In China, unlike America, political legitimacy is built on competence and experience - Page 5 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues in the People's Republic of China.

Moderator: PoFo Asia & Australasia Mods

Forum rules: No one-line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum moderated in English, so please post in English only. Thank you.
#15181569
Rancid wrote:Deflection, misinformation, and propaganda, are not viewpoints. What we are seeing here is trash done in bad faith.

That's the fundamental strategy from authoritarian shitholes (study any authoritarian shithole from the Americas, to Europe, to Africa, to Asia...). Exploit the relative openness of freer societies to spread their logical fallacies and general bullshit. This happens at various levels.

All view points are not equal, and all view points are not valid. Especially not these "viewpoints". Just as we dismiss superstition, we should be dismissing this crap being spewed in this thread.

Many of us have fallen for the trap that all views/opinions deserve equal attention and weight. This is a mistake. Trash is trash, and should be called out as such.


I understand that you think it like that but we still need to accept CCP/Chinese propaganda to some degree. While I understand your arguments fully and agree with them, the problem of China is that it has not undergone the same processes that Europe and US as a descendant of Europe has undergone. What I mean by that is that the greatest motivators for change is fear, death and pain sadly speaking. Europe and US learned its lessons the hard way, the bloody way. China didn't have the same experience because it was a closed off society so it is reasonable for China as a country and as a society to not understand the same truths that we take for granted. I mean they didn't bleed in the 30 years war nor did they have to fight again Napoleon or WW1 and WW2. They had their own independence war and unification and then the reighn of missmanagement and terror under Mao and they did learn something from that. From our side, sure it is not so much but it explains the situation in my opinion a bit.

The outcome of the unification and independence wars was:
1) Modernisation of the country to a more European model. (Communism is European. Communist model is a European Beurocratic model. It brought modernity to rural populations in China the same way it did in Russia)
2) Strengthening of the military according to European theories and systems.
3) Maos economic mismanagement after the wars directly lead to a transition from hardline communism to capitalism.
4) Maos infinite reign also lead to the Chinese leadership being changed every decade although this process was not institutionolized so Xi is having no problems of breaking this idea as memory of Mao fades.

From our perspective this is little but Europe and US also didn't just magically change their mind on many things that we consider the norm right now. Here are some examples:
1) If it wasn't for the 30 year war then we wouldn't have any rules for warfare.
2) If it wasn't for the Napoleonic wars then we would not have any diplomatic rules or systems to prevent war.
3) If it wasn't for the WW1 then we would not care for minorities so much.
4) If it wasn't for the WW2 then we would not care about genocide so much.

There are far more examples and such. Since the Napoleonic wars we have itterated through basically 3-4 international systems to prevent war because every time the conflicts were more bloodier and bloodier. By the way, the concert of Europe has been the most successful so far although our current iteration is doing pretty good. China simply didn't have all those experiences.

Is it possible to get them without war or massive suffering? Probably but it is easy for us to say that when we have actually experienced it through war and our ancestors paid the prices and learned from it.
#15181570
JohnRawls wrote:
I understand that you think it like that but we still need to accept CCP/Chinese propaganda to some degree. While I understand your arguments fully and agree with them, the problem of China is that it has not undergone the same processes that Europe and US as a descendant of Europe has undergone. What I mean by that is that the greatest motivators for change is fear, death and pain sadly speaking. Europe and US learned its lessons the hard way, the bloody way. China didn't have the same experience because it was a closed off society so it is reasonable for China as a country and as a society to not understand the same truths that we take for granted. I mean they didn't bleed in the 30 years war nor did they have to fight again Napoleon or WW1 and WW2. They had their own independence war and unification and then the reighn of missmanagement and terror under Mao and they did learn something from that. From our side, sure it is not so much but it explains the situation in my opinion a bit.

