China's Third Plenum and India's 'Dictator Envy'

[Fattyacids]

no, I disagree with you here. We need to take stats and also see the likelihood for failure.

For example if out of 100 countries 50 democratic and 50 autocratic.

If 1 democratic system failed and 49 autocratic system failed, you seem to suggest somehow they are equally likely hence one is not better than other?

Ok, about one party system, that definitely an improvement upon dictatorship. So it all starts with one party. It started so in India (congress was only party worth anything).
Can you expand upon that system. Like how will the members of party selected. and how will representitives of the party who make decision be selected.

You'll have to qualify what is a failure before going into your stats. Poor socio-economic condition or the so called "lack of freedom." If you read me well, I'm saying no one system is inherently better than the other, there are other important variables than just political ideology that determine how well a country will do.

Meritocracy works in both a democracy and one-party system. At the core of the Chinese system, decision are made based on meritocracy, accountability and performance.

 

[Airboss786]

But the Indians like to brag that its democracy is something superior. Even though that its failed democracy is keeping the people perpetually poor. Just one wrong incident and India will be a failed state.

Also, another important 'tenant' of Democracy is "everyone is treated equally & has equal rights"!!!!
But India is 'plagued' by a Caste System!

 

[livingdead]

You'll have to qualify what is a failure before going into your stats. Poor socio-economic condition or the so called "lack of freedom." If you read me well, I'm saying no one system is inherently better than the other, there are other important variables than just political ideology that determine how well a country will do.

Meritocracy works in both a democracy and one-party system. At the core of the Chinese system, decision are made based on meritocracy, accountability and performance.

lets remove lack of freedom and add socio economic condition, thats the factor we are most interested in. From my side please add likelyhood of things going upside down (unless you dont want it)

Like I already asked chinese dragon, which way do you want to compare.

1. take stats of deveoping countries that stated fresh(thats what we are arguing about) and make two buckets and decide which one goes to which.
2. Take two specimens (India and china most popular it seems) and make them representitive case for either of the two systems and decide faiure or success based on who wins of these two.
3. Something else you prefer.

 

[Fattyacids]

lets remove lack of freedom and add socio economic condition, thats the factor we are most interested in. From my side please add likelyhood of things going upside down (unless you dont want it)

Like I already asked chinese dragon, which way do you want to compare.

1. take stats of deveoping countries that stated fresh(thats what we are arguing about) and make two buckets and decide which one goes to which.
2. Take two specimens (India and china most popular it seems) and make them representitive case for either of the two systems and decide faiure or success based on who wins of these two.
3. Something else you prefer.

I'm not comparing. You specifically said not to compare with India, then you asked about BD. Hence, my reply, which you don't seem to agree and you raise that comparison bar again.

 

[IND151]

But the Indians like to brag that its democracy is something superior. Even though that its failed democracy is keeping the people perpetually poor. Just one wrong incident and India will be a failed state.

To be fair, we are not greatest democracy; but we are taking several right steps and have lifted several millions out of poverty.

This so called backward nation today is now No.1 milk producing nation in world, leaving behind even US.

It wasn't a fact in past; but we made this happen.

My nation may have several problems but we are correcting them; though at slower pace.

 

[livingdead]

I'm not comparing. You specifically said not to compare with India, then you asked about BD. Hence, my reply, which you don't seem to agree and you raise that comparison bar again.

I just cited BD as an example to remove complexity , as a test case. BD was no comparison with any autocratic country ever.
BD does not have complexities of multiple nations like India and a better fit for autocracy(one can argue) I was asking your opinion how it will exactly work out.

For democracy vs autocracy comparison, the bar has been lowered by removing emotion of citizen (freedom bit) from equation.
I am perfectly fine with comparing against India (which country? I am guessing china? not a random autocratic country ) it will mean you are choosing option 2.

I am sorry for confusion as I muddled it by adding two things together.
a. how to introduce the system, which one is easier
b. compare the ones which already have one or the other

the bangladesh one was about point a.

