|
A bit of ignorance and just plain wrongness in the responses to this blog.
On July 02 2012 00:58 jpak wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 00:56 Paljas wrote:On July 02 2012 00:48 Caihead wrote:On July 02 2012 00:45 Paljas wrote:
wow china, the the country with the strongest economy in the world, isnt comunist? thanks you captian obvious, for explaning this very complex topic. It's that same pain-staking simplicity and obviousness that makes people who defend the view that China is communist and attack people of Chinese descent by negative association (which is hilarious because functioning Social-democracy is often seen as the end goal of democracy) all the more angering. And also, how strong the economy is of a country is irrelevant to its political structure inherently. but it is indeed that simple. and communism is not only a political structure, but a economical too. and i gave you 5 stars. In truth, no communist country was ever truly "communist."
In truth, this is misleading. They classified their societies as being in the "socialist" stage of development in Marxism-Leninism (-Maoism -Stalinism -Titoism -What-have-you-ism) and building themselves toward "Communism." They were Communists, they identified themselves as Communists, thought of themselves as Communists. In truth, no country ever can be Communist, at least not by the methods that Marx and later Marxist thinkers prescribed and by the definition Marx gave for Communism. It's been shown impossible to get past the "socialism" stage as the State becomes a corrupt, repressive class structure itself.
Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 01:02 Kupon3ss wrote:On July 02 2012 00:58 jpak wrote:On July 02 2012 00:56 Paljas wrote:On July 02 2012 00:48 Caihead wrote:On July 02 2012 00:45 Paljas wrote:
wow china, the the country with the strongest economy in the world, isnt comunist? thanks you captian obvious, for explaning this very complex topic. It's that same pain-staking simplicity and obviousness that makes people who defend the view that China is communist and attack people of Chinese descent by negative association (which is hilarious because functioning Social-democracy is often seen as the end goal of democracy) all the more angering. And also, how strong the economy is of a country is irrelevant to its political structure inherently. but it is indeed that simple. and communism is not only a political structure, but a economical too. and i gave you 5 stars. In truth, no communist country was ever truly "communist." In truth, no country was ever truly "democratic" outside of a few Greek city-states, and even then it was limited to rich white men
In truth, the free Greeks of the Classical era would be quite puzzled to hear themselves described as "rich white men," as:
1. The "white/non-white" dichotomy was not to come into being for another 2000 years, and
2. It varied from polis to polis but you did not necessarily have to be rich, you had to be a freeman and in some poleis you had to own property, in others all you had to do was be a freeman and have completed military service.
Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 00:45 Paljas wrote:
wow china, the the country with the strongest economy in the world, isnt comunist? thanks you captian obvious, for explaning this very complex topic.
China does not have the strongest economy in the world by any measure.
Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 00:51 Kupon3ss wrote:
China is communist the same way America is democratic; the government in charge claims that it is the case~
Cynicism of this level is no different from simple ignorance.
I voted the blog 3 stars because China is not a Communist country but the author is kind of naive about China anyway.
Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 01:05 Caihead wrote:On July 02 2012 01:02 Kupon3ss wrote:On July 02 2012 00:58 jpak wrote:On July 02 2012 00:56 Paljas wrote:On July 02 2012 00:48 Caihead wrote:On July 02 2012 00:45 Paljas wrote:
wow china, the the country with the strongest economy in the world, isnt comunist? thanks you captian obvious, for explaning this very complex topic. It's that same pain-staking simplicity and obviousness that makes people who defend the view that China is communist and attack people of Chinese descent by negative association (which is hilarious because functioning Social-democracy is often seen as the end goal of democracy) all the more angering. And also, how strong the economy is of a country is irrelevant to its political structure inherently. but it is indeed that simple. and communism is not only a political structure, but a economical too. and i gave you 5 stars. In truth, no communist country was ever truly "communist." In truth, no country was ever truly "democratic" outside of a few Greek city-states, and even then it was limited to rich white men Current Bolivia, 1942 Spain pre-civil war (more accurately during Spanish revolution) - before anyone tells me I'm shooting myself in the foot, I'm aware it's possible to identity Spain during this period as either direct democracy, or anarcho-syndicalist.
