|
On August 03 2007 19:16 RebelHeart wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2007 08:38 kewlsunman wrote:
The fact is, there was an effort, almost ten years ago, at trying to completely overhaul China and liberalize it. Liberalize information. Liberalize society. Make it into a liberal democracy. This is the "famous square" incident that you mentioned. It was rejected, though, and not by the government, but by the people of the People's Republic of China. It was rejected through negligence and apathy. It was rejected because it was the bourgeois revolution, and the lower classes simply didn't care.
The Chinese people, on that day, 6/4/89, stated that they preferred oppression of information and restriction on freedoms, for security, economic prosperity, and stability; over the alternative of a liberal democracy. This is the key point. The Chinese people aren't dumb, they realize that the Chinese government is pulling the hood over their eyes, but they, for now, allow it. Because look where it's brought them. In 1989, who would have ever imagined that within 20 years, the capitol would be hosting the Olympic games. Who would have thought that the nation could have become a global superpower. Who would have believed these things.
pa fucking thetic. yes they are dumb, do you know why? because they're so poor they can't afford to be educated about these things. is your dad a rich corrupt government official who tells you this sort of shit? my family visited China. poor people fucking everywhere, trying to sell stuff just to feed themselves for an extra day, begging for money, it was fucking horrible because it was meant to be a holiday but i feel fucking guilty because in reality that money should've been donated to some international Christian charity which helps poor people in China (and yet are still subject to the government's persecution for trying to bring in Bibles) the poor people don't give a fuck about economic prosperity, that's because they don't even know what the hell it is and they're just struggling to survive each day. the so-called "bourgeois" that you label were uni students who came from poor farms and made their way to the top, seeing how corrupt government is and how the only way a country can truly prosper is through market liberalisation and private capital growth, not government control and fuck you to the dumbshit Lefties who talk out of your asses about me wanting freedom and being ironic and ignore the fact that historically Left-wing governments = communism and socialism = no freedom
Seeing incidents of poverty doesn't discredit everything the Chinese government has been working up to. You make it sound as if every single time you see a beggar on the streets, be it in New York or London or Beijing, you immediately have to condemn the government for not caring. This is wrong.
And who are you to say that poor people don't give a fuck about economic prosperity. Of course they do, they see the possibility in upward mobility, and it's something that the Chinese government has helped them afford.
In all honesty, you need to get past your teenage angst and stop slinging your outlandish nonsense everywhere.
|
On August 03 2007 22:50 RebelHeart wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2007 19:38 Aphelion wrote:On August 03 2007 19:16 RebelHeart wrote:On August 03 2007 08:38 kewlsunman wrote:
The fact is, there was an effort, almost ten years ago, at trying to completely overhaul China and liberalize it. Liberalize information. Liberalize society. Make it into a liberal democracy. This is the "famous square" incident that you mentioned. It was rejected, though, and not by the government, but by the people of the People's Republic of China. It was rejected through negligence and apathy. It was rejected because it was the bourgeois revolution, and the lower classes simply didn't care.
The Chinese people, on that day, 6/4/89, stated that they preferred oppression of information and restriction on freedoms, for security, economic prosperity, and stability; over the alternative of a liberal democracy. This is the key point. The Chinese people aren't dumb, they realize that the Chinese government is pulling the hood over their eyes, but they, for now, allow it. Because look where it's brought them. In 1989, who would have ever imagined that within 20 years, the capitol would be hosting the Olympic games. Who would have thought that the nation could have become a global superpower. Who would have believed these things.
