What is democracy?Is that so important that you use it in every post?In fact I don't know how it operate,absorbing so many followers.What can democracy take to you?Do you really feel perfect with democracy?We don't care about democracy,because we trust our government.
I live in China,I know exactly about China.It's not so bad as you say.Communist has done much to solve the problem you say.And now the problem is no longer serious.
Has the Communist done anything hurt you?If so,I also support you to oppose it.If not,please be more tolerant towards it because it's not easy to lead 1.3 billion people.

Speaker:

I can certainly understand that you find Democracy an alien concept since you have only a ' one party system ' to compare it with..

And, nice of you to trust your government, however will only act in your best interests so that forced re-location of people, supressing religious freedoms and kicking people off lands for the greater good of society [ Three Gorges Dam ]are all for the betterment of the country and you aren't to question ..

all those in public office may not be as altruistic as you believe and have a vested interest in lining their own pockets or making themselves rich at the expense of others.. corruption and deciet are not uncommon factors in humans LOL,

Democracy allows us to mitigate these ' weaknesses' by
1] being able to protest against adverse/selfish/underhanded decisions without fear of vicious lawless reprisals, arbitrary imprisonment or other retribution for speaking against certain actions/policies enacted by those in power
2] demcoracy allows us to turf out criminal/incompetents or those who we feel have not lived up to their promises to improve/correct issues by voting them out of office on regular intervals and forcing them and others to convince us through the electoral process that they can/will do tasks they claim to and

3] allows us to have alternate viewpointws/positions presented by a number of candidates and choose from among them who will prepresent us and our wishes.. All of these things are denied us/you when one party espouses only one 'solution' and refuses to listen to alternatives/other points of view and, indeed supresses, many times violently protests against actions taken/not taken and all oppositiuon to their ' understanding of things '.


absolute power corrupts absolutely...

I can go out on a street corner and yell to the world that I think my leaders/politicians and the government is crap and corrupt without fear that I will be beaten, hauled off to jail and tortured into being 're-educated' for my sin of disagreeing with those in power.[ I may have to prove what I claim to have any validity in the community, but, at least, I'll be listened to without being abused by ' official policy' in the form of police bashing me about the head ]

Can you say the same?

Speaker, you are able to survive in the PRC ONLY because you goose-step to the march dictated by a centralized one-party system that oppresses opposition, outlaws free debate and caters to the whims and vanities of an undemocratically elected ruling class whose leaders enjoy the fruits of capitalism by making god-damn sure that they own and control essentially all profit making enterprises.

You ask rhetorically "what is democracy" as if what is at stake is a choice between various brands of automobiles that are for sale to the public. Give me a break and get real: if the ideas and the principles of the communist party are so clear-cut and beneficial in promoting the general welfare, why is it that it will ruthlessly hunt down and destroy political opposition that offers other ideas about how a society should be governed?? The answer is obvious: a legitimate two party system and the right to have free debate would expose the communist party of the PRC as corrupt frauds.

Anton:

legitimate opposition, yes.. tow party system? no.. there are more values/concepts and ideas than an either/or situation..don't tell me that the republicans and Democrats are the only alternatives open to Americans..there are probalby third and fourth ways, they just haven'tr been articulated to the point that the people are willing to consider those options, or, more precisely, haven't as yet, devloped the party apparatus and machinery to compete against the long standing current options...

As for Speaker's perspective.. in a trus Communist society everyone, regardless of their abilities, training or education should be willing to work to benefit the state [ i.e. each other ] with no thought of personal reward.. The concept is that the individual is subsumed by the collective.. therefore whether you're a doctor or a shoe maker you should all be content to accept one shirt, one pair of shoes and one bowl of rice as your daily reward for services rendered and have no desire to obtain or accumulate more..don't mix up democracy with free enterprise...

the trouble with Communism as espoused currently in China is that the ' ideal ' greater good, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one concept, has not been adopted by all, even after years of ' education ' and has to be continually beaten into people who transgress.. They control by fear the people who should have accepted the path out of love..

ultimately it will never work because people are just too damn selfish and want that 103" plasma TV [ I know I do ] if they didn't no one would buy the damn thing , they'd all settle for the cheapy B&W 9" crap and the manufacturers would be out of business because advertising would have no effect

Let China ' absorb' Taiwan.. iot will only hasten the collapse of the Mainland IMHO

quote:

Originally posted by Rocketeer:
Anton:

legitimate opposition, yes.. tow party system? no.. there are more values/concepts and ideas than an either/or situation..don't tell me that the republicans and Democrats are the only alternatives open to Americans..there are probalby third and fourth ways, they just haven'tr been articulated to the point that the people are willing to consider those options, or, more precisely, haven't as yet, devloped the party apparatus and machinery to compete against the long standing current options...