Current Bolivia is not truly democratic and barely has even a veneer of democracy anymore. It's an increasingly authoritarian repressive state. Spain before the Civil War was not a true democracy during the Civil War only very small areas of it under the control of local anarchists for very brief periods of time could be considered "truly democratic" in the way that is being defined here.
|
I think they are saying they are communist because the government likes the control it has. But I feel like its more of a hybrid of communist/captalist. China really just wants to be like the US, use to be I think. But interesting read.
|
You're right OP, we can't really call China communist anymore. The people still live under an authoritarian state, but no longer have access to the few benefits a communist state might provide them. Unfortunatley, you can't really call China capitalist either. Sure, there is come capitalism operating within the country, but not within the context of any kind of meaningful civil liberties, so most people have no access to the market in a way that makes capitalism meaningful. So, what is China to the people? Communist? Not really, there's a growing divide between the majority of the people and a new emerging wealthy business class (that accepts repressive authoritarianism in exchange for wealth). Capitalist? Not really, it's not really a free state where people might pursue wealth and autonomy. Totalitarian is really the only meaningful word remaining to describe China, it's just a fully centralized one party system whose top priority is to maintain power that controls every aspect of Chinese society with an iron fist.
It doesn't matter that China isn't as communist as it used to be, because it's hard to even determine whether or not that constitutes progress. And it's ridiculous to claim that the condemnations of the international community are victimizing Chinese people. The issue is that the current ruling class in China is victimizing Chinese people.
If it weren't for the economic growth in that country, China would be in a state of arrested development. As such, I personally will rag on China until pigs fly (or until China makes some important changes, whatever comes first). I am not a racist, however, and harbour no ill will toward any Chinese people. If you think an attack on China's policies constitutes an attack on you, that's your problem, not ours.
|
I appreciate this kind of blog but you can't educate people who are ignorant here and who just refuses to believe anything else other than what they think is right. Mostly they are jealous of the fact 1.China will surpass US in the future. 2. Cheap Chinese labour takes away jobs in US.
|
While you pose fairly rational arguments, I think the title and opening statements cause people to pre-judge without reading.
That said, you articulate yourself fairly well, although it's clear you have some strong resentment towards those who disparage China and it's current policies.
Personally I think that China will continue to grow in power and influence, and most Americans are resistant to being challenged as the most influential country. As far as the attitude towards Chinese people, people always fear what they don't understand, and there are some major differences between the western and eastern cultures.
|
China has betrayed the ideals of Communism and has been lured into the evil of Capitalism. We already know.
|
If anything, aren't people way more critical of the huge disparity between the poor and the rich in a country that is supposedly communist? Like there seems to be a population in China that lives fairly well, and then everyone else is working themselves to death and making no money. A problem in many countries to be sure, but everyone knows what it means when they read 'made in china' on something they bought. I don't know how much that has changed in the last five or so years and I don't claim to have educated myself much since then about issues is China.
In high school they used to show us pictures of McDonalds and stuff in China to demonstrate the irony of a supposedly communist state.
|
Well I love nitpicking, so bear with me as I do a little of it.
You are one of the few people that adhere to the official definition of communism. Many, if not all, of the "communist" nations I can recall off the top of my head have utterly failed at their goals of becoming classless, moneyless and stateless. Instead, the power is concentrated even further to often a select few.
Do you know of any nation that was every truly communist, or have they all been fakes, in your opinion?
|
Communism as a whole has never existed due to the fact that communism, from my understanding, views the system as one for everything and everything for one. There's no difference in people, ranks and alike according to my understanding. Yet every communist approach has had someone on top to steer the future of said "communist" country into "favourable" ways. How can a system that claims everyone being exactly equal exist, while there's always someone on top of the food chain that makes decisions?
