vi-va
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2019
- Messages
- 6,475
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Do people in the West have more rights than Chinese people?
They have more superficial rights, like freedom of speech, but ultimately, the freedom of speech has no meaning because the politicians ignore them and serve their patrons, who contribute cash to finance their campaigns.
Many Americans though have been brainwashed into thinking that freedom of speech is all important. If you have freedom of speech though, and your thought and opinions are ignored, then why should I care about freedom of speech?
I literally don’t give a flying **** about freedom of speech. Why? Because I am educated, literate and intelligent and know how to frame what I say. I also know that the people who read what I say are not illiterate hillbillies.
In contrast, Chinese have channels to express their opinion to government, both in the party and if they are not party members. Many of them have serious suggestions about how government governance can be improved, and sometimes they are adopted.
The difference between Americans and Chinese is that Chinese understand the difference between criticism and freedom of speech. Criticism is often valuable because it is about how to make government better.
When I look at what many take to be freedom of speech issues on Quora, it looks like public masturbation to me.
I mean, what is the point?
Are you so dumb that you consider that to be a freedom which you cherish and are willing to die for?
When the American founding fathers talked about freedom of speech, I don’t think that they had this public masturbation in mind. What they had in mind was constructive criticism which would make government better.
It is very ironic, but I think that the government in China today is closer to what the American founding fathers, especially Benjamin Franklin and George Washington, had in mind than government in the US today.
Some comments I copied over here:
Choi Julian Mon 13 upvotes
Americans pride themselves to scold their presidents freely.
Richard Kwok Mon 1 upvote
Yes and free media… reality shows “free” media doesn’t mean sh1t if people don’t act.
Eward Ho Mon 51 upvotes
George Washington strongly opposed party politics, and he supported a strong central government rather than stronger state governments.
The thing with having a single party system like in China and Singapore is that having one party is equivalent in some ways to having no parties at all. When almost every government official belongs to the same party, then these officials must share the responsibility of running the country, and they must all share the blame when things don't go well. In a multi-party system, blame can be shifted to opposition parties. But a party that controls the entire government can't do that.
One potential danger of a single party system would be having too much conformity while failing to consider more diverse views. That's a danger that would need to be avoided.
Obviously, a ruling party that is corrupt, cruel, or inept will eventually lead to the collapse of the entire system, or even worse, an Orwellian nightmare.
But at least a single-party system, when done right, can function much better than a multi-party system, especially when compared to a two-party system like the one in the US, which has got to be the worst type of multi-party system you can have. America's system nearly tore apart the country during the Civil War, causing millions of deaths. It's brought about numerous catastrophes since then, including the current coronavirus crisis.
Ignorant people believe that America's rise as a world power must mean it has a great political system. They totally ignore other factors like natural resources, geography, education, and human capital. The only thing America's political system ever contributed is that it fooled the have-nots and made them easier to control and boss around. It also makes it easier to lead the have-nots to their doom. It's really too bad George Washington couldn't get his way.
Alex Shi Mon 17 upvotes
That is why CCP has probably the most strict rules and meticulous procedures in enrolling a new member. CCP membership doesn't guarantee you a position in the government. It is ONLY a recognition that you are a CCP member who is supposed to have higher moral standards and should work harder than ordinary people in their field.
To seize a position in the government, you will have to pass a pretty tough national examination to be a candidate. Only after passing a successful interview later on can you be a lowest-level worker in the government. Your CCP membership doesn't have much help in the process. When you start your career of serving the country and the people, you need to prove your competence and dedication in your position to get a promotion. Or else, you will end up an ordinary government servant.
CCP membership is not necessarily a guarantee for a position in the government. And you don't need to be a CCP member to get such a position. But both have pretty high requirements. Even if you may be an opportunist, you still have to pretend to be committed to the undertaking of serving the country.
Updates:
There are 388 people died while on duty, either from infection, or accidents, or overwork, during the battle against COVID-19 in China, and over 90% of them were CCP members. They were doctors, police officers, villagers, grassroots government workers, or just ordinary people. By contrast, the proportion of CCP members in the whole Chinese population is only 6%-7%.
When facing dangers, the elites must stand out voluntarily. If they don't, the CCP constitution, which all members must unconditionally abide by, will order its members to do so.