The outcome of the unification and independence wars was:
1) Modernisation of the country to a more European model. (Communism is European. Communist model is a European Beurocratic model. It brought modernity to rural populations in China the same way it did in Russia)
2) Strengthening of the military according to European theories and systems.
3) Maos economic mismanagement after the wars directly lead to a transition from hardline communism to capitalism.
4) Maos infinite reign also lead to the Chinese leadership being changed every decade although this process was not institutionolized so Xi is having no problems of breaking this idea as memory of Mao fades.

From our perspective this is little but Europe and US also didn't just magically change their mind on many things that we consider the norm right now. Here are some examples:
1) If it wasn't for the 30 year war then we wouldn't have any rules for warfare.
2) If it wasn't for the Napoleonic wars then we would not have any diplomatic rules or systems to prevent war.
3) If it wasn't for the WW1 then we would not care for minorities so much.
4) If it wasn't for the WW2 then we would not care about genocide so much.

There are far more examples and such. Since the Napoleonic wars we have itterated through basically 3-4 international systems to prevent war because every time the conflicts were more bloodier and bloodier. By the way, the concert of Europe has been the most successful so far although our current iteration is doing pretty good. China simply didn't have all those experiences.

Is it possible to get them without war or massive suffering? Probably but it is easy for us to say that when we have actually experienced it through war and our ancestors paid the prices and learned from it.


This is all fair and valid. I do not disagree. However, don't they have the luxury of learning from this as well? I mean fuck. It's not like you or I actually suffered through WWI/WWII, no? Yet, we understand. Then again, i guess there's the collective cultural experience.

You raise the big question though. Is it possible to get them there without war/suffering/destruction? I feel like it's unlikely given their propensity to use fear, violence, and intimidation. They have tripled down on this many times after Tienanmen square. Most of all, they are hell bent on revenge given their "century of shame". There is a machisomism that's embedded in all of this behavior from the CCP as well. The only thing that might avoid war is economics.

Which brings me to the fundamental thing/point. Indeed the CCP is very scared of their own people. Hence why they put so much energy into controlling their own people. As of a few years ago, China spent more on domestic security (controlling its people) than it did on their defense (military). That speaks volumes as to how scared the CCP are of their own people. The inefficiency in that sided spending is massive. I mean shit, you are spending more to control what happens inside your borders than you are spending to influence/control the rest of the world. That puts them on a bad footing (thankfully, fucking thanksfully). They can't let up on the spending either.

https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/China-People-s-Congress-2018/China-spending-puts-domestic-security-ahead-of-defense

In short, the CCP are babies that get offended by everything. Once their economic growth slows down (it will happen, probably many many years from now, but it will happen eventually). People in China will realize the lies and bullshit they have been fed by the CCP. They will start demanding their freedoms back. This will spell doom for the CCP. The CCP is on borrowed time. That said, between now and then is a very very long time, thus the CCP will have plenty of time to inflict massive damage to the planet with spewing sewage into the oceans, and to the people of this planet by committing genocides and starting wars. Sitting around and waiting for the internal demise of the CCP is also a mistake. I don't think the solution is to wait and let them figure it out. They won't. The CCP is oo obsessed with its own power.

China reminds me of the classic Aesop story (Greek; the great fathers of western civilization) about The dog and the wolf. The Chinese people are the dog for the moment, but they will eventually want to be the wolf when their economic growth slows. That will be the death kneel of the CCP. Of course, the CCP themselves know this, they know this well, they are not stupid. It will be interesting to see what they do in order to avoid their inevitable demise. Let's hope they do not spark a massive war. WWIII, if it happens, will be started by China; or rather, the CCP to be more precise.


Last. Where's JACK MA!!??

If you become too rich, you are a target to the CCP.
#15181572
Russianbear wrote:Before the West took for granted democracy from the ancient Greeks, they should have at least become acquainted with what Greek thinkers said about democracy like Plato in his work "Republic", where he characterized democracy as one of the worst possible political systems.


Oh look, we have an expert on Plato here.

