilections of the populace, which today is total dominance of the SCS. What could change that?

1) The demographic change that is occurring in China could change the priorities of the population from expansion to an internal focus (possible)

2) The increasing wealth of the populace could make it more risk-averse, and thus conflict-averse (possible)

3) Diplomatic relations could suddenly improve (doubtful), causing the populace to feel more friendly towards China's neighbors (doubtful)

4) Some internal catalyst would change China's priorities to an internal focus (e.g. "mass events" that spiral out of control, terrorism, etc.) (unlikely)

Other than that, I suspect it's going to be a rough couple of decades for the countries surrounding the SCS. To be honest, China has been able to do whatever it wants so far, and its deceitful moves in the Scarborough Shoal (offering a mutual stand-down with the Philippines, staying even after the Philippines withdrew) provide a model to be used in the Spratley and Paracel islands. Who will stop China in the SCS? Not the US, we have our own problems elsewhere that no one wants to help us with.

Anyway, to return to your scenario, I view it as an unlikely outcome at this point in time, but never say never.

 

[Edison Chen]

Then do not complain if I call you guys 'sheeple' because you pretty much admitted that is what you are.

Yeah go ahead, you puto, your regime is not superior to anyone but suits yourself, and China just need the regime that benefits ourselves, that's enough. There is no comparison. Stop your long piece of BS to me.

 

[TaiShang]

I don't think it's necessary for China to welcome back the KMT specifically, as long as it eventually reaches a point where an opposition party (or equivalent entity) can serve as a check on the CCP. Singapore is technically a democracy, but in reality, it's a single-party authoritarian state. My understanding is that the ruling party has been gradually losing popularity, however, and so it's not unimaginable that an opposition party will eventually take power. The same process happened in Japan with the LDP and the DPJ (although the DPJ was rather incompetent the first time around). I think as long as it's a gradual process, China will get there. And from all appearances, that sort of gradual transition seems to be what China has been achieving in the past 30 years, so I would say there is a better than 50% chance that China will someday have a loyal opposition party.

Certainly China will continue to progressively change as it has been over the past century. If you compare and contrast, China is in fact one of the most radically transformed countries in a relatively short period of time (Within a century the nation went through regime changes, revolutions, reformations, economic and social turbulence, explosive growth, changes in lifestyle, new urban structures, transportation, international exposure etc.) A country that is rigid and anti-historical would at some point crumble and revert back but China has been at a better situation than it started off in terms of international position/influence and national wealth. China's CCP is not a ruling party in the sense of LDP or others, so, it will come up with an innovative model where certain systemic checks and popular control is firmly established. The government is already amazingly responsive, which can be seen in timely and efficient response to the Financial Crisis, or, the now ongoing anti-graft and anti-pollution drive. In-system tensions are not surprising and out of ordinary, so, no need to delve in political gossiping. But the overall system is becoming more efficient and responsive than less.

I will not judge the legitimacy or rationality of other regimes such as the Indian regime as it is not my concern or interest here, but, China has a considerable popular and elite will-power to ensure that whatever model China's domestic and international governance may evolve, it will be nationally-driven and informed by the nation's own historical, social, and cultural dynamics. It may resemble to this or that model, I do not wish to judge one system as better than the others. But it will remain inherently a China model.

I mentioned earlier that democracy could actually increase tensions, with the government pandering to the most base and extreme predilections of the populace, which today is total dominance of the SCS. What could change that?

Indeed. Examples abound. In Turkey, democracy can lead to a very authoritarian rule with the ruling regime interfering in people's life styles. In India, democracy can lead to systemic corruption. In the US, democracy may still unable to response to the existing racial divides. All systems have their merits and shortcomings. Elections may or may not bring about the desired change. It is all unpredictable, relative, and locally-bound. One geographical/social area cannot be judged by another geographical/social area's dynamics.

1) The demographic change that is occurring in China could change the priorities of the population from expansion to an internal focus (possible)

The issue is that the general public has no intention for imperial expansion. The territorial claims are not the construct of a generation, it is historical. Nothing short of a nuclear holocaust will change the greater historical direction the nation takes. Besides, the same demographic change, by the same account, should also be applicable to other claimants in SCS. In that case, as the Philippine's economy grows and social economic life improves, the new generation will give up on their national claim on certain territories. Unlikely.