They have more superficial rights, like freedom of speech, but ultimately, the freedom of speech has no meaning because the politicians ignore them and serve their patrons, who contribute cash to finance their campaigns.
Many Americans though have been brainwashed into thinking that freedom of speech is all important. If you have freedom of speech though, and your thought and opinions are ignored, then why should I care about freedom of speech?
I literally don’t give a flying **** about freedom of speech. Why? Because I am educated, literate and intelligent and know how to frame what I say. I also know that the people who read what I say are not illiterate hillbillies.
In contrast, Chinese have channels to express their opinion to government, both in the party and if they are not party members. Many of them have serious suggestions about how government governance can be improved, and sometimes they are adopted.
The difference between Americans and Chinese is that Chinese understand the difference between criticism and freedom of speech. Criticism is often valuable because it is about how to make government better.
When I look at what many take to be freedom of speech issues on Quora, it looks like public masturbation to me.
I mean, what is the point?
Are you so dumb that you consider that to be a freedom which you cherish and are willing to die for?
When the American founding fathers talked about freedom of speech, I don’t think that they had this public masturbation in mind. What they had in mind was constructive criticism which would make government better.
It is very ironic, but I think that the government in China today is closer to what the American founding fathers, especially Benjamin Franklin and George Washington, had in mind than government in the US today.
Some comments I copied over here:
Choi Julian Mon 13 upvotes
Americans pride themselves to scold their presidents freely.
Richard Kwok Mon 1 upvote
Yes and free media… reality shows “free” media doesn’t mean sh1t if people don’t act.
Eward Ho Mon 51 upvotes
George Washington strongly opposed party politics, and he supported a strong central government rather than stronger state governments.
The thing with having a single party system like in China and Singapore is that having one party is equivalent in some ways to having no parties at all. When almost every government official belongs to the same party, then these officials must share the responsibility of running the country, and they must all share the blame when things don't go well. In a multi-party system, blame can be shifted to opposition parties. But a party that controls the entire government can't do that.
One potential danger of a single party system would be having too much conformity while failing to consider more diverse views. That's a danger that would need to be avoided.
Obviously, a ruling party that is corrupt, cruel, or inept will eventually lead to the collapse of the entire system, or even worse, an Orwellian nightmare.
But at least a single-party system, when done right, can function much better than a multi-party system, especially when compared to a two-party system like the one in the US, which has got to be the worst type of multi-party system you can have. America's system nearly tore apart the country during the Civil War, causing millions of deaths. It's brought about numerous catastrophes since then, including the current coronavirus crisis.
Ignorant people believe that America's rise as a world power must mean it has a great political system. They totally ignore other factors like natural resources, geography, education, and human capital. The only thing America's political system ever contributed is that it fooled the have-nots and made them easier to control and boss around. It also makes it easier to lead the have-nots to their doom. It's really too bad George Washington couldn't get his way.
Alex Shi Mon 17 upvotes
That is why CCP has probably the most strict rules and meticulous procedures in enrolling a new member. CCP membership doesn't guarantee you a position in the government. It is ONLY a recognition that you are a CCP member who is supposed to have higher moral standards and should work harder than ordinary people in their field.
To seize a position in the government, you will have to pass a pretty tough national examination to be a candidate. Only after passing a successful interview later on can you be a lowest-level worker in the government. Your CCP membership doesn't have much help in the process. When you start your career of serving the country and the people, you need to prove your competence and dedication in your position to get a promotion. Or else, you will end up an ordinary government servant.
CCP membership is not necessarily a guarantee for a position in the government. And you don't need to be a CCP member to get such a position. But both have pretty high requirements. Even if you may be an opportunist, you still have to pretend to be committed to the undertaking of serving the country.
Updates:
There are 388 people died while on duty, either from infection, or accidents, or overwork, during the battle against COVID-19 in China, and over 90% of them were CCP members. They were doctors, police officers, villagers, grassroots government workers, or just ordinary people. By contrast, the proportion of CCP members in the whole Chinese population is only 6%-7%.
When facing dangers, the elites must stand out voluntarily. If they don't, the CCP constitution, which all members must unconditionally abide by, will order its members to do so.
Last edited:
