In China, unlike America, political legitimacy is built on competence and experience - Page 2 - 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.
#15180930
I'll say it again:

"Here is my 2 cents, and it's a guess, but a good one.

China has hit the wall. It's a damn shame, but inevitable. Their social contract with their people is a common one when a poor country gets authoritarian government. Russia did much the same, the government says we will make your lives better.

They were able to keep that promise, partly through the stupidity of American (and other leaders). That has slowed down, and that's just the first part of the tale of woe. The way most Chinese invest is real estate. The government deliberately created a investment bubble, and now they are trapped inside it. So they keep pouring massive amounts of money in, with zero expectation of it doing much good. It used to, their brilliant maglev trains are good example. But an economist would tell you it needs to stop, but the government is far too afraid of the political consequences of obliterating the investment income most Chinese have.

Then there is their other problems. They have severe water problems. That does have an easy solution, but it would be highly unpopular. "If you want to change behavior, change the price."

China is between a rock and hard place of it's own doing. They need to make the transition to being a mature economy, but they are terrified the government will collapse if they do. They are in a race against time, and losing."

There is an old Go proverb, "Rich men don't pick fights."

Countries that are secure don't need to keep a boot on the necks of their people... The big fear among China's leaders is another collapse into chaos and 'warlordism'. They have good reason to worry. We're in an era of rapid change, and that is a severe challenge to all of the governments. Those that are quicker to adapt have a better chance to handle it better. One of the few agile governments out there is Iceland, run mostly by women.
#15180932
JohnRawls wrote:First of all, an hour video is not a proper answer nor is the video title indicates that it has anything to do with your claims.

Please explain and provide evidence for your claims that we can discuss which is your own text.


Be creative and proactive in drawing your own conclusions.
This forum doesn't offer ready made Big Mac.


"Ignorance and arrogance are twins who like to be together"
Lao Tzu
:)

Image
#15180934
Russianbear wrote:Be creative and proactive in drawing your own conclusions.
This forum doesn't offer ready made Big Mac.


"Ignorance and arrogance are twins who like to be together"
Lao Tzu
:)

Image


Your posting things at random and don't want to discuss it. Anyone can really say random general things without elaborating anything. This does not make it true or believable though and encourages people to just ignore you.
#15180935
Who does rule America?

Democracy in America has been replaced by plutocracy and corporate fascism.
The role of the official state has been replaced by a deep state that represents the interests of large corporations, Wall Street and the Military complex.
The senile president of the United States is just the puppet of a deep state.



:|
#15180936
JohnRawls wrote:Your posting things at random and don't want to discuss it. Anyone can really say random general things without elaborating anything. This does not make it true or believable though and encourages people to just ignore you.


I agree that it is very encouraging that ignorant and arrogant people ignore you.
America desperately needs a lost substance and a brain.
#15180938
Russianbear wrote:I agree that it is very encouraging that ignorant and arrogant people ignore you.
America desperately needs a lost substance and a brain.


We often get here people/bots like you who just spam and don't wanna debate anything. Usually they don't participate in topics though so we gave you a try. Pofo doesn't care much about propaganda as long as the propagandist is willing to debate and all ideologies are accepted here.

Bottom line being, what is the point of your posts? And your other accounts. (Probably)
#15181064
JohnRawls wrote:We often get here people/bots like you who just spam and don't wanna debate anything. Usually they don't participate in topics though so we gave you a try. Pofo doesn't care much about propaganda as long as the propagandist is willing to debate and all ideologies are accepted here.

Bottom line being, what is the point of your posts? And your other accounts. (Probably)


Firstly you and US must suppress your arrogance, become humble and respect others, otherwise God will make you humble.
That could be very painful.


"If you're not humble in this world, then the world will throw humbleness upon you."
Mike Tyson


#15181078
It's vital for a developing country, any country, to have stable governments and strong institutions and law and order. China has this, which has helped them a lot.

When you have instability, infighting, coups, internal violence etc it scares away foreign investment too.

The problem with many developing countries who try democracy is the peaceful transition of power, where leaders don't want to give up power, so they rig elections, jail political opponents, make changes to the law to extend their power etc. And then sometimes this will cause a military coup or other civil war. Putin acts like this too. Amazingly we saw Trump try to act like a 3rd world dictator and try to hang on to his power, but US democracy and rule of law was too robust.