But while I write this, I realise that a majority of the people in the Western world are influenced by bad propaganda, and therefore wouldn't even look outside this propaganda and seek reality.
|
On July 02 2012 02:21 sevencck wrote:
You're right OP, we can't really call China communist anymore. The people still live under an authoritarian state, but no longer have access to the few benefits a communist state might provide them. Unfortunatley, you can't really call China capitalist either. Sure, there is come capitalism operating within the country, but not within the context of any kind of meaningful civil liberties, so most people have no access to the market in a way that makes capitalism meaningful. So, what is China to the people? Communist? Not really, there's a growing divide between the majority of the people and a new emerging wealthy business class (that accepts repressive authoritarianism in exchange for wealth). Capitalist? Not really, it's not really a free state where people might pursue wealth and autonomy. Totalitarian is really the only meaningful word remaining to describe China, it's just a fully centralized one party system whose top priority is to maintain power that controls every aspect of Chinese society with an iron fist.
It doesn't matter that China isn't as communist as it used to be, because it's hard to even determine whether or not that constitutes progress. And it's ridiculous to claim that the condemnations of the international community are victimizing Chinese people. The issue is that the current ruling class in China is victimizing Chinese people.
If it weren't for the economic growth in that country, China would be in a state of arrested development. As such, I personally will rag on China until pigs fly (or until China makes some important changes, whatever comes first). I am not a racist, however, and harbour no ill will toward any Chinese people. If you think an attack on China's policies constitutes an attack on you, that's your problem, not ours.
I really wonder if you've got any experience with life in China, and the way the country works other than listening to mainstream news (which exaggerate a lot). Let me tell you one thing from my experiences after living in the country. There's plenty of things that need improvement, and they ARE indeed improving. But there's an equal if not greater amount of people who live in rural area's, which find the development isn't going quick enough and exaggerate situations to get attention. It happens all the time, and when you experience life there it turns out it's not as perfect as laowai's have, but it's very decent and improving at a steady pace.
Aside of that, please do not forget that China essentially became a country after a civil war that "ended" about 70 years ago. To quote wikipedia:
The Chinese Civil War (1927–1950, though some argue that it is ongoing)[6] was a civil war fought between the Kuomintang (KMT)-led Nationalist Government of the Republic of China, and the Communist Party of China (CPC),[7] for the control of each others' territory which eventually led to two de facto states, the Republic of China (ROC) in Taiwan and the People's Republic of China (PRC) in mainland China both claiming to be the legitimate government of China. The war began in April 1927, amidst the Northern Expedition,[8] and essentially ended when major active battles ceased in 1949–1950. However there is debate on whether the war has officially ended.[6] Cross-Strait relations have been hindered by military threats and political and economic pressure, particularly over Taiwan's political status, with both governments officially adhering to a "One-China policy." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Civil_War
A majority of people forget that China wasn't an unified country before the civil war. Most of the China region was divided in the time between 1911-1928 as anarchy raged and local warlords began to fight one another, after the Qing dynasty's demise in 1911 due to the Xinhai Revolution. After the civil war of 1928 to 1949, the Kuomintang lost the upperhand and they now control Taiwan, where as the Communist Party of China controlled the mainland.
Since the opiumwars with the Brits late 1800's, the Qing dynasty was on the decline, and then almost half a century of warlords, civil war and anarchy, before they finally were able to start to work on becoming one unified nation. Now you tell me, can a nation build itself up without outside help (as Mao Zedong eventually declined a lot of Russian aid if I remember correctly) to the standard that you're used to in the Commonwealth, in less than 70 years while the Commonwealth has been spending centuries of growth to reach where you're now?
Don't be ignorant, learn your history and don't come around throwing remarks with no substantial basis.
|
I'm really curious at the usage of the word democratic in this thread. Everybody seems to be throwing around very general statement, while using pretty restrictive definitions of the term. Given that there is a huge difference between for instance what Rousseau and Tocqueville call a democracy, I'd be interested to see what people claim is a democracy...
|
On July 02 2012 06:35 Aelonius wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 02:21 sevencck wrote:
You're right OP, we can't really call China communist anymore. The people still live under an authoritarian state, but no longer have access to the few benefits a communist state might provide them. Unfortunatley, you can't really call China capitalist either. Sure, there is come capitalism operating within the country, but not within the context of any kind of meaningful civil liberties, so most people have no access to the market in a way that makes capitalism meaningful. So, what is China to the people? Communist? Not really, there's a growing divide between the majority of the people and a new emerging wealthy business class (that accepts repressive authoritarianism in exchange for wealth). Capitalist? Not really, it's not really a free state where people might pursue wealth and autonomy. Totalitarian is really the only meaningful word remaining to describe China, it's just a fully centralized one party system whose top priority is to maintain power that controls every aspect of Chinese society with an iron fist.