2) The increasing wealth of the populace could make it more risk-averse, and thus conflict-averse (possible)

Risk-averse, yes. Just as the US population is extremely risk averse -- just compare the number of deaths on the US and Iraqi side during the Second Iraq War. This does not make the US a less war-like country. Risk averse, in this case, means high technology. HGV technology is more risk-averse than hand-grenades. This is exactly what China does. On the other hand, China's international governance parameters are obvious, and yes, quite conflict-averse -- as compared with, say, the United States. Increasing wealth has nothing to do with foreign policy. Generally, so long as the death on their side is at acceptable levels, national populations do not care about others' death and quickly forget. That's the inconvenient truth.

3) Diplomatic relations could suddenly improve (doubtful), causing the populace to feel more friendly towards China's neighbors (doubtful)

You mean Chinese populace? If that's the case, then, China already has pretty much healthy people-to-people relationship with its neighbors. Interestingly, as I just found out and shared with @Nihonjin1051 on some thread, the China-Japan economic relations seem to have undergone a structural change in the form of an upgrade at the time the political relations were at their lowest. Friendship and good will is there. But, even when you have a good relations with your next door neighbor, it does not mean you will let it occupy half of your front yard as long as you believe it is yours to keep.

4) Some internal catalyst would change China's priorities to an internal focus (e.g. "mass events" that spiral out of control, terrorism, etc.) (unlikely)

Same applies to China's neighbors. Given that China's neighbors (most of them) trail China in terms of basic social/economic development, it is more likely that (if there is ever such a likelihood), they will be subject to certain mass events. So, I agree with you that this is highly unlikely in China as well as in other neighbors. Besides, again, nothing short of a nuclear holocaust can really change a country's long-standing claims. There may be a time lapse, but, the contention and claim remain. Also, China is "internally-focused" already with all those reforms and structural changes going on. This does not suggest less attention to the outside world.

Who will stop China in the SCS? Not the US, we have our own problems elsewhere that no one wants to help us with.

Let's hope no body has to stop anybody. The issues are solvable on bilateral basis. The status quo will likely continue for a foreseeable future.

 

[Edison Chen]

What you don't understand is that only when people are free to control the government and can elect and outs government officials, that's when you can fight corruption. In a system where citizens are able to question government officials and demand an investigation, etc if they suspect corruption, you keep corruption to a minimum. You don't understand that because you don't have the experience of living in a western country.

Sure I know your point and it's true in specific circumstances but not in China at this moment. I said in the above posts people's control aka vote or anything, is one of the solutions to fight the corruption, I truly hope our people do have more power to supervise the government. But what China lack is the design of a series of coherent systems to control the power. That's our PM Li called "制度反腐" - “systematic anti-corruption”. For example, if the massives can only supervise the officials, but there is no actual punishment to them? What if the officials "buy" votes (As you know, it could happen in China if there is open election, especially those lower class people could be bought), can we call this fake democracy? This is China, anything can happen, because the Chinese law do not really have enough control over the both the officials and the people, it's not effective. The vote is good, only if there is theoretical and practical foundation. Also please explain why India as a democracy has even more serious corruption? I did have expeirence of living in the west for 3 years like you did in China. I thought the west system is good to China before I came to the west. During my time abroad, I know truly where China's weakness is.

 

[somsak]

I want to make my last comment here in this thread.

We were originally arguing about what kind of path China is taking to become a super power (in a multi-polar future). What kind of actions China is currently undertaking and do they indicate that China will take a non-aggressive and stabilising path in the future. And whether this path will be successful in winning friends, allies, influences in the region without the need to resort to any form of coercions or threats.

My view has been basically opposite to the @Genesis.

However, I will give this little humble opinion of mine:

China can indeed achieve what @Genesis have described in the OP. It is possible. It is also possible for the US to voluntarily withdraw from Asia, and even become treaty allies with China.