As for Speaker's perspective.. in a trus Communist society everyone, regardless of their abilities, training or education should be willing to work to benefit the state [ i.e. each other ] with no thought of personal reward.. The concept is that the individual is subsumed by the collective.. therefore whether you're a doctor or a shoe maker you should all be content to accept one shirt, one pair of shoes and one bowl of rice as your daily reward for services rendered and have no desire to obtain or accumulate more..don't mix up democracy with free enterprise...

the trouble with Communism as espoused currently in China is that the ' ideal ' greater good, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one concept, has not been adopted by all, even after years of ' education ' and has to be continually beaten into people who transgress.. They control by fear the people who should have accepted the path out of love..

ultimately it will never work because people are just too damn selfish and want that 103" plasma TV [ I know I do ] if they didn't no one would buy the damn thing , they'd all settle for the cheapy B&W 9" crap and the manufacturers would be out of business because advertising would have no effect

Let China ' absorb' Taiwan.. iot will only hasten the collapse of the Mainland IMHO

I couldn't have said it better myself. However, I'm not sure if allowing the Mainland to "absorb" Taiwan is a good idea. The CCP might still be able to suppress the population on the island, just as it has on the Mainland, allowing it to survive. We're not dealing with the Soviet Union here, which never opened up its markets the way China has, and was even more oppressive. As long as the Chinese are making money, they don't care who's running the country, plain and simple. Therein lies part of the problem. If China invades Taiwan, I don't think the average Chinese, like SPEAKER, would care. If anything, they'll support it. But if China failed in any attempt to take Taiwan, the CCP's rule would end. I have no doubts about this. Who knows what kind of desperate measures they'd take to avoid this though. Their generals have already threatened to nuke LA. Would a military coup be a more likely outcome?

In addition, the international community seems to ignore China's human rights abuses, while chastising America for anything and everything. Maybe this is because America is so open about everything. Only recently has China's import of Sudanese oil become an international issue, even though it's probably helped fuel genocide in Darfur for years. Yet, the US keeps getting slammed for holding terrorists at Gitmo. The world just loves to bash America for everything because we're rich and powerful, but ignores China's support of genocidal and repressive governments around the world because they're still considered a poor developing country. Talk about a double standard! Have the anti-American leftists taken over the world?

If China ever becomes as powerful as America, it will become the world's new "whipping boy." I, for one, am looking forward to it.

Rocketeer, up to this point in American history, ideas and solutions about our governance has been the brainchild of a two party system. We have never had a third or fourth party that successfully amounted to anything other than causing one of the candidates from the major party to lose an election. Thus the “either/or” approach to our governance is the only thing we have. But this is all beside the point. My reference to a two party system in the PRC was meant in the context of fostering accountability in the governing of that country, the premise being that two or ten parties is better than the one party that rules the PRC right now. It was not intended to be an endorsement of a two party system, per se.

The pros and cons of our two party system is worthy of a new tread discussion that would be endless in its comments. There are too many people I know whose opinions I respect that are fed up with our two parties for the reasons you mention. I am increasingly finding myself agreeing with them because there is much merit in their views and yours as well. But none of those concerns apply to the PRC because it is ruled by one totalitarian based party that inflicts human rights abuses galore on its citizenry.

And I agree with Joey that the US is judged by a double standard not only by the international community but also by the Left Wing in this country (who are also known as the "San Francisco Democrats").