The CCP has an extremely tight grip on power and has consolidated its rule very well. The country has done well economically under its rule the last 30 years so this helps its legitimacy with the average Chinese citizens.
#15181105
Rugoz wrote:@ThingkingPanda
You literally responded to none of the posts. People are here to debate, not to hold monologues.

:lol:

The NPC is a rubber-stamp parliament. It has no power whatsoever.

The CCP is a top-down hierarchical organization where those at the top decide who's allowed to advance. That may be a good thing or not, but labeling it "democracy" is preposterous.

Who's "the country"? The CCP?


1、 Sorry, I'm still learning how to use this forum.

2、At the third session of the 13th National People's Congress in 2020 alone, deputies to the NPC put forward 506 motions and 9000 suggestions. The people's Congress system is the cornerstone of China's law making, not just “rubber-stamp”.

3、I think democracy is a process of universal participation, and every citizen should participate in the formulation of national policies. At the same time, the formulation of national policies should not only listen to public opinions, but also be based on reason and science.

Take China's 14th five year plan as an example. After the government put forward the draft, the NPC solicited opinions and suggestions from the whole society through the Internet and the media. More than one million suggestions have been received from Chinese citizens, many of which have been adopted.

In daily life, any dissatisfaction, complaint and suggestion of Chinese citizens to the government can be submitted through the "12345" system of each city. According to the law, any government department must reply and deal with it within 72 hours until the citizens are satisfied. If some government departments treat it negatively, the performance appraisal of their officials will be greatly affected.

Whether it is democracy in which the president is directly elected by vote or multi-level representative democracy in China, I think it’s just different form of democracy.
According to the Munich Security Index in 2021, Chinese people have the highest sense of security in the world. Isn't that exactly the purpose of democracy?
#15181116
Sandzak wrote:@ThingkingPanda

I am sinofile, but what CCP is doing with minorities in Xin Yang and Tibet, is a genocide.


Gosh another Anglo-Western propaganda myth about Xinjiang Autonomous Region and Tibet created to bring division, destabilize China turning Islamic states and Muslims against China.
I would like to remind you that the United States government has detained twenty-two Uyghurs in the Guantanamo Bay prison on terrorism charges.
If America has the right to fight Uighur terrorists, why shouldn't China do it on own territory?
You can't be soft when dealing with terrorist recruited by foreign intelligence (MI6, CIA). They will go all out for their agenda even at the expense of innocent people. Even people who are kind to them.
As for Tibet, unprecedented prosperity is happening there, as in other parts of China.
As an educated Turkish person, you should not be influenced by such cheap western propaganda.
Even in Turkey Erdogan has to fight with Kurdish terrorists.

Last edited by Russianbear on 15 Jul 2021 11:18, edited 3 times in total.
#15181117
You can fight terrorism without engaging in a totalitarian level of data-assisted repression. China may be catching a lot of radicalized Muslims (and I commend China for their efforts at reeducation of radicalized elements rather than simply bombing) but they're catching a lot of innocents with their deep trawl as well, and this should be recognized as an injustice.

The only way to justify such a deep trawl is to defend the Chinese hold on the region, and we shouldn't pretend its done entirely for humanitarian reasons as a result. To say it another way: they're not being sent into re-education for their own good, out of a kindness by the Chinese state, even if some good results from it. Any good is a byproduct, not the core intent.
#15181121
ThingkingPanda wrote:1、 Sorry, I'm still learning how to use this forum.


Fair enough.

ThingkingPanda wrote:2、At the third session of the 13th National People's Congress in 2020 alone, deputies to the NPC put forward 506 motions and 9000 suggestions. The people's Congress system is the cornerstone of China's law making, not just “rubber-stamp”.


"Motions" and "suggestions"? Take a look at the voting record of the NPC:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_v ... China#2018

It never rejects anything the party leadership proposes. 2018 is particularly extreme, with 100% approval everywhere. No doubt related to Xi's power grab. It also only meets for 2 weeks a year. "rubber stamp parliament" is an adequate description. Even it the NPC were powerful, the candidates standing for election are hand-picked by the CCP. It's not even remotely a democratic institution.

