What's gone wrong with Democracy? Good Governance can be the solution

[Naofumi]

Chinese want democracy since 200 BC, the traditional Confucius value. We Chinese want modern democracy since 1911 revolution.

The problem is, we don't recognize western one as democracy in the first place, especially US so called democracy.

We Chinese has our China dream, that every citizens can be prospers, can make our government accountable. We want justice, good governance, that's can NOT be achieved by western political system, nor their value system.

So, you're already democratic?

 

[Globenim]

Democracy is the worst form of government, but at least you won't have to use a VPN to post your own propaganda

Why dont you ever tell that retarded talkingpoint to all these "democratic" countries in Europe, the craddle of "democracy" according to some Western historians, where they have to use VPN to access thousands of foreign news sites blocked in the region because they refuse to selfcensor according to local government rules, use VPN access banned content visibly and shadow blocked on social media in their region, use VPN out of fear of legal troubles for illegal speech like "making fun of Erdogan" and journalists regularly face government censorship, government orders to report things as viewed by the government and fines simply for reporting news from a perspective outside of the local government endorsed "free" speech?

 

[Naram_Sin]

A sick man can tell you that he is sick, he cannot prescribe the medicine, most are also unable to identify who is best suited to cure them from those selling them snake oil, as shown by the many superstitious beliefs across cultures on how and by whom to treat one's illness.

To give a sickman the same power to prescribe medicine and select a practitioner as those with the neccessary knowledge and education to do so is seen in no proffessional, competitive field, you only see it in governance and to catastorphoc results... Iraq being a shining example.

Sickmen, the majority of them, are too confused to make solid judgement and can be easily led to make a choice , good or bad, through a variety of means, in the case of nations and democracy the 2 primary methods being the application of both soft power (media) and sharp power (economy) by a 3rd party possesing both.

You here see why democracy is such a sacred tool to the US and its obsession to inject it everywhere, it denies power from the intellectuals of a nation and gives it to the sick of said nation who are easily led by sharp/soft power and which entity has the most sharp and soft power in the world ? Not any from the target nation I assure you.

 

[vi-va]

So, you're already democratic?

Democracy, for the people of the people by the people

China government is much more accountable than western countries. Compare what China did during pandemic and what US did, and what EU did, you see clearly China put citizen lives much higher than economy, while US put economy on top of citizen lives. Is it for the people?

We government made decision for the greater good of all citizens. In US, the oligarchies lobby the congress and make law and policy for their own benefits. Is it by the people?

US government is war criminals, how many people George W Bush killed in ME? How many people Clinton killed in Balkans? How many people Obama killed in ME and Afghanistan? Many Americans died for those worthless war, but no one take any responsibility. Those presidents enjoy a much wealthier life after retirement. While those solders are crippled in the rest of their lives. Is it of the people?

So yes, China is on the path to true democracy.

United States is mixed system, no matter what they claim they are public or democracy. They are not republic nor democracy, they are capitalism, plutocracy, democracy, republic, kleptocracy, and dictatorship of majority. Also they are expansionists, imperialists, protestant, and many others.

 

[Naofumi]

Democracy, for the people of the people by the people

China government is much more accountable than western countries. Compare what China did during pandemic and what US did, and what EU did, you see clearly China put citizen lives much higher than economy, while US put economy on top of citizen lives. Is it for the people?

We government made decision for the greater good of all citizens. In US, the oligarchies lobby the congress and make law and policy for their own benefits. Is it by the people?

US government is war criminals, how many people George W Bush killed in ME? How many people Clinton killed in Balkans? How many people Obama killed in ME and Afghanistan? Many Americans died for those worthless war, but no one take any responsibility. Those presidents enjoy a much wealthier life after retirement. While those solders are crippled in the rest of their lives. Is it of the people?

So yes, China is on the path to true democracy.

United States is mixed system, no matter what they claim they are public or democracy. They are not republic nor democracy, they are capitalism, plutocracy, democracy, republic, kleptocracy, and dictatorship of majority. Also they are expansionists, imperialists, protestant, and many others.

You're basically claiming that Chinese are achieving the ideals set by western democracy without following the path set by it?

 

[Rusty]

Why dont you ever tell that retarded talkingpoint to all these "democratic" countries in Europe, the craddle of "democracy" according to some Western historians, where they have to use VPN to access thousands of foreign news sites blocked in the region because they refuse to selfcensor according to local government rules, use VPN access banned content visibly and shadow blocked on social media in their region, use VPN out of fear of legal troubles for illegal speech like "making fun of Erdogan" and journalists regularly face government censorship, government orders to report things as viewed by the government and fines simply for reporting news from a perspective outside of the local government endorsed "free" speech?

I literally got dumber reading that.

so this is for you

Also
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument.[1][2][3]


you guys are trained to give the same nonsense response every time.
This is getting boring.
Please up your training.

 

[Pakistani E]

who said there are only two system, democracy and dictatorship? Can you think outside the box --- the western narrative?

The western countries failed to think, because the media stuff their mind without thinking in depth, sad but true.

Most intellectuals from western countries can only think of 2 stereotype:

1. Democracy
2. Dictatorship

Haven't anyone tell them there are more than 20+ types of governance?

List of forms of government

Back 2500 years ago, they 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

Democracy is a flawed system, everyone knew it. Otherwise, Trump won't be elected.

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 and party determine the destiny of the nation.

I didn't say there are two different forms of governance. I simply stated the main two generic branches we have currently in the world. The main advantage of democracy, in whatever form you are looking at, is that the electorate has the right to not elect a party/person/whatever, if they believe that they have performed inadequately.