 

[IND151]

We are breaking ground in that area.
Look at Pakistan on the other hand as another example - even with more Dictatorship and Army rule more than half its life and democracy for the smaller part, we are more developed than them.

I think the reason for that is education. India has a much higher literacy level than Pakistan and so is more developed than them.

As more Indians grow more literate, the functioning of democracy will get smoother and more efficient.

Also when jatpat politics gets reduced.

Good thing is economic progress is key agenda for most parties today (INC and BJP)

This wasn't case 2 decades back.

 

[Chronos]

I just cited BD as an example to remove complexity , as a test case. BD was no comparison with any autocratic country ever.
BD does not have complexities of multiple nations like India and a better fit for autocracy(one can argue) I was asking your opinion how it will exactly work out.

For democracy vs autocracy comparison, the bar has been lowered by completely removing emotion of citizen (freedom bit) from equation.
I am perfectly fine with comparing against India (which country? I am guessing china? not a random autocratic country ) it will mean you are choosing option 2.

You might want to be a bit cautious here. Chinese jingoistic are on a whole level of offensive compared to Indian jingoists

 

[Fattyacids]

I just cited BD as an example to remove complexity , as a test case. BD was no comparison with any autocratic country ever.
The bar has been lowered by completely removing emotion of citizen (freedom bit) from equation.
I am perfectly fine with comparing against India (which country? I am guessing china? not a random autocratic country ) it will mean you are choosing option 2.

If emotion of citizen can be part of the equation, why not material well being, the pain of hunger.....?
If the bar is NOT clearly defined, there is no ground for comparison. But as I said, I was not looking for a comparison, merely stating my view that a democratic system may not be better than one-party, there are many other important variables.

(China is frequently use as a comparison because both china and india are big country with huge population. Other successful autocratic states are nowhere this huge)

 

[anjaneyashruti]

If emotion of citizen can be part of the equation, why not material well being, the pain of hunger.....?
If the bar is NOT clearly defined, there is no ground for comparison. But as I said, I was not looking for a comparison, merely stating my view that a democratic system may not be better than one-party, there are many other important variables.

(China is frequently use as a comparison because both china and india are big country with huge population. Other successful autocratic states are nowhere this huge)

China frequently uses this comparison because the CCP finds it convenient to demonstrate to the chinese why they don't need democracy.

Statistically and logically a multi party system always provides more choice and hence more competition to improve.

Otherwise the only way to improve is to demonize the US and stir hate in the Chinese and a desire to become greater than your enemy.

 

[Fattyacids]

China frequently uses this comparison because the CCP finds it convenient to demonstrate to the chinese why they don't need democracy.

Statistically and logically a multi party system always provides more choice and hence more competition to improve.

Otherwise the only way to improve is to demonize the US and stir hate in the Chinese and a desire to become greater than your enemy.

From the Economist to academic journals, just about every economist and political scientist compare China with India. Your own politicians and academia too use China as comparison.
CCP never compare China with India. Facts are facts.

Logically, all the 3rd countries that are mostly democratic should have seen dramatic improvement in their condition. However, stats show otherwise.

Start a revolution.

 

[anjaneyashruti]

From the Economist to academic journals, just about every economist and political scientist compare China with India. Your own politicians and academia too use China as comparison.
CCP never compare China with India. Facts are facts.

I cannot speak on behalf of the Economist or academic journals, but it is reasonable to assume they see India and China as more similar to each other than any other civilization / nation on earth.

However for political matters we compare ourselves with US and UK. For Judicial matters we compare ourselves with US & Europe, for Cultural matters we compare ourselves with the US, for social matters too we compare ourselves with US & Europe.

We compare our selves with china only for Economical matters. But we also compare ourselves with US too. Facts are Facts.

Logically, all the 3rd countries that are mostly democratic should have seen dramatic improvement in their condition. However, stats show otherwise.

All Democratic countries HAVE seen dramatic improvements in their condition.However unlike china, democratic countries measure their improvement over various parameters other than economics.