Authoritarian regimes often have institutions such as parliaments, supreme courts etc., but they have little de facto power and only exist to provide a veneer of legitimacy.

ThingkingPanda wrote:3、I think democracy is a process of universal participation, and every citizen should participate in the formulation of national policies. At the same time, the formulation of national policies should not only listen to public opinions, but also be based on reason and science.

Take China's 14th five year plan as an example. After the government put forward the draft, the NPC solicited opinions and suggestions from the whole society through the Internet and the media. More than one million suggestions have been received from Chinese citizens, many of which have been adopted.

In daily life, any dissatisfaction, complaint and suggestion of Chinese citizens to the government can be submitted through the "12345" system of each city. According to the law, any government department must reply and deal with it within 72 hours until the citizens are satisfied. If some government departments treat it negatively, the performance appraisal of their officials will be greatly affected.


Nothing of that is democratic. The word "democracy" comes from Greek and literally means "rule by the people". Not rule by a tiny elite who might take into account people's views in case they don't collide with the interests of the elite.

ThingkingPanda wrote:Whether it is democracy in which the president is directly elected by vote or multi-level representative democracy in China, I think it’s just different form of democracy.


"democracy with Chinese characteristics" is almost like "socialism with Chinese characterists", i.e. it means the exact opposite. China is authoritarian and hypercapitalist. Or to quote Deng Xiaoping: "It doesn't matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice."

It's safe to say the CCP has no commitment to the truth. It manufactures reality to serve its interests and it makes sure that reality isn't challenged by controlling the public discourse.

ThingkingPanda wrote:According to the Munich Security Index in 2021, Chinese people have the highest sense of security in the world. Isn't that exactly the purpose of democracy?


That's a purpose of every state, not only democratic ones.
#15181230
This is a great thread. I've read through much of it.

The initial points referencing the form of democratic centralism the CCP has been arguably based upon was good reading. And I'd add that it's important to remember that even during past periods of strong paramount leaders, there were still contending voices within the SC and elsewhere. Chen Yun countering Deng Xiaoping for example.

And this is where I see the relevance of some other good points made later in the thread. Deng had a phrase 'tacking against the wind' which alluded to heading out in one direction (economic reform) only to tack back in the other direction in order to correct the miscalculations which come with experimentation gone wrong ... and in a sailing context, this sideways maneuvering has the end result of moving forward. My concern for China now, mainly in relation to its economic structure permeating into its social structure, is that if dissenting voices are suppressed too much then many necessary corrections won't be flagged and corrected.

I also personally believe as an Australia based in North East Asia that without mechanisms in place to contain unbalanced ideology ... short term-ism will trump long term reasoning. This is also a dynamic going down in the United States at this point in time, and not one to follow. My own opinion is that Zhao Lijian is on the wrong track with Australia. Morrison and his government have been unwise and not very astute regarding China IMO, but the aggressive Chinese backlash to their disposition may well resonate with Australian people for long after the LNP has lost government. It's a bit of a pointless conflict and I can't see anything but very superficial PR gains from it.
#15181232
JohnRawls wrote:The core problems are still there:
1) Government and political institutions are loyal to the CPC. While this might sound nice to some, it creates a divergence between peoples interest and CPC interest. In a nut shell, theoretically the party in the Marxist-Leninist party model should represent the needs and wants of the people but it is not the case in all situations. Meaning that conflicts will arise on these basis.

2) Marxist-Leninist system has a problem of mono cultural orientation. In a sense that it wants to supplant any cultural or regional differences with one idea, one culture and so on. This is not ideal for larger countries since the regional differences will always be present. And once the system shows weakness then the region revolt or have discontent. Even more problematic is that this form of governance creates an illusion that the old grievances are gone which they are not. They are merely supressed on hidden. The collapse of the SU was a shock in this regard, everyone thought that ethnic and regional divides were fixed but in reality they weren't.

3) The Marxist-Leninist party model is based on almost total loyalty and has problems resolving conflicts for people who are outside of this loyalty circle or individuals who gain prominence while their achievements within the party are few. This creates selective application of laws and judgements. To elaborate on this a bit: this covers powerful businessman, academia, small businessman to average joes. Basically almost anyone who is not interested in the party and wants to do his own thing. This process is more pronounced for very prominent businessman in the current times in China.