Is this your point too? I am not sure what the purpose of above, China is not in anyway a democracy. This mental gymnastic you've performed above does not make China a democracy.

 

[vi-va]

I didn't say there are two different forms of governance. I simply stated the main two generic branches we have currently in the world. The main advantage of democracy, in whatever form you are looking at, is that the electorate has the right to not elect a party/person/whatever, if they believe that they have performed inadequately.

Is this your point too? I am not sure what the purpose of above, China is not in anyway a democracy. This mental gymnastic you've performed above does not make China a democracy.

If Trump is the outcome of democracy, congratulation.

 

[Pakistani E]

If Trump is the outcome of democracy, congratulation.

Well Trump can be removed from office in the next election if enough of the electorate wants him gone. He also cannot make himself President for life or for a very long time unlike some other countries.

I think you missed the point with this one. Trump was elected, and Trump can be "de-elected", in the next election (yes, I made that word up). Do other forms of governance give this choice to the people?

 

[vi-va]

Well Trump can be removed from office in the next election if enough of the electorate wants him gone. He also cannot make himself President for life or for a very long time unlike some other countries.

I think you missed the point with this one. Trump was elected, and Trump can be "de-elected", in the next election (yes, I made that word up). Do other forms of governance give this choice to the people?

Bush was elected, Obama was elected, Trump was elected. So Americans has had 8+8+4= 20 years bad government. What they learnt? Nothing.

 

[Pakistani E]

Bush was elected, Obama was elected, Trump was elected. So Americans has had 8+8+4= 20 years bad government. What they learnt? Nothing.

So, help me understand this, are you suggesting that if the electorate is too stupid to vote in people who do not work for their interest, their right to choose the next leader should be taken away?

If so, please tell me, how or who gets to decide who the best man/woman for the job is. Which groups of people have the ultimate say in this?

 

[Mista]

It doesn't matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice.

As long as the welfare of the people is improving, it doesn't matter what forms or precise way the rules are expressed.

 

[vi-va]

So, help me understand this, are you suggesting that if the electorate is too stupid to vote in people who do not work for their interest, their right to choose the next leader should be taken away?

If so, please tell me, how or who gets to decide who the best man/woman for the job is. Which groups of people have the ultimate say in this?

It's not because stupidity. It's because unprofessional voters, voters are not supposed to be professional on politics, they are busy on feeding their family. While politicians are trained to disguise, lie, like a performer.

The voters may be experts on science, technology, medical, etc. But most of them lack of the experience on real politics or lack of judgement on how to run a country. Voters spent most of their time on living skills not politics. While politicians spent most of their time on politics, and how to win vote, including lies, like a performer.

Why don't you vote for doctors? If voters decide who will be doctors, get prepared to die.
Why don't you vote for teachers? If voters decide who will be teachers, get prepared to be illiterate.
Why don't you vote for airplane pilots? If voters decide who will be pilots, get prepared to walk 1000 miles.

So you think running a country/province is easier than being a doctor/teacher/pilot?

Running a country/province is a profession. It required as much efforts as being a doctor/teacher/pilot if not more.

You need to spend at least 20-30 years in school and in practices to be a good doctor/teacher/pilot. You need to be checked by your classmate, exam, workmate, procedure to be a good doctor/teacher/pilot.

So back to topic, why do you think running a country do not require a licence? Why inexperienced George W. Bush, Obama, Trump can participate running an election? All those 3 candidates have little experience on running a country/province before elected as president.

That's insane.

 

[Han Patriot]

Democracy is the worst form of government, but at least you won't have to use a VPN to post your own propaganda

But then you get to inject klorox when you start coughing. Lol

 

[Mista]

So back to topic, why do you think running a country do not require a licence?

In Singapore, a Presidential candidate has to have qualifications to meet the eligibility to run for office lol.

According to Article 19 of the Singapore Constitution, to qualify for election as President, a person must:

...

• Have, at the date of the writ of election, met either the public or private sector service requirements, and such period(s) of service must have partially or wholly fallen within the 20 years preceding the date of the writ.

Public sector service requirement
To fulfil the public sector service requirement, a person must have:

• Held office as Minister, Chief Justice, Speaker, Attorney Attorney-General, Chairman of the Public Service Commission, Auditor-General, Accountant-General or Permanent Secretary for at least 3 years; or
• Served as the chief executive of a key statutory board or government company, such as the Housing Development Board or GIC Private Limited, for at least 3 years.

The public sector service requirement can also be fulfilled if you have served at least 3 years in a public sector office, and the PEC is satisfied that, having regard to the nature of the office, your performance in the office, and any other factors it sees fit to consider, that you have the requisite experience and ability to effectively carry out the functions and duties of the office of President.

Private sector service requirement
To fulfil the private sector service requirement, a person must have served as the chief executive of a company, with his or her most recent period of service as chief executive being at least 3 years.

During this period of service, the company must, on average, have at least $500 million in shareholders’ equity, and have made profit after tax throughout the entire period.

Where the person has ceased to be chief executive of a company before the date of the writ of election, the company must also not have been subject to any insolvency event from the person’s last day of service as chief executive until (i) the date falling 3 days after that day; or (ii) the date of the writ of election, whichever is earlier.

But then again, the President is largely just a ceremonial figurehead unlike the PM (separately elected) who wields the executive power. The only executive power the President has is to block attempts by the government of the day to draw down past reserves to spend.

LKY designed it to rein in future governments' spending and thus political parties cannot simply propose populist policies which will incur a fiscal deficit.