Socrates in The Republic wasn't particularly fond of any existing form of government, after all they all degenerate from one into the other. Not that his ideal state in The Republic has ever existed or will ever exist, because no ruling elite will ever subject itself to that kind of treatment :lol:.

Plato wrote other dialogues however, for example The Statesman or The Laws. The latter is an attempt at a more realistic ideal state, which roughly resembles an "electoral democracy". In quotes because for the Greeks elections were aristocratic. Democracy meant election by lot (among other things).

What is fair to say though is that Plato wasn't a liberal. In fact by today's standards he was a total prick.

Russianbear wrote:We do not want western decline, we prefer our undisputed progress.


Wait...aren't you from Russia? :eek: :lol:
#15181582
JohnRawls wrote: I mean they didn't bleed in the 30 years war nor did they have to fight again Napoleon or WW1 and WW2.


This whole post and its conclusions are laughable. China didn't fight in WW2? China hasn't had serious nation-building conflicts in its recent history? China doesn't have a culture of diplomacy or rules of war?

For fuck's sake, man. There's ignorance and then there's this glob of shit.

Rancid wrote:You raise the big question though. Is it possible to get them there without war/suffering/destruction? I feel like it's unlikely given their propensity to use fear, violence, and intimidation. They have tripled down on this many times after Tienanmen square. Most of all, they are hell bent on revenge given their "century of shame".


There is an assumption that many make here that I don't understand - that a liberal, democratic China wouldn't be a threat to a Western-led world order. I don't think this is true at all: the same nationalist undercurrent that exists in the UK and USA that promote Trumpism, freedom fries, and Brexit would exist in a democratic China. There is no reason to believe that a democratic Chinese body politic wouldn't challenge US hegemony in Asia, and given my own experiences and the general atmosphere on Weibo and television media, when it comes to issues like Taiwan or Hong Kong - the CCP is actually a restrained influence on a Chinese population that would happily go to war to restore the national honor.

Rancid wrote:Indeed the CCP is very scared of their own people.


The CCP is traumatized by two events - 1) the current leadership suffered under the Cultural Revolution (which was basically a nation-wide, ten year 'January 6' autocoup led by Mao to shore up his waning institutional support). Xi spent time in a labor camp, for example. They're very, very wary of uncontrolled populism. 2) The collapse of the USSR and the subsequent degradation of quality of life and economic prospects for the Russian people as a result.

In other ways, however, the CCP is opening up - Party membership is becoming easier, even if the duties associated with it are becoming more stringent. Local level elections are open to more and more people as a result. There is a greater dialogue in local-level decisions between non-party members and local councils in the last five years as well. Additionally, like it or not, Xi has made great strides in reducing corruption in the state apparatus and improving Chinese trust in officials, especially inspectors and police, greatly improving people's confidence and trust in one another. The stereotype of Chinese 'liars and cheats' is a deserved one - any Chinese will admit it - but one that is increasingly of the past. This is something I've noticed improving even just over the last six years I've been here, and covid was actually a huge boost for it.

Rancid wrote:People in China will realize the lies and bullshit they have been fed by the CCP. They will start demanding their freedoms back.


China is not a closed system - millions travel, millions study and work abroad, and they all communicate with their families back home. They come back to visit or to live.

In my experience, people in China are far more aware of the lies their government says than the typical American. Nonetheless, the CCP enjoys considerable public support and the people in China have an optimism about the future that far outpaces Westerners. It seems to be a trade they're happy to make.

It's like saying "Singaporeans will wake up any day now and demand freedom" and presumes a universality of your specific system of values that simply isn't there.

Rancid wrote:Last. Where's JACK MA!!??


Jack Ma has made several public appearances this year. Yes, he's toned down his public profile, but unfortunately it isn't because he was rich (he isn't even the richest man in China at the moment) but because he thought himself above the CCP. China has no tolerance for figures like Koch or Soros.

