Not true, he is just a figurehead for something that has always been there and never went away. The factional divide between the neo-maoists and the reformists is firmly swinging to the former. One reason that Xi was chosen, was that many in the party believed that reforms had gone too far. China is moving back in time right now, and many at a government and citizen level support it.
1 Like
The idea that Western Liberal democracy is the panacea for everything is pure post-cold war/neo-liberal/ Francis Fukuyama rhetoric. Its the best system for our societies, but not for everyone.
The best system is the one that provides the most freedoms and quality of life to its people. Right now Chinaâs system is trash and doesnt do that, but that doesnt mean that democracy is the only answer.
China has a middle class. Theyâll be ready for democracy in about ten years ago.
I think back in 2001 no democracy with per-capita GDP over $10,000 has ever reverted back to authoritarianism.
If you adjust for inflation, China should be close.
Many, like 5%?
Wouldnât it be great if they have a way to regularly understand citizens concerns, give them choices and survey them and take them into account In a transparent way.
Ah yesâŚItâs called democracy.
1 Like
A lot
Democracy is one system for doing that, yes I agree. Its just not the only one
Democracy is the only moral type of governance, all other types are inherently immoral. However, there is no one type of democracy and at its core democracy is simply the ability of its people to choose the goals and general direction of the government. For example, some of the best democracies in the world are monarchies. Each country can and should find what suits its needs best.
2 Likes
Morality is pretty relative and cultural.
How do you tell a Singaporean that their government is less moral than Guatemala?
No. There are ethics and morality principles that are objective and universal. The right to choose how you want to live your life is one of those things.
And Singapore is obviously a better democracy that Guatemala, why would I tell them otherwise?
For most Western people, Singapore would only be considered a de-facto democracy.
I dont think you can argue democracy based on morality and argue for it.
Itâs a one party state. It just happened to have worked fairly well in Singapore being a city state with less complications perhaps but in most countries that has ended badly.
1 Like
Singapore is one party, but it also has a very functioning rule of law, clean legal system and checks and balances.
Yes which as I said it has made it work fairly well, but it doesnât have the diverse demands of bigger âstandardâ size countries. Itâs also fairly fortunate not to be constantly be pushed around by massive neighbours keen to take it over. Anyway Iâm pretty sure Singapore doesnât need to be a one party state to do just fine.
Theyâre gonna get hosed when some incompetent jackass takes the helm. Which is bound to happen given enough time.
6 Likes
Why not? what gives the ruler the right to decide the fate of its people? what gives them the right to tell people they should give x amount of tax? or they should send their sons and daughters to be slaughtered by another country for the sake of a small stretch of land that serves no real purpose but to strengthen the power of said ruler?
The âdemocraciesâ you mentioned like Russia or Guatemala are as much a democracy as China is communist. By definition a democracy should be ruled by the people and for the people. If there is no rule of law and corruption is abound, whether in the economy or in election fraud, then its not a democracy at all since its not reflecting the will of the people.
Just came across this 2013 article about Chinaâs Middle Class and Iâm wondering now how much of this has really come to pass