Why do many Chinese believe that Western democracy is a plot to make China weak?

[nang2]

I didn't find any successful democratic country. All anti intellectual games. You may say there are some successful countries with democracy. These countries would be equally (if not more) successful if they were not democratic countries.

The issue is with your definition of success and your historical horizon. You would have the same observation about authoritarianism.

 

[kankan326]

The issue is with your definition of success and your historical horizon. You would have the same observation about authoritarianism.

Authoritarianism helped Japan, South Korea, China to change into industrialized countries from backward economies. There is a misunderstanding that democratic countries care ordinary people more than non-democratic countries. Wrong. US has many homeless people, which can not be seen in China.

 

[Yankee-stani]

Quite Simple the Chinese Communist Party and its media organs has basically molded their public by offering relative economic incentives than political by pursuing a strong stable central govt to many westerners who are bought up to believe that elections matter and ruh rahh of Congress in the US or
Parliament, in other Anglosphere nations this is kinda like different and Chinese people do tend to prefer centralized form of govt going to the whole "Mandate of Heaven" tropes and ruling large swathes of territory I mean Chiang Kai Shek who is often lauded by many American media and lenses was very authoritarian the KMT was a one party state even after 1949 when they flee to Tapei the KMT till like the early 90s was like running Taiwan as one party state basically.So I just think the way the run things is more or less the same be it dynasties of the past,KMT and CCP just updated in modern form

Not realistic. I am not saying you can't get rid of those lobbies, but you can't get rid of human nature which is greed.

As long as a system open to all party, ideologies, religions, colors of skin, races, gender, ages, there will be difference, and people will naturally fight for resource. That's human nature.

There have to be some one, some system on top of all interest, suppress the conflicts to certain level, decrease tension, and serve the common good. Which in Chinese, we call it Heaven 天。

There is no easy solution, or political system which can be installed in any societies, or countries. It must grow organically on their social soil, culture.

What failed India is they installed a Christian liberal democracy inherited from western culture and value, but India can NOT adept and digest.

Political lobbies are lesser evil in some cases my Uni has a lobbyist that goes to the State Capitol and Washington to push interests for the Uni and higher education in general there will always be third parties between people in power and folks underneath just need influence

Sure, there is no solution can resolve all the problem. Once you has a solution, you will face new problem soon. Fighting with greed is a never ending battle.

Also, regarding Fabian socialism, we Chinese choose a radical revolution. India has too much culture burden, colonialism legacy, diversities, the only way to keep India as one piece is gradualism and reformism. The side effect we have seen.

Nehru was a "social democrat" and a lawyer by profession was more close to upper class privlage of the colonial era and continued the faux leftist tropes a lot of that has been broken the "peaceful" India trope by Modi

5,000 is the maximal number you could know other people. More than that media will be invited. Propaganda will be needed. Money will be invovled. Social psychology will start to work. Political manipulation happens.

1000 percent

I didn't find any successful democratic country. All anti intellectual games. You may say there are some successful countries with democracy. These countries would be equally (if not more) successful if they were not democratic countries.

Authoritarianism helped Japan, South Korea, China to change into industrialized countries from backward economies. There is a misunderstanding that democratic countries care ordinary people more than non-democratic countries. Wrong. US has many homeless people, which can not be seen in China.

Well I never been to the PRC so I cant really say about the homeless situation as much but it depends where you go in the US LA has it the worse tho

 

[nang2]

Authoritarianism helped Japan, South Korea, China to change into industrialized countries from backward economies. There is a misunderstanding that democratic countries care ordinary people more than non-democratic countries. Wrong. US has many homeless people, which can not be seen in China.

Both can be beneficial. Whether it happens on a particular country depends on the status of that country. As I mentioned earlier, a country with one dominating political power, authoritarianism helps; a country with multiple balanced political factions, democracy helps. Blindly pursuing one or the other is dangerous.

 

[Mista]

meritocracy. Both China and Singapore are meritocracy to some extent, which is traditional Confucianism value.

Singapore might be, but China is definitely not...

Singapore developed and Vietnam improve fast but not US style democracy

Neither Singapore nor Vietnam has adopted American democracy.

To me, democracy is not important. What is important is the rule of law in shaping a fair and just society.

Singapore is a good example of that.

There is no perfect system in the world. Every country's political culture and system has to accommodate their unique history, demography, and geography.

Singapore on paper is a democracy, however in practice Singapore is more 'authoritarian' than most democracies because the PAP (ruling party) has won every general election since 1965. This allows continuity in most of the government policies and agenda, and the process of choosing political leaders is not dissimilar to China's.

Younger ministers have to climb the political ladder by taking on different ministries, accumulate experience, and prove their worth before taking on key ministerial roles like the Minister of Defence and the Minister of Finance. Before becoming the PM, one has to be the DPM to learn on the job for some years which is quite similar in China. This is quite different from some Western democracies such as the US where you can become the President without holding any prior political positions (Trump). There is a steep learning curve.

However ultimately they still have to renew their mandate every 5 years come general election, and they do have to respond to the people's needs or they have to pay the price. For example in 2011 and 2013 they suffered an electoral setback because housing prices spiked with the strong economic recovery after the recession. They introduced strong measures to tame the prices and prices have remained stable since then, with income growth outpacing housing inflation. They won a resounding victory in the elections in 2015.

Choosing the leaders is a function of both democracy and meritocracy.

4:42

If you're interested. The PM explains why and how Singapore's political system is what it is. History (inherited the system from the British and Malaysia when we gained independence), demographic (multiracial with a Chinese majority), and geography (a small city-state in a not-so friendly neighborhood). And he contrasted it to other countries such as the US, Europe, China, and Australia.

 

[Yankee-stani]

There is no perfect system in the world. Every country's political culture and system has to accommodate their unique history, demography, and geography.