It doesn't matter that China isn't as communist as it used to be, because it's hard to even determine whether or not that constitutes progress. And it's ridiculous to claim that the condemnations of the international community are victimizing Chinese people. The issue is that the current ruling class in China is victimizing Chinese people.
If it weren't for the economic growth in that country, China would be in a state of arrested development. As such, I personally will rag on China until pigs fly (or until China makes some important changes, whatever comes first). I am not a racist, however, and harbour no ill will toward any Chinese people. If you think an attack on China's policies constitutes an attack on you, that's your problem, not ours. I really wonder if you've got any experience with life in China, and the way the country works other than listening to mainstream news (which exaggerate a lot). Let me tell you one thing from my experiences after living in the country. There's plenty of things that need improvement, and they ARE indeed improving. But there's an equal if not greater amount of people who live in rural area's, which find the development isn't going quick enough and exaggerate situations to get attention. It happens all the time, and when you experience life there it turns out it's not as perfect as laowai's have, but it's very decent and improving at a steady pace. Aside of that, please do not forget that China essentially became a country after a civil war that "ended" about 70 years ago. To quote wikipedia: Show nested quote +The Chinese Civil War (1927–1950, though some argue that it is ongoing)[6] was a civil war fought between the Kuomintang (KMT)-led Nationalist Government of the Republic of China, and the Communist Party of China (CPC),[7] for the control of each others' territory which eventually led to two de facto states, the Republic of China (ROC) in Taiwan and the People's Republic of China (PRC) in mainland China both claiming to be the legitimate government of China. The war began in April 1927, amidst the Northern Expedition,[8] and essentially ended when major active battles ceased in 1949–1950. However there is debate on whether the war has officially ended.[6] Cross-Strait relations have been hindered by military threats and political and economic pressure, particularly over Taiwan's political status, with both governments officially adhering to a "One-China policy." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Civil_WarA majority of people forget that China wasn't an unified country before the civil war. Most of the China region was divided in the time between 1911-1928 as anarchy raged and local warlords began to fight one another, after the Qing dynasty's demise in 1911 due to the Xinhai Revolution. After the civil war of 1928 to 1949, the Kuomintang lost the upperhand and they now control Taiwan, where as the Communist Party of China controlled the mainland. Since the opiumwars with the Brits late 1800's, the Qing dynasty was on the decline, and then almost half a century of warlords, civil war and anarchy, before they finally were able to start to work on becoming one unified nation. Now you tell me, can a nation build itself up without outside help (as Mao Zedong eventually declined a lot of Russian aid if I remember correctly) to the standard that you're used to in the Commonwealth, in less than 70 years while the Commonwealth has been spending centuries of growth to reach where you're now? Don't be ignorant, learn your history and don't come around throwing remarks with no substantial basis.
Lol? It fascinates me that you think what I wrote is particularly ignorant or has no substantial basis. Also, why have you decided an overview of the last 200 years of Chinese history is particularly relevant to critique their current sociopolitical philosophy (particularly in the context of the current international community)? First of all OP is fundamentally arguing that since China is no longer as communist as it used to be, therefore people should stop being so critical of it, which is somewhat missing the point. People aren't particularly critical of China because they are communist, they're critical of China because of a very poor human rights record, a lack of any kind of meaningful democracy, very strict censorship of materials of all kind, substandard (but to be fair improving) plans for environmental policy, questionable (terrible) business ethics, and a defiance to the rest of the international community. Combine this with some of the heinous debacles that are reported by the Western news sources (many of which China actually goes out of its way to conceal), and there are enough to outline for pages, and yeah I would argue there is indeed a substantial basis for criticism.
Do I know everything about China? No, certainly not. Nor do I need to in order to critique many of its social, economic, or political policies. Do you know everything about China? Nope. And I suppose that in your opinion the fact that China is widely criticized on a number of very morally questionable policies just reflects bias, bigotry, and "ignorance" on the part of the international community (which is aligned against China in some kind of conspiracy)? Be realistic.