pa fucking thetic. yes they are dumb, do you know why? because they're so poor they can't afford to be educated about these things. is your dad a rich corrupt government official who tells you this sort of shit? my family visited China. poor people fucking everywhere, trying to sell stuff just to feed themselves for an extra day, begging for money, it was fucking horrible because it was meant to be a holiday but i feel fucking guilty because in reality that money should've been donated to some international Christian charity which helps poor people in China (and yet are still subject to the government's persecution for trying to bring in Bibles) the poor people don't give a fuck about economic prosperity, that's because they don't even know what the hell it is and they're just struggling to survive each day. the so-called "bourgeois" that you label were uni students who came from poor farms and made their way to the top, seeing how corrupt government is and how the only way a country can truly prosper is through market liberalisation and private capital growth, not government control and fuck you to the dumbshit Lefties who talk out of your asses about me wanting freedom and being ironic and ignore the fact that historically Left-wing governments = communism and socialism = no freedom Your level of intellectual discourse is so low I have problems understanding it. Yet I ask you this: from your leanings I'd assume you are a supporter of the Bush Administration, so what do you feel about the Patriot Act. Isn't it in essence what you just condemned, an acceptance of a loss in liberty, freedoms, and privacy in exchange for security against terrorists, and in extension prosperity? Oh yea, I recommend you for a ban. so ignore the hugeass post i made and try changing the topic, ignoring the points i've made? what the fuck does this have to do with the Bush Administration and the Patriot Act, i don't even live in America and know fuck all about US politics, if you want to know my political leanings visit www.act.org.nz or look up classical liberalism on Wikipedia so basically you've discarded the fact there are a fuckload of poor citizens who contrary to your argument that they are happy with the government are in fact just ignorant of the government because of my "level of intellectual discourse"? pathetic strawman
Who's discarding anything? I've said in every single one of my posts that China's economic disparity between rich and poor and human rights record were huge problems. I just don't believe they are unique the the political system or that they cripple the country's advancement for good. Neither do I believe that these problems ought to be the sole deciding factor of how 'good' China is as a whole.
|
On August 04 2007 07:05 Aphelion wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2007 22:50 RebelHeart wrote:On August 03 2007 19:38 Aphelion wrote:On August 03 2007 19:16 RebelHeart wrote:On August 03 2007 08:38 kewlsunman wrote:
The fact is, there was an effort, almost ten years ago, at trying to completely overhaul China and liberalize it. Liberalize information. Liberalize society. Make it into a liberal democracy. This is the "famous square" incident that you mentioned. It was rejected, though, and not by the government, but by the people of the People's Republic of China. It was rejected through negligence and apathy. It was rejected because it was the bourgeois revolution, and the lower classes simply didn't care.
The Chinese people, on that day, 6/4/89, stated that they preferred oppression of information and restriction on freedoms, for security, economic prosperity, and stability; over the alternative of a liberal democracy. This is the key point. The Chinese people aren't dumb, they realize that the Chinese government is pulling the hood over their eyes, but they, for now, allow it. Because look where it's brought them. In 1989, who would have ever imagined that within 20 years, the capitol would be hosting the Olympic games. Who would have thought that the nation could have become a global superpower. Who would have believed these things.
pa fucking thetic. yes they are dumb, do you know why? because they're so poor they can't afford to be educated about these things. is your dad a rich corrupt government official who tells you this sort of shit? my family visited China. poor people fucking everywhere, trying to sell stuff just to feed themselves for an extra day, begging for money, it was fucking horrible because it was meant to be a holiday but i feel fucking guilty because in reality that money should've been donated to some international Christian charity which helps poor people in China (and yet are still subject to the government's persecution for trying to bring in Bibles) the poor people don't give a fuck about economic prosperity, that's because they don't even know what the hell it is and they're just struggling to survive each day. the so-called "bourgeois" that you label were uni students who came from poor farms and made their way to the top, seeing how corrupt government is and how the only way a country can truly prosper is through market liberalisation and private capital growth, not government control and fuck you to the dumbshit Lefties who talk out of your asses about me wanting freedom and being ironic and ignore the fact that historically Left-wing governments = communism and socialism = no freedom Your level of intellectual discourse is so low I have problems understanding it. Yet I ask you this: from your leanings I'd assume you are a supporter of the Bush Administration, so what do you feel about the Patriot Act. Isn't it in essence what you just condemned, an acceptance of a loss in liberty, freedoms, and privacy in exchange for security against terrorists, and in extension prosperity? Oh yea, I recommend you for a ban. so ignore the hugeass post i made and try changing the topic, ignoring the points i've made? what the fuck does this have to do with the Bush Administration and the Patriot Act, i don't even live in America and know fuck all about US politics, if you want to know my political leanings visit www.act.org.nz or look up classical liberalism on Wikipedia so basically you've discarded the fact there are a fuckload of poor citizens who contrary to your argument that they are happy with the government are in fact just ignorant of the government because of my "level of intellectual discourse"? pathetic strawman Who's discarding anything? I've said in every single one of my posts that China's economic disparity between rich and poor and human rights record were huge problems. I just don't believe they are unique the the political system or that they cripple the country's advancement for good. Neither do I believe that these problems ought to be the sole deciding factor of how 'good' China is as a whole.