It is not clear to me that PRC absorbing Taiwan would mean the destruct of communism in the PRC. Hong Kong was absorbed into the mainland without loss of the capitalism that fuels HK or the communism that runs the PRC. Nevertheless, are you suggesting that the US should abandon its commitment to defend Taiwan from Mainland aggression under the notion that the PRC’s takeover of Taiwan would mean the end of communism in China??

Anton:

agree that a discussion of the Two Party system would be fodder for another thread.. My backyard is a product of multi-party system [ not as bad as say Italy, but some days it seems we're going that way ]..In the last election in my riding alone we had 9 candidates/parties in contention..

Certainly not suggesting America abandon its committment to support Taiwan if provoked, though even the Joint Chiefs admit fighting on another front, especially one as big as a Pacific conflict might prove beyond US capabilities at present, with most of the burden falling on the US Navy who haven't been as involved in the Iraq/Afghanistan issue as much as land forces..

You're right, it does seem that a balance has been found, sort of, between capitalistic desires on the part of Macao and Hong Kong vs the Command and Control Communistic leadership of Beijing. However, there is a lot of frustration and unrest in Hong Kong and the mainland government has had to twist and bend to allow ' democracy' or a semblance of it creep in so as not to push for repression and all out conflict.. given that Hong Kong is relatively small [ both in area and population ] this has been containable [ some would say, barely ] but Taiwan is much bigger and less accessible.. the communist party would have to ' soften them up ' militarily or otherwise, if they were to control Taiwan with any certainty.. My personal feeling is that they couldn't for long, if at all, and are inviting subversion from within if they try ending up with Communism in name only while ' accomodating ' all sorts of free enterprise/democratic programmes [ somethiong already happening at local levels on the mainland to a greater or lesser degree ]..

rest assured China will collapse just like the Soviet Union, just not as quickly as China doesn't have quite as many ' disparate elements' in its make-up as did the USSR - the Chines Provinces aren't as ' independent ' , with the exception of Tibet, as the ' national entities such as Latvia, Estonia, Georgia and the various ' stans' under the old Soviet regime..

Once the US wrings more trade concessions from China and Walmart and Starbucks get a good grip on the populace, the subversion will quicken...trust the Internet to circumvent the Government, despite its attempts at censorship and containment adn open the regular folk to opporuntiy and alternative viewpoints..then watch the dominoes fall..

Interesting,I find that I'm enjoying the democracy in China now by your words.Do you know the People's congress Council of China?It's the representation of the citizens,the members of it are elected by us(over 16),I have already voted for one.and whatever policy should be carried out after the agreement of it.The Communist know what we want by it.Maybe you think it's one-sided,but I have benefited from nearly every policy about us,just like the free schooling.Three Gorges Dam really re-locates many people,some of them even come here.But what I know is that they live in a new beautiful house now,even better than mine.and the government has already found jobs for them.All of them are satisfied,what they lose are the old things that can't be moved.
Every country has its own condition,the reason why China has the policy very different from you is the condition of China is very different from the western countries.I believe you live a good life,and you are eager to make us live a same life as you,thank you,but,we've already live a good life.We can also say:"Damn,Communist,go to the hell."If you come to a Chinese community,you may find these words,very few,but following a lot of disagreements.I think every policy can not benefit everyone,but it can benefit the majority of people.

Speaker:

I have no doubt that China is moving toward what we consider a full democracy..not as fast as some would like, not as fast as some would expect..in time [ and not too long from now ] I think that the Communist Party will be that in name only, while the policies it administers will be pragmatic and indistinguishable from other rules of law..that is not to say that the current regime isn't fighting this inevitability tooth and nail [ hence the repressive measures against protest, censorship, jailing of dissidents, etc. ] but change will come..It will be interesting to see how the process works.

at least Chian has had a history of ' rule of law ', dynastic or ' popular' and thus is better able to absorb the concept of change something we see sadly lacking in areas of the Middle East where Tribalism and Clan/Family takes precedence over wider issues..

still, to Western eyes, many of the actions of the Communist regime in Beijing remind us of these other backward, repressive , authoritarian forms of ' unenlightend ' rule rather than a 21st century forward thinking open accepting government we hope and trust we have where we live [ despite outward appearances of the Right/Left Pro-Anti Bush antics of the Reps and Dems in the USA!! LOL ], though one could be forgiven for wondering sometimes what ' democracy' is about given the factions at work in the West sometimes.