I realize there are likely many endearing qualities about such a nation and people with such a rich cultural history, and perhaps you have experienced alot of it. That doesn't somehow validate some of the things the current Chinese govt. is doing.
|
I think you missed the point I try to make.
Sure, a country does bad things, but try to look to your southern neighbour on their mighty horse of "democracy" and you'll see that, while China has a few things and it's not being denied, the USA does their best to hide EACH aspect they can of their mistakes and problems. One example is the Manning case with leaking sensitive data. While there may be a danger to soldiers itself, the information in it also has evidence that proves the USA is doing terrible things aswell.
Guantanamo Bay? CIA interfering in the Middle East in the 1960's? Just a few examples.
You're judging a country which has been in development for years from scratch on their own feet, yet you ignore that fact and base your view off Western propaganda. That's what I call ignorance. Yes, China has it's problems. No, China is no longer an authoritarian state by the definition of that word. The Chinese government is loosening the rules step by step every year, but they also know that when you're going too quick and too radical, you may end up losing everything you built up. If I remember correctly this was also a problem with the Soviet Union, under the rule of Chroetsjev (spelling).
It's ignorant that you judge a country on values which they have been changing over the past 60 years, while your country is built upon a foundation of the British Empire, which transitioned for many colonies into the Commonwealth of Nations. You had no civil war breaking your country apart as far as I know. You're judging a country that's trying to develop itself, by looking at the current situation. Wake up call: The British Empire was around since 1497, which is 515 years of development as a country, Empire and later a Commonwealth. Yet while you spent 515 years to get to an acceptable position in which you are now, you expect China to change that in less than 70 years?
My message: See it from both sides before you judge. China has a long way to go, their current development in culture, society and alike is around what we had in the 1960's (this is judged from personal experience. Take it with a grain of salt).
When I look at China and see that after the Opium Wars, they were closed for almost a century for foreign powers (with exception of N. Korea and Russia) and just around 20 years ago started to open up to the world to grow, I think they do pretty damn fine.
Canada, where you live, has approximately 34,844,000 inhabitants by a 2012 estimate (see wikipedia), where as China has 1,339,724,852 inhabitants according to the 2010 census. Add to that that Canada is about 340.000 m2 bigger in total space, and you're clearly seeing that you're in a "small" country (in terms of inhabitants) with relative easy problems, where you house 1/38th of the people China has. Yet you expect them to change that in a few meager years without completely destroying the country?
Ignorance at it's finest.
Edit: I was wrong about the fall of the Soviet Union. It wasn't Chroetsjev, it was Gorbachev as can be read here http://www.coldwar.org/articles/90s/fall_of_the_soviet_union.asp
|
On July 02 2012 01:22 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 00:45 Paljas wrote:
wow china, the the country with the strongest economy in the world, isnt comunist? thanks you captian obvious, for explaning this very complex topic. China does not have the strongest economy in the world by any measure.
Just to comment on this.
Lets assume that these numbers are correct, especially since Wikipedia does check pages for consistency.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_economy
That would debunk your statement pretty hard looking at the 2010-2017 numbers, and seeing the steady growth of China. The only issue that you could use here to devalue the number is that there's a housing bubble, which may be problematic.