Singapore on paper is a democracy, however in practice Singapore is more 'authoritarian' than most democracies because the PAP (ruling party) has won every general election since 1965. This allows continuity in most of the government policies and agenda, and the process of choosing political leaders is not dissimilar to China's.

Younger ministers have to climb the political ladder by taking on different ministries, accumulate experience, and prove their worth before taking on key ministerial roles like the Minister of Defence and the Minister of Finance. Before becoming the PM, one has to be the DPM to learn on the job for some years which is quite similar in China. This is quite different from some Western democracies such as the US where you can become the President without holding any prior political positions (Trump). There is a steep learning curve.

However ultimately they still have to renew their mandate every 5 years come general election.

4:42

If you're interested. The PM explains why and how Singapore's political system is what it is. History (inherited the system from the British and Malaysia when we gained independence), demographic (multiracial with a Chinese majority), and geography (a small city-state in a not-so friendly neighborhood). And he contrasted it to other countries such as the US, Europe, and China.

Being that the PAP has ruled Singapore since like 1959 how are elections turnouts like in Singapore is there an active civil society, and I know there is one opposition party called the Workers Party which historically was a socialist party but nowadays is basically is a Center Left party do you guys have primaries where candidates like in the PAP compete to become the PAP candidate was just curious

 

[Mista]

I know there is one opposition party called the Workers Party

There are actually 8 opposition parties in Singapore last GE, but only the WP have won parliamentary seats.

do you guys have primaries where candidates like in the PAP compete to become the PAP candidate was just curious

Nope. Candidates (especially ministerial candidates) in the PAP are headhunted and chosen by party leaders, kinda similar to a corporation lol.

4:26

 

[Yankee-stani]

There are actually 8 opposition parties in Singapore last GE, but only the WP have won parliamentary seats.



Nope. Candidates (especially ministerial candidates) in the PAP are headhunted and chosen by party leaders, kinda similar to a corporation lol.

4:26

What exactly the WP opposes that the PAP does

 

[Mista]

What exactly the WP opposes that the PAP does

Tbh nothing much, only slightly left to the PAP's policies. Their election campaign is basically "we do not want to form the government, but we want to check the PAP's absolute dominance in parliament'. Many Singaporeans want the PAP in government but with opposition voices. That's why the constitution requires a minimum number of opposition members in the parliament. The first video I posted explains why so.

 

[Yankee-stani]

Tbh nothing much, only slightly left to the PAP's policies. Their election campaign is basically "we do not want to form the government, but we want to check the PAP's absolute dominance in parliament'. Many Singaporeans want the PAP in government but with opposition voices. That's why the constitution requires a minimum number of opposition members in the parliament. The first video I posted explains why so.

So would you call it a "controlled" opposition then again Singapore is very tiny and very multi-ethnic thankfully it did not became a East Asian Lebanon with parties based on ethnic group or sect credit goes to LKY for maintaining that delicate balance

 

[Mista]

So would you call it a "controlled" opposition

Yes.

credit goes to LKY for maintaining that delicate balance

Yeah.

Btw LKY (cited) also talked about lessons from Pakistan's constitutional history around the 29 min mark in the first video.

 

[Pax Ottomana]

Western democracy?

That cracked me up. In the USA, Hillary got 3 million more votes but Trump ended up the president anyway. Germany has been under Merkel's rule since 2005. And United Kingdom is a fvcking MONARCHY where the Queen can confiscate anything she wants and declare wars.

Western Democracy is just a phrase to trick dumb people into giving up their sovereignty to oligarchical CORPORATE CAPITALISM.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

When China GDP per capita reach 50000$, may be we will choose democracy

1. Chinese don't think.democracy can make a country developed. some one can give.evidence of some country .become developed bcs of democracy

Depends upon what you define as "developed".

I'm pretty sure the US wasn't considered a developed country until more than a few decades after the British were gone.

45,000,000 Americans live like this

um..no.

BTW remember REAL poverty is something very very common in your own backyard.
Most of the so called "10's of millions of poor people" in the US own cars and lead a life FAR from what is considered harsh poverty.

https://www.theatlantic.com/busines...as-you-think-says-heritage-foundation/242191/
30 Million in Poverty Aren't as Poor as You Think, Says Heritage Foundation

Many of the 30 million Americans living in poverty "are not poor in any ordinary sense of the term," the Heritage Foundation claims, because they have access to air conditioning, television, and a car.

"They are well housed, have an adequate and reasonably steady supply of food, and have met their other basic needs, including medical care," authors Robert Rector and Rachel Sheffield write. The vast majority of them own refrigerators, televisions, stoves, microwaves, air conditioning and other consumer electronics not available to even the richest families a few generations ago.

Tens of millions of Americans are uninsured and 50 million suffer from insecure access to food. But nearly all poor households own a refrigerator, television, and microwave. Surprising? Not really. It's a snapshot of one of the most important trends of the U.S. economy: the productivity paradox.


But we do have poverty. Here are the top poorest towns (I'm sure most would not fall into the brutal poverty definition)

 

[fisher1]

So democracy over slavery? Democracy any day even if it is a failed democracy.

Chinese suffer from Stockholm syndrome. They have been enslaved by CCP for so long, they don't want freedom anymore.

By the way, i hope America stops investing in China completely and send these peasants back to where they were a few decades ago then see how great that slavery to Xi Jinping feels like. The only reason China hasn't become a madhouse yet is because of the economic prosperity and that prosperity is because of West to begin with.

 

[Old School]

Personal happiness is all that matters. Live wherever you feel comfortable. However, if you are unhappy in otherwise so called powerful countries, that doesn't make any sense. Every rich family has a poor member and every rich country has poor and unhappy people.