In all honesty, I just see a lot of filtered, indirect and frankly... not racist but racist adjacent through ignorance?... "knowledge" about China here. I think a lot of you would be benefited by at least seeking out some translations and finding out what the Chinese think about themselves and the role of their political systems or their own views on history. Like seriously - China didn't fight in WW1 or WW2? China had no nation-building wars or systems of international diplomacy? These are basic, basic errors being made with an absurd level of confidence.
#15181602
Rugoz wrote:Oh look, we have an expert on Plato here.

Socrates in The Republic wasn't particularly fond of any existing form of government, after all they all degenerate from one into the other. Not that his ideal state in The Republic has ever existed or will ever exist, because no ruling elite will ever subject itself to that kind of treatment :lol:.

Plato wrote other dialogues however, for example The Statesman or The Laws. The latter is an attempt at a more realistic ideal state, which roughly resembles an "electoral democracy". In quotes because for the Greeks elections were aristocratic. Democracy meant election by lot (among other things).

What is fair to say though is that Plato wasn't a liberal. In fact by today's standards he was a total prick.



Wait...aren't you from Russia? :eek: :lol:


Wait...aren't you from Ukraine? :eek: :lol:
#15181605
Rancid wrote:This is all fair and valid.

Last. Where's JACK MA!!??


Very good question. America is currently ruled by a corporatocracy, where corporate fascism with Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey can impose censorship on a democratically elected president, and then let deep state organize a coup and remove him from office.
China will never allow an oligarch like Jack Ma to impose the rule of corporate fascism, instead of having a corporation that serves the interests of the people in the country.
Let the corporate mafia rule America, but not China.

JACK MA understood all of that and now he is fine.
:)
#15181610
Anglo mentality is always one of brutal action when confronted with something that they do not understand. they seek to dominate in order to bring perceived meaning to their self-designated righteous superiority. This is yet another such fine example. The west has no clue how to answer to China and have embarked on an ancient old tradition of propagating war and destruction. They know that china is outmaneuvering them at every corner, and they do so with class, peace, and resolve. This approach is not only portrayed as alien in substance but also as unacceptable by the west who needs all to play according to their rules of might (as they see themselves despite the dire and rapidly degrading condition of their societies) is right. they need and want China to play by their books in order to be able to contain china through their own, and only known, tactic and method of conducting war as the only solution to a problem. the western psyche has not evolved a bit despite coming into contact with so many various cultures, from which they could have learned so much, over the span of centuries.
#15181611
JohnRawls wrote:After rigorous process of theory and practice, democracy has prevailed. Europe has tried numerous autocratic, totalitarian, theocratical, democratic, monarchical and so on forms but democratic liberalism has won in the end. Political Darwinism i guess if such a thing exists.


As I said before, the Chinese people have tried various political systems. In the end, we chose the socialist system -- Socialist system with Chinese characteristics.

I want to emphasize once again that there is no perfect system in the world. Every country must find a political system suitable for its own history and culture.

There is no reason for forcing a country to accept or abandon a political system, whether it's "democratic liberalism" or "communism" or "socialism" or other "...ism".

At the same time, each country must adjust and optimize its own system. For China, the CPC is constantly carrying out self criticism and even self denial.

The CPC was founded in 1921. However, the CPC in 1921 was different from the CPC in World War II, was different from the CPC when the people's Republic of China founded in 1949, was different from the CPC during the cultural revolution, was different from the CPC after reform and opening up, and was different from the CPC after China becoming the second largest economy in the world.

It is this ability of continuous self evolution that enables the CPC to adapt to China's different situations in different historical periods and has been supported by the people.