|
On July 02 2012 09:15 Aelonius wrote:I think you missed the point I try to make. Sure, a country does bad things, but try to look to your southern neighbour on their mighty horse of "democracy" and you'll see that, while China has a few things and it's not being denied, the USA does their best to hide EACH aspect they can of their mistakes and problems. One example is the Manning case with leaking sensitive data. While there may be a danger to soldiers itself, the information in it also has evidence that proves the USA is doing terrible things aswell. Guantanamo Bay? CIA interfering in the Middle East in the 1960's? Just a few examples. You're judging a country which has been in development for years from scratch on their own feet, yet you ignore that fact and base your view off Western propaganda. That's what I call ignorance. Yes, China has it's problems. No, China is no longer an authoritarian state by the definition of that word. The Chinese government is loosening the rules step by step every year, but they also know that when you're going too quick and too radical, you may end up losing everything you built up. If I remember correctly this was also a problem with the Soviet Union, under the rule of Chroetsjev (spelling). It's ignorant that you judge a country on values which they have been changing over the past 60 years, while your country is built upon a foundation of the British Empire, which transitioned for many colonies into the Commonwealth of Nations. You had no civil war breaking your country apart as far as I know. You're judging a country that's trying to develop itself, by looking at the current situation. Wake up call: The British Empire was around since 1497, which is 515 years of development as a country, Empire and later a Commonwealth. Yet while you spent 515 years to get to an acceptable position in which you are now, you expect China to change that in less than 70 years? My message: See it from both sides before you judge. China has a long way to go, their current development in culture, society and alike is around what we had in the 1960's (this is judged from personal experience. Take it with a grain of salt). When I look at China and see that after the Opium Wars, they were closed for almost a century for foreign powers (with exception of N. Korea and Russia) and just around 20 years ago started to open up to the world to grow, I think they do pretty damn fine. Canada, where you live, has approximately 34,844,000 inhabitants by a 2012 estimate (see wikipedia), where as China has 1,339,724,852 inhabitants according to the 2010 census. Add to that that Canada is about 340.000 m2 bigger in total space, and you're clearly seeing that you're in a "small" country (in terms of inhabitants) with relative easy problems, where you house 1/38th of the people China has. Yet you expect them to change that in a few meager years without completely destroying the country? Ignorance at it's finest. Edit: I was wrong about the fall of the Soviet Union. It wasn't Chroetsjev, it was Gorbachev as can be read here http://www.coldwar.org/articles/90s/fall_of_the_soviet_union.asp
No it isn't? It has nothing to do with my country. Yes Canada and the U.S.A. are both different from China. No, neither are perfect. I'm critical of my own country in many ways as are many Americans. What is ignorant is that you assume I haven't bothered to think about it from both sides before. Let me summarize your point. China has numerous problems, but people shouldn't be critical of them because they haven't had as much time to develop (not even true), and the size of the nation makes it difficult to enact change (not even true).
First of all, the size of the nation has very little to do with anything. Japan has one of the most densely populated areas in the world and they are an extremely highly developed nation in many ways. Secondly, China has arguably had the longest time to develop a culture of any region on earth. You can't just arbitrarily assign significance to the past 70 years in China, yet decide Canada and the U.S. have had 500+ years.
Thirdly, it is the year 2012, not the year 1497. China has access to many elements of technology and the support of the international community to help socially develop their nation, but chooses to do otherwise. Fourthly, and most importantly, China doesn't appear remotely interested in social development, they gauge success on the basis of economic development. Nobody cares about economic development if you have to undermine social progress in order to enact it (much like the USSR under Stalin). If even China was highly economically developed, they have a ruling class that is arresting the development in other regards. How does your culture view sexuality? How does it view certain meditative practices? It is basically a one party totalitarian regime that enforces often draconian regulations to maintain control of all elements of the economy/culture/law. Fifthly, if such a government was interested in instituting wide scale changes, it should be easy, they don't have to appeal to a voting public or care about popular opinion. They don't. Why? They aren't interested. Just wanna manage the country and stay in power.
|
On July 02 2012 09:33 Aelonius wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 01:22 DeepElemBlues wrote:On July 02 2012 00:45 Paljas wrote:
wow china, the the country with the strongest economy in the world, isnt comunist? thanks you captian obvious, for explaning this very complex topic. China does not have the strongest economy in the world by any measure. Just to comment on this. Lets assume that these numbers are correct, especially since Wikipedia does check pages for consistency. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_economyThat would debunk your statement pretty hard looking at the 2010-2017 numbers, and seeing the steady growth of China. The only issue that you could use here to devalue the number is that there's a housing bubble, which may be problematic.
? Strongest growth =/= strongest economy. Think of it like height - if my friend is three inches taller than me but I am in the midst of a growth spurt, that doesn't mean that I am taller (yet). China will not have the strongest economy until the 2020s+ (depending upon who you ask and differing factors that can change). But as for now, it most certainly does not have the strongest economy.
|
I'm not sure what to think of this blog. What you're saying is true but I don't think you could engage a serious person in conversation and have them claim that the current Chinese state is communist.