Start a revolution.

Why ? Evolution is better and that is how we plan to get there.

 

[Fattyacids]

I cannot speak on behalf of the Economist or academic journals, but it is reasonable to assume they see India and China as more similar to each other than any other civilization / nation on earth.

However for political matters we compare ourselves with US and UK. For Judicial matters we compare ourselves with US & Europe, for Cultural matters we compare ourselves with the US, for social matters too we compare ourselves with US & Europe.

We compare our selves with china only for Economical matters. But we also compare ourselves with US too. Facts are Facts.



All Democratic countries HAVE seen dramatic improvements in their condition.However unlike china, democratic countries measure their improvement over various parameters other than economics.



Why ? Evolution is better and that is how we plan to get there.

You cannot, because you're not qualified to speak on behalf of the Economist or any academic journals. They compare China and India because both are huge country with similar population. Fact no.1

No country compares Judicial matters, it is as good as comparing Constitution. There is little basis for comparison between US, UK and India in political matters; one is presidential system, the other is two party dominated system. For cultural matters, there is absolutely no common ground for comparison with the US. Fact no. 2

Countries are measured based on social and economic indicators as set by World Bank and other academia. China is no exception. Fact no, 3.
Not all democratic countries have seen dramatic improvement vis-a-vis autocratic ones. Africa? None beats Singapore and Malaysia. fact no. 4

Whatever works for you.

 

[anjaneyashruti]

You cannot, because you're not qualified to speak on behalf of the Economist or any academic journals. They compare China and India because both are huge country with similar population. Fact no.1

LOL. You are the one who said Economist and academic journals compare India and China. Not me. I just gave you the probably reason.

However since neither are you not qualified to speak on behalf of economist or academic journals, your Fact is only an assumption. Is this chinese high IQ ?

No country compares Judicial matters, it is as good as comparing Constitution. There is little basis for comparison between US, UK and India in political matters; one is presidential system, the other is two party dominated system. For cultural matters, there is absolutely no common ground for comparison with the US. Fact no. 2

You are not qualified to speak on behalf of India either

Indian constitution borrows from the US and UK constitution and our democratic set up borrows from the US, UK model too. Eg. Bicameralism, President as India's head etc.. Our Judicial system borrows from the UK too. However US judicial matters continuous to be pertinent to us.

Culturally Hollywood and Bollywood immediately come to mind. So does our common language english and the books we read. Fact 2

Your ignorance about the cultural similarity is also evident. This is also a FACT.

Countries are measured based on social and economic indicators as set by World Bank and other academia. China is no exception. Fact no, 3.

World Bank is a "Bank" They are nobody to set parameters for measurement except for determining how much Loan to give and how to recover that loan.

You assumption that they set any kind of social indicator is just a myth. Fact 3

Not all democratic countries have seen dramatic improvement vis-a-vis autocratic ones. Africa? None beats Singapore and Malaysia. fact no. 4

No nation in Africa ever had stable democracy. Those that had, has done well. Fact 4.

Whatever works for you.

Whatever works for you too boy. Whatever.

 

[livingdead]

If emotion of citizen can be part of the equation, why not material well being, the pain of hunger.....?
If the bar is NOT clearly defined, there is no ground for comparison. But as I said, I was not looking for a comparison, merely stating my view that a democratic system may not be better than one-party, there are many other important variables.

(China is frequently use as a comparison because both china and india are big country with huge population. Other successful autocratic states are nowhere this huge)

the material well being is already added by virtue of the fact that we are considering only economic prosperity and ignoring freedom as you asked.
The only thing I want to add is the probability of things getting bad, as democracy has this huge practical advantage (forgetting freedom, equality etc which are dear to me too) of being very good at smooth transition of power.
where as autocracy gives you a false sense of stability equivalent to living on a dormant volcano.

I have no issue comparing India with china, but then that will be exactly that, a comparison of India and china. Not a comparison of democracy vs autocracy.