4) Institutional governance is largely based on memory and institutional expertise instead of a clear system of checks and balances ingrained in law or a constitution. What this means is that the control over the key functions and processes within the system are decided and can be changed to suit the current power circle. This might be a good thing in some cases but long term this has never(?) worked. There are always ups and downs for this but the gist of it, as institutional memory fades of the bad times so does the system descends in to some form of abuse of power or mistakes. For example, while the institutional memory of Mao was strong, the chairman's of the party tried to maintain the 10 years office schedules and so on. Now that it has weakened, there is a 2 decades of Xis rule. This is a massive inherent weakness of such a system.

5) The general attitude of such a model is that it can do no wrong, there can't be anything bad and so on. While some people like to pretend it is part of the Chinese culture, I would totally disagree. The same situation was rampant in the Soviet Union. This leads to higher ranking official like province heads and so on falsifying economic growth, hiding corruption and so on. If the system doesn't allow or can't report any failures then people will just not report them and make it look like everything is okay. Ignoring the unhappiness of people regarding this, the more problematic aspect is that it destroys the information feedback loop either from the people or within the system itself.

There are more minor things that can be added but then this will be even more of a TLDR kinda answer. Overall, we have observed through out the 20th and 21st centuries how similarly structed countries will progress and what happens. All of the above will eventually lead to a situation of China having trouble surpassing the middle income trap and the growth will stall. Usually in this cases the countries take a hard pivot to the right to maintain stability and power for the bureaucracy and within the party elites and so on.


When I introduced China's political system to foreign friends, I had to emphasize repeatedly the concept that China's political system is “a socialist system with Chinese characteristics”. It is different from the Soviet Union style political system, also different from the fundamentalist communism.

Throughout the years, the ideology of the CPC has changed together with the change of the party leaders. And between all the changes in the party history, the most well-known and significant period would be the reform and opening up which pursue socialist modernization by incorporating elements of capitalism. After Deng Xiaoping, the leader who tried to avoid theoretical debates, Jiang Zemin invented a new theory to define the new relationship between the party and the people, which is named “Three Represents.”Since then, the CPC identified itself as the representatives in three levels:

[list=]Representing the development trend of China’s advanced productive forces.
Representing the orientation of China's advanced culture.
Representing the fundamental interests of the overwhelming majority of the Chinese people.[/list]

China's political system has three cornerstones:
The system of party representatives of the Communist Party of China, the system of the National People's Congress, and the system of the National Committee of the Chinese people's Political Consultative Conference.

The role that CPPCC plays in the Chinese government is stated in the preamble of the PRC Constitution. In practice, its role and powers are somewhat analogous to an advisory legislative upper house.

"The Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, a broadly based representative organization of the united front which has played a significant historical role, will play a still more important role in the country’s political and social life, in promoting friendship with other countries and in the struggle for socialist modernization and for the reunification and unity of the country. The system of the multi-party cooperation and political consultation led by the Communist Party of China will exist and develop for a long time to come."

The CPPCC is neither a body of state power nor a policymaking organ, but an important platform for democratically participating in state affairs. In practice, CPPCC members serve as advisors for the government and legislative and judicial organs.

The Chinese Communist Party and the aligned "democratic parties" participate in the CPPCC. Besides political parties, CPPCC has also representatives from various sectors of society in its ranks.

The above is only about the political system, how the CPC unites intellectuals, businessmen and other non party personages. As for the economic system, the CPC is more flexible, so I will not elaborate.
#15181236
Rugoz wrote:Fair enough.



"Motions" and "suggestions"? Take a look at the voting record of the NPC:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_v ... China#2018

It never rejects anything the party leadership proposes. 2018 is particularly extreme, with 100% approval everywhere. No doubt related to Xi's power grab. It also only meets for 2 weeks a year. "rubber stamp parliament" is an adequate description. Even it the NPC were powerful, the candidates standing for election are hand-picked by the CCP. It's not even remotely a democratic institution.

Authoritarian regimes often have institutions such as parliaments, supreme courts etc., but they have little de facto power and only exist to provide a veneer of legitimacy.



Because of my work, although I worked in a private company, I still had opportunities to attend several working meetings of city-level CPC Municipal Party committees.