I'd much rather see a blog like this detailing why China isn't the worlds most powerful economy since I see that misconception a lot more.
|
I'm a Chinese person living in China, and while I agree with many of the points presented by Caihead, I don't quite see the point behind this. Anyone with any sort of background knowledge pretty much knows that China isn't Communist. The people who do toss that term around like the Cold War is still ongoing are most likely ignorant and aren't worth bothering with.
Yet the current policies and problems of China cannot be entirely disassociated with the ideals of Communism, or whatever it has morphed into in post-Cultural Revolution China. Chinese leaders don't need to worry about being re-elected or being accountable to the people, which may be part of the reason why there are human rights abuses and such. State-owned companies are major factors of corruption and nepotism in the party, and contribute to housing and lending bubbles.
All told, I don't care if people criticize China. I'd be the first to admit problems with China's party, policies, or people. All I ask is that the criticism be constructive. China is at an inflection point where its growth seems to be slowing while inflation, inequality, and corruption are high. Technology is flooding in and Chinese people are increasingly on the internet. The "cheap labor" and "state-owned enterprise" model for growth is under fire for being unsustainable. I believe there needs to be some type of economic or political reform, now more than ever, if China is to keep developing.
|
"Chinese leaders don't need to worry about being re-elected or being accountable to the people, which may be part of the reason why there are human rights abuses and such. State-owned companies are major factors of corruption and nepotism in the party, and contribute to housing and lending bubbles."
So, just like the US regulatory/corporate lobbying revolving door, the human rights violations of the drug war, and the state-funded housing corporations which collapsed the economy...
Yah, I think China is about as communist as the US is capitalist. They're both fascist bureaucracies.
|
On July 02 2012 09:40 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 09:15 Aelonius wrote:I think you missed the point I try to make. Sure, a country does bad things, but try to look to your southern neighbour on their mighty horse of "democracy" and you'll see that, while China has a few things and it's not being denied, the USA does their best to hide EACH aspect they can of their mistakes and problems. One example is the Manning case with leaking sensitive data. While there may be a danger to soldiers itself, the information in it also has evidence that proves the USA is doing terrible things aswell. Guantanamo Bay? CIA interfering in the Middle East in the 1960's? Just a few examples. You're judging a country which has been in development for years from scratch on their own feet, yet you ignore that fact and base your view off Western propaganda. That's what I call ignorance. Yes, China has it's problems. No, China is no longer an authoritarian state by the definition of that word. The Chinese government is loosening the rules step by step every year, but they also know that when you're going too quick and too radical, you may end up losing everything you built up. If I remember correctly this was also a problem with the Soviet Union, under the rule of Chroetsjev (spelling). It's ignorant that you judge a country on values which they have been changing over the past 60 years, while your country is built upon a foundation of the British Empire, which transitioned for many colonies into the Commonwealth of Nations. You had no civil war breaking your country apart as far as I know. You're judging a country that's trying to develop itself, by looking at the current situation. Wake up call: The British Empire was around since 1497, which is 515 years of development as a country, Empire and later a Commonwealth. Yet while you spent 515 years to get to an acceptable position in which you are now, you expect China to change that in less than 70 years? My message: See it from both sides before you judge. China has a long way to go, their current development in culture, society and alike is around what we had in the 1960's (this is judged from personal experience. Take it with a grain of salt). When I look at China and see that after the Opium Wars, they were closed for almost a century for foreign powers (with exception of N. Korea and Russia) and just around 20 years ago started to open up to the world to grow, I think they do pretty damn fine. Canada, where you live, has approximately 34,844,000 inhabitants by a 2012 estimate (see wikipedia), where as China has 1,339,724,852 inhabitants according to the 2010 census. Add to that that Canada is about 340.000 m2 bigger in total space, and you're clearly seeing that you're in a "small" country (in terms of inhabitants) with relative easy problems, where you house 1/38th of the people China has. Yet you expect them to change that in a few meager years without completely destroying the country? Ignorance at it's finest. Edit: I was wrong about the fall of the Soviet Union. It wasn't Chroetsjev, it was Gorbachev as can be read here http://www.coldwar.org/articles/90s/fall_of_the_soviet_union.asp No it isn't? It has nothing to do with my country. Yes Canada and the U.S.A. are both different from China. No, neither are perfect. I'm critical of my own country in many ways as are many Americans. What is ignorant is that you assume I haven't bothered to think about it from both sides before. Let me summarize your point. China has numerous problems, but people shouldn't be critical of them because they haven't had as much time to develop (not even true), and the size of the nation makes it difficult to enact change (not even true).