Therefore, I hope that foreign friends can see China and the CPC with a developing eyes, rather than staying at a certain historical stage. I also hope that foreign friends will examine their own national systems and political parties according to the same standards.
#15181612
ThingkingPanda wrote:foreign friends


I do hope that the Weibo crowd can internalize this phrase fully. There is a huge body of people happy and willing to move to China that are often marginalized by aspects of Chinese society and latent racism. The CCP does not endorse this, but public backlash remains. The problem is that those that are willing to move to China to pursue education and work and live (and often most integrate into Chinese society) come from "less desirable" backgrounds: Rwandans, Ethiopians, Kenyans, Pakistanis, Nepali, etc. They're often highly educated and actually bother to learn Chinese, something that escapes most Western expats (myself included, I capped out at a 5th grade level :lol: )

Welcoming the Third World would do a lot to solve China's latent birth crisis, as well as improve China's relationship with the Global South - yet many Chinese online see accepting them as beneath the dignity of China: despite the fact that they'd be China's greatest allies, both at home and abroad. I've known personally four guys from Africa that got their PhD here, found girlfriends, and were willing to stay in China long-term, if not for life. Yet living permanently as a resident, hostile attitudes from disgruntled Chinese men (women don't seem to mind as much), and a difficult job market sent these highly educated and potential allies packing back home.

What's the solution for this?
#15181613
Rugoz wrote:Of course CCP rule under Mao was mostly a disaster, with tens of millions starving during the great leap forward, to give one example. Deng gave up on socialism by any real definition of the word. China today is a highly unequal society, more unequal than basically every other industrialized country. Whether that will correct itself remains to be seen.


You mentioned Mao Zedong, so I'll talk with you about Mao Zedong.

What kind of country was China in 1949? It is a poor and backward agricultural country.

In the first 30 years after the founding of new China (Mao's 30 years), China achieved national independence, people's Liberation and national unity; China has established the basic socialist system in an all-round way; On the ruins left by the old China, China has basically established an independent and relatively complete industrial system and national economic system in a much shorter time than the western countries, which has laid a solid material and technological foundation for the modernization drive.

India gained independence in 1947, when life expectancy was 32 years. When new China was founded in 1949, the life expectancy of the Chinese was 35 years - three years higher than that of India. By 1978, the last year before China's reform, life expectancy was 67 in China and 55 in India - the gap widened to 12.

The widening gap is not because of India's poor performance - life expectancy has increased by 22 years in 32 years, but because of China's excellent performance - life expectancy has increased by 32 years in 29 years. This means that before the reform, Chinese life expectancy increased by more than one year a year - an average annual increase of 2.3%.

By comparison, we have a better understanding of the true scale of this achievement. It should be pointed out that, compared with other major countries in human history, China's life expectancy growth rate is the fastest in the 30 years after 1949. For example:

- In the 30 years after 1880, life expectancy in the United States increased by 0.9% annually.
- After 1871, life expectancy in the UK experienced a period of rapid growth, with an annual growth rate of less than 1.0% .
- Japan's life expectancy growth is more significant, and it is a country that has achieved rapid growth in the economic recovery after WW II. In the 29 years after 1947, the average annual growth rate of life expectancy is 1.3%.

As a result, China's 2.3% increase in life expectancy between 1949 and 1978 is far higher than those calculated by normal standards in these countries, and its performance is unprecedented.

This is only one of Mao Zedong's many achievements, but I personally think it is his most important achievement, because the right to life is the most important human right.

His other achievements, for example, under the joint sanctions and embargoes of the Soviet Union and the United States, enabled China to have the capability of nuclear deterrence and launching satellites, and enabled China to return to the UN and became one of the five permanent members.

Of course, the CPC and Mao also made many mistakes in the "first 30 years" of new China, and the development of our country suffered serious setbacks as a result. This is the price to pay in the process of exploration“ The new road of reform and opening-up in the last 30 years is created on the basis of summing up the experience and lessons of the first 30 years. We should treat the "first 30 years" of new China with respect for history.
#15181616
China not involved in conflict and not part of WW2 or suffered hardship @JohnRawls?