But it is not possible with the kind of path that China is currently taking. For China to gain full trust and respect from all Asian countries, and from the US, China must change its way of diplomacy and governance. You cannot expect people in countries such as Japan and Korea who enjoy a lot of freedom and rights to fully trust a China that only allows its citizens a very limited amount of rights and freedom.

So what am I saying? China needs a big change, a big revolution. But as some PRC members has argued, democracy is something new and foreign to China, it might even fail if an inexperience China want to try it, just like Russia. So, China needs someone with governance experiences who could introduce this form of revolution smoothly. And the best candidate is the KMT.

In other words, to achieve the future that @Genesis dream about, China needs to kick out the CPC and welcome back the KMT.

I have no doubt in my mind that if this take place in the future, countries like Japan and Korea will fully trust and respect this new China. Even the US will fully trust and respect China then, and voluntarily withdraw from Asia, even becoming treaty allies with China.

These are my personal opinions, and will be my last comment in this thread.

@LeveragedBuyout, @Peter C @SvenSvensonov @gambit @BoQ77 @Soryu @NiceGuy @Carlosa @Viet @Ayan81 @Zero_wing @Cossack25A1 @Indos @madokafc @Reashot Xigwin @pr1v4t33r @Nihonjin1051, @cnleio @Sonyuke_Songpaisan @somsak @alaungphaya

what do you all think about this proposal? will China have more chances of gaining respect and trust from everyone (including the US) if a a big revolution were to take place where the CPC gets kick out and the KMT welcomed back? It is only under the leadership of the democratic KMT, not the CPC, will China be able to unify Asia and draw Asian countries voluntarily into its sphere of influence? I think so, what do you all think?

Should I make a poll?

According to Non interfere policy from ASEAN idea, we do not care about China's internal politics or system of government. We only care external how China acts. ASEAN is more on economic and cultural integration, with some military ingradient. Yet each member country's defence is still their own matter.
Currently Thailand has no border conflict with China. Currently Red China is not trying to export idea of Communism to Thailand. Therefore there are nothing impede in relation.
As of being in China's sphere of influence, I need you to provide definition of the word sphere of influence and some example for me to classify according to what you mean.
Without such example, I try to answer it this way : I think Thailand is an independent country not vassal state of any country. If currently Thailand is a thinly vassal state to a country, she is the US. If any change is happening right now, it seems that Thailand/US relation is getting farer away each orbit. I have supporting evidence of this: No US ambassador in Thailand since October. Note that warming relation with US is welcomed by Red shirt supporters like me because US praise democracy.

 

[BoQ77]

Malaysian people told me ( during my trip to Malaysia during June - July 2014 ) that Vietnamese are well known on the bravery to confront the China oil rig ( during May - 15 July 2014 )
( they say ) Malaysian govt is silent because they're afraid of China.

 

[Aepsilons]

what do you all think about this proposal? will China have more chances of gaining respect and trust from everyone (including the US) if a a big revolution were to take place where the CPC gets kick out and the KMT welcomed back? It is only under the leadership of the democratic KMT, not the CPC, will China be able to unify Asia and draw Asian countries voluntarily into its sphere of influence? I think so, what do you all think?

In regards to the current framework of Japanese-Chinese political rapport, its been based on the recognition of the legitimacy of the Communist Party of China as the Government in control of the People's Republic of China. This has been formalized in the 1978 Treaty of Peace and Friendship between Japan and the People's Republic of China. The vast communiques and diplomatic forrays between Tokyo and Beijing is based on the intergovernmentalist approach. In addition, Japan's economic activities in China have been centered on the legal cooperation with the CPC. Thus, it is in my firm opinion that Japan's activity in China is based and dependent on a friendly, productive therapeutic rapport between Tokyo and Beijing Governments.

As explicitly stated in the 1978 Treaty of Peace and Friendship, both China and Japan will abstain from interventionist policies with each other's internal affairs.

Malaysian people told me ( during my trip to Malaysia during June - July 2014 ) that Vietnamese are well known on the bravery to confront the China oil rig ( during May - 15 July 2014 )
( they say ) Malaysian govt is silent because they're afraid of China.

The Malaysians cannot afford to anger and irritate any more neighbors. They already have a precarious relationship with Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines and Singapore.