I can only say that the debates and quarrels at the meeting were very intense. However, unlike in the west, this kind of debate on policies and laws will not or rarely be made public, because we think it will cause social division and antagonism.

Therefore, you can see that when there is a public vote, the resolutions of the party and the government are always passed smoothly. What you can't see is the fierce "struggle" before the vote.

I think this is not only the system difference between China and the west, but also the cultural difference between China and the West.
#15181239
ThingkingPanda wrote:When I introduced China's political system to foreign friends, I had to emphasize repeatedly the concept that China's political system is “a socialist system with Chinese characteristics”. It is different from the Soviet Union style political system, also different from the fundamentalist communism.

Throughout the years, the ideology of the CPC has changed together with the change of the party leaders. And between all the changes in the party history, the most well-known and significant period would be the reform and opening up which pursue socialist modernization by incorporating elements of capitalism. After Deng Xiaoping, the leader who tried to avoid theoretical debates, Jiang Zemin invented a new theory to define the new relationship between the party and the people, which is named “Three Represents.”Since then, the CPC identified itself as the representatives in three levels:

[list=]Representing the development trend of China’s advanced productive forces.
Representing the orientation of China's advanced culture.
Representing the fundamental interests of the overwhelming majority of the Chinese people.[/list]

China's political system has three cornerstones:
The system of party representatives of the Communist Party of China, the system of the National People's Congress, and the system of the National Committee of the Chinese people's Political Consultative Conference.

The role that CPPCC plays in the Chinese government is stated in the preamble of the PRC Constitution. In practice, its role and powers are somewhat analogous to an advisory legislative upper house.

"The Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, a broadly based representative organization of the united front which has played a significant historical role, will play a still more important role in the country’s political and social life, in promoting friendship with other countries and in the struggle for socialist modernization and for the reunification and unity of the country. The system of the multi-party cooperation and political consultation led by the Communist Party of China will exist and develop for a long time to come."

The CPPCC is neither a body of state power nor a policymaking organ, but an important platform for democratically participating in state affairs. In practice, CPPCC members serve as advisors for the government and legislative and judicial organs.

The Chinese Communist Party and the aligned "democratic parties" participate in the CPPCC. Besides political parties, CPPCC has also representatives from various sectors of society in its ranks.

The above is only about the political system, how the CPC unites intellectuals, businessmen and other non party personages. As for the economic system, the CPC is more flexible, so I will not elaborate.


On paper perhaps, but reality is bit more disappointing. Although China has its own characteristics as you said, this is still the same party and governmental apparatus system that the SU used. The Soviet Union also had similar justification written for its apparatus. The difference here is obviously the movement from hardline communism to more softer socialism with a lot of capitalism which was a great success.

Once again though, it doesn't address all of the core problems. De Facto CPC is in full control of all governmental institutions and the loyalty doesn't go from CPC to Institutions but the other way around that institutions have to be loyal to CPC. This creates a process of rubber stamping of party decisions on any level of governance.

Jiang Zemins work has been on my to read list for a long time now. I opened it up for a bit but didn't really read much, perhaps i will pick it up again.
#15181251
ThingkingPanda wrote:I can only say that the debates and quarrels at the meeting were very intense. However, unlike in the west, this kind of debate on policies and laws will not or rarely be made public, because we think it will cause social division and antagonism.


That presumes social division is caused by public debate. Most likely the social divisions already exist and the debate just brings them to the forefront, which is necessary if you want to resolve them. But let's not be so naive here. The CCP is concerned its political legitimacy might be questioned in open debate, that people might demand actual political power. Hence the censorship.

ThingkingPanda wrote:Therefore, you can see that when there is a public vote, the resolutions of the party and the government are always passed smoothly. What you can't see is the fierce "struggle" before the vote.


A fierce debate doesn't tell us who calls the shots. You can have a fierce debate at the workplace, but in the end its the bosses who decide (for most of us anyway).

ThingkingPanda wrote:I think this is not only the system difference between China and the west, but also the cultural difference between China and the West.


Well there's a place called Taiwan that is culturally Chinese and at the same time has a vibrant democracy that is open and transparent. Sorry for mentioning it :D.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 9

EU is not prepared on nuclear war, but Russia,[…]

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

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

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