When you're able to publish critiques of the government without fear of reprisal and can question the policies of the ruling elite without fear of imprisonment, I'll be the first to buy you a beer, assuming you can get a visa to travel and aren't labelled a spy for the Chinese government [ROTFL ]

It is funny how Russia does not control Finland or Austria/Hungry any of the eastern European countries as they used to (or each other for that matter). I doubt the British will try to get the U.S. back again. That is why the whole point is lost on us in the west.

The catalyst for the equilibrium in the relations between Great Britain and the US is directly attributable to GB's loss during the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812. Such a catalyst did not exist after Gen. Chiang Kai Chek fled to Taiwan in 1949 because of the presence of the US fleet.

Having said all this, the question remains: how much time must pass before the PRC should be expected to treat Taiwan as an independent State? The US's answer is "within five seconds after the US positioning of its fleet between the PRC and Taiwan. The PRC says "Never."

I do not have an answer to this question except to say that the US must honor its commitment to defend Taiwan against an attack by the PRC and that it has been 58 years since Taiwan came into existence as a nation. So the PRC should simply "Get Over it." But this is easy for me to say. The US did not have this kind of a problem when several southern states tried to secede from the Union in 1861. As a result, the equilibrium between the individual States and the federal government was achieved only after the Union defeated the Confederate States and without military intervention by Europe. I wonder what position the US would be taking (and for how long) if the sovereignty of the Confederate States was protected by GB or France.

The stuff about Taiwan is idiotic bravado and sabre rattling, the Chinese and the US are making a lot of money off eachother in trade, I'm not talking millions, I'm talking ten, possibly hundreds of billions of dollars. There is no way in hell either country will try anything, because both countries would fall apart if they did. China is keeping the dollar strong producing much of our goods, and we're keeping their currency down and providing them with a huge market. No one, not even the craziest communist person in china, or even George W. Bush would be NEARLY stupid enough to jeporadize that.

Economics is certainly a powerful force that has been able to keep the peace between the US and the PRC but that force is not enough and goes only so far. If the US dropped its guard or gave signals that it would not honor its treaties with Taiwan and, if sensing such weakness, the PRC invaded Taiwan, those same economic forces would prevent the US from risking a military confrontation against the PRC although it might do so despite the economic consequences. Hyperion, I think it is rather dangerous for rogue nations to put risk putting the back of a president against a wall. Very risky. Some presidents (No, actually ALL presidents) will use the military option against the PRC if it chose to invade Taiwan. That is why it is critical for the US to maintain a strong defense posture and proclaim loudly that it will honor its obligations with Taiwan no matter what the consequence might be should the US decide to use military force against the PRC. It is our military strength and our willingness to use it that is responsible for keeping the peace. Economics is insufficient by itself to accomplish that objective.

I was just thinking how honoured we were to have 3 PRC posters in these English threads and how unusual it is, when most forums don't have any.

To be fair the Chinese Communist party has done some great things for China. It has lifted 100s of millions out of poverty. I also applaud the way they encourage students to help Chinese people on public forums to think in a harmonious manner. We must all strive for harmonious thought. China's overview of the Internet is quite light. They only have one person per 1,000 Chinese Internet users (according to the BBC news which is blocked in China) keeping an eye on things.

I don't agree with everything that the Communist party has ever done (nor do the Chinese people or even the people inside the Communist party) but in recent years it has done China a lot of good. Hu Jin Tao is currently tackling one of China's biggest problems - corruption. Most Chinese people don't mind the Communist party but they do hate corruption.

We are honoured to have 3 PRC posters when most English language forums have none. It is extremely unusual but we are honoured none the less.

Rabbie Burns, a guest of the Chinese people inside the PRC.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: RabbieBurns,

quote:

What is democracy?Is that so important that you use it in every post?In fact I don't know how it operate,absorbing so many followers.What can democracy take to you?Do you really feel perfect with democracy?We don't care about democracy,because we trust our government.

Deng Xiao Ping said that one day, China would be democratic. Surely they taught you that in School during your politics classes?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: RabbieBurns,