You're dead wrong there. If you're to enforce policy that changes a country's fundamental mindset, and culture into something that's new, you're bound to run into disaster. My point is that people are TOO critical without proper information or research into the subject. My point is, that while China does have issue's, it's nowhere as bad as you portray it. If you're going to go that way, I suggest you look at your own country and history of Canada, UK, British Empire and the USA.
It took the Chinese years to get to the Maoist approach, and then years to revert it while still retaining a stable growth as a whole. To claim you can change this in an instant is saying you can dig a hole in a 20m concrete wall, with a toothbrush, within 3 minutes. Nigh-impossible.
First of all, the size of the nation has very little to do with anything. Japan has one of the most densely populated areas in the world and they are an extremely highly developed nation in many ways. Secondly, China has arguably had the longest time to develop a culture of any region on earth. You can't just arbitrarily assign significance to the past 70 years in China, yet decide Canada and the U.S. have had 500+ years.
If I look at system that is in place in these area's, I feel I can say that. You may not be the same at each point in time, but your country runs on specific principles. Please read why the Qing Dynasty fell apart, and look what the Chinese have tried to improve growth as a country. Canada, for all I know, has been unified for a longer term than China. That means they had more time to adjust changes.
Thirdly, it is the year 2012, not the year 1497. China has access to many elements of technology and the support of the international community to help socially develop their nation, but chooses to do otherwise. Fourthly, and most importantly, China doesn't appear remotely interested in social development, they gauge success on the basis of economic development. Nobody cares about economic development if you have to undermine social progress in order to enact it (much like the USSR under Stalin). If even China was highly economically developed, they have a ruling class that is arresting the development in other regards. How does your culture view sexuality? How does it view certain meditative practices? It is basically a one party totalitarian regime that enforces often draconian regulations to maintain control of all elements of the economy/culture/law. Fifthly, if such a government was interested in instituting wide scale changes, it should be easy, they don't have to appeal to a voting public or care about popular opinion. They don't. Why? They aren't interested. Just wanna manage the country and stay in power.
Ever heard of the saying "Tyrants always fear those they oppress?". Look at the Soviet Union, and the reforms made by Gorbachev from 1985-1991. He allowed free speech at once, and suddenly there was so much issue's coming up that the government, and the country as a whole couldn't handle it into a reasonably orderly manner. After Gorbachev was kidnapped, and the country went in uproar, the Soviet Union collapsed 6 months later. This is a typical example of a country changing from a totalitarian regime, towards a democratic system.
Do you think that the Chinese government looks forward to drop the democracy bombshell in one go, guaranteed to destabilize the country? No they won't. Sure, there's a few powergreedy people in the country but look at ANY country in the world, and it'll be there. It does not matter if you're American, German, Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese or whatnot. Whenever there's power for grab, it corrupts people. My view on the current progress of China is that they gradually loosen the reigns, and give more power back to the people. It is a slow process, and they ain't there yet but they do it in a smart, well-prepared way to avoid anarchy.
Aside of that, you mention they deny help. Perhaps they do, but if Canada would be in the same shoes, they would do so aswell. You need to learn that Asian people in general are very honourable people. This is something they feel they want to change, and no one will be influencing them except their own people.
The British Empire (and thus indirectly Canada) has had over five hundred years of continuous development of their society, and after all those years they are at the point that we see in 2012. China has had over 2000 years of history, but never consistency as the Empire has had. The Qing Dynasty left the country broke and shattered, and in 101 years they have built something that took the English 500 years (and already is corroding). Denying that simple fact is ignorance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