:facepalm:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War

I thought the Japanese invasion of China was just common knowledge. Clearly not. Also, Japanese were far worse enemies than the Germans for POW. You literally were worked to death.
#15181617
Fasces wrote:I do hope that the Weibo crowd can internalize this phrase fully. There is a huge body of people happy and willing to move to China that are often marginalized by aspects of Chinese society and latent racism. The CCP does not endorse this, but public backlash remains. The problem is that those that are willing to move to China to pursue education and work and live (and often most integrate into Chinese society) come from "less desirable" backgrounds: Rwandans, Ethiopians, Kenyans, Pakistanis, Nepali, etc. They're often highly educated and actually bother to learn Chinese, something that escapes most Western expats (myself included, I capped out at a 5th grade level :lol: )

Welcoming the Third World would do a lot to solve China's latent birth crisis, as well as improve China's relationship with the Global South - yet many Chinese online see accepting them as beneath the dignity of China: despite the fact that they'd be China's greatest allies, both at home and abroad. I've known personally four guys from Africa that got their PhD here, found girlfriends, and were willing to stay in China long-term, if not for life. Yet living permanently as a resident, hostile attitudes from disgruntled Chinese men (women don't seem to mind as much), and a difficult job market sent these highly educated and potential allies packing back home.

What's the solution for this?


Time, my friend, it needs time.

Equality is everyone's pursuit. For the Chinese people, especially the Han people, who account for the majority of China's population, we first pay attention to the equality between all ethnic groups in China, and then the equality between foreigners living in China and Chinese citizens.

Perhaps different from what many foreigners imagine, China's ethnic minorities enjoy more "privileges" than China's Han people. China has just ended its "family planning" policy. In fact, the policy mainly restricted the Han people, while there were no real restrictions on the Uygur, Tibetan, Mongolian and other ethnic minorities. Chinese people attach importance to education, but in the college entrance examination, ethnic minority candidates will get bonus points, and their admission rate is higher than that of Han candidates.

Same for foreigners living in China. When I was in college, foreign students in my college enjoyed better accommodation, restaurants and scholarships than Chinese students. It is also easier for foreigners to find jobs in China.

I understand why our government has made these seemingly "unequal" policies, some to strengthen national unity, some to eradicate poverty, and some to increase China's international influence. But these policies have also caused some negative effects, including some Han people feel unfair, including the things you mentioned.

With the development of China's economy, with more and more foreigners live in China and more and more Chinese live abroad, I have noticed that some unequal policies are being abolished. I think Chinese people will gradually adapt to a more diversified society.
#15181632
B0ycey wrote:China not involved in conflict and not part of WW2 or suffered hardship @JohnRawls?

:facepalm:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War

I thought the Japanese invasion of China was just common knowledge. Clearly not. Also, Japanese were far worse enemies than the Germans for POW. You literally were worked to death.


Re-read my text. What do you think the independence and unification war is for China? You are missing the main idea also that conflicts inevitably teach us something and since the conflict took a bit different form in China, they learned different lessons compared to Europe or US.
#15181634
JohnRawls wrote:Re-read my text. What do you think the independence and unification war is for China? You are missing the main idea also that conflicts inevitably teach us something and since the conflict took a bit different form in China, they learned different lessons compared to Europe or US.


The point is China have had the same type of history that the West have. In fact I would say it is significantly more bloody than the West in particular the US which is a relatively new nation anyway.

Also I have found Thingking Pandas Posts rather interesting as he reminds me of Balancer, a Russian, a few years back which have given us an insight of China from their perspective. You don't have to agree with him but I know first hand his voice is not alone in China. That is kind of why I have stayed out of this thread despite enjoying it. You see the Western opinion being challenged and what I have found is users that are challenging the Chinese narrative have no clue what they are talking about. Like China not being in WW2?? But that isn't saying there isn't a challenge to be made or that the Chinese narrative is correct. What I am saying is you need to learn about China in order to understand China and perhaps be able to challenge the arguments being made.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 9

It is implausible that the IDF could not or would[…]

Moving on to the next misuse of language that sho[…]

@JohnRawls What if your assumption is wrong??? […]

There is no reason to have a state at all unless w[…]