i never did say anything about all the crap you claim i did - firstly i posted the OP which merely stated China's laws on opposition campaigning to show how ironic it is that it's saying you can be against us, but not really. secondly i only got into this debate when you made the absolute bullshit point about the Tienanmen Square incident as being about rich kids being spoilt and how poor people were happy with what the government were giving them and didn't want free market liberalism (when in fact they don't know what's best for them). but as you are unable to admit that what you said was total crap you have to keep making it seem like i'm arguing about something else and then rebutting that
|
On August 04 2007 07:18 RebelHeart wrote:
. secondly i only got into this debate when you made the absolute bullshit point about the Tienanmen Square incident as being about rich kids being spoilt and how poor people were happy with what the government were giving them and didn't want free market liberalism (when in fact they don't know what's best for them).
That wasn't me - another poster put that forward. But I do think he has a point though. I wouldn't call them spoiled rich kids, but they are very idealistic university students who didn't really reflect popular opinion; they didn't really represent the country as much as they did their own beliefs. What the government did to them to them was still tragic and atrociously wrong, but they weren't quite the "average Chinese".
In a larger sense, I also believe that in nation building, social stability and economic prosperity has to precede and take priority over individual freedom. Without the former, a "democratic system" would simply dissolve into anarchy.
|
On August 04 2007 07:24 Aphelion wrote:
In a larger sense, I also believe that in nation building, social stability and economic prosperity has to precede and take priority over individual freedom. Without the former, a "democratic system" would simply dissolve into anarchy.
Right, but do you think that nowadays more individual freedom would threaten China ? I think that people minds are ready to it ( at least among the middle/upper class ) especially if China spend more money for education ( with less propaganda ), isntead of increasing each year their military spendings .
|
"especially if China spend more money for education ( with less propaganda ), isntead of increasing each year their military spendings ."
Are you serious?
|
On August 04 2007 07:37 Boblion wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2007 07:24 Aphelion wrote:
In a larger sense, I also believe that in nation building, social stability and economic prosperity has to precede and take priority over individual freedom. Without the former, a "democratic system" would simply dissolve into anarchy. Right, but do you think that nowadays more individual freedom would threaten China ? I think that people minds are ready to it ( at least among the middle/upper class ) especially if China spend more money for education ( with less propaganda ), isntead of increasing each year their military spendings .
I really think it would actually. Civic responsibility in China is at an all time low due to Communism tearing up traditional social roles and structures, and the sudden introduction of a capitalistic economy further strained whatever social fabric Communism put in place. This sudden transition is the real cause of today's rampant corruption (for all its vices, pre-capitalist Communist China had extremely low rates of corruption and bribery) and the heavy emphasis on material pursuits of the urban nouveau riche. Its my opinion that the civic culture has not really evolved to maturely handle democratic choice, and with the internal and external stresses China is currently facing (Taiwan, Tibet, rich-poor divide), this could easily tear the country apart or at least stunt its growth. Give it another 20-30 years.
Oh, and primary and secondary education in China is very very good, and there's not much really in terms of actual propaganda (unless you count patriotic songs and civic education). And China actually spends a lesser proportion of its GDP on military than say, the US.
|
On August 04 2007 07:59 haduken wrote:
"especially if China spend more money for education ( with less propaganda ), isntead of increasing each year their military spendings ."
Are you serious?
Serious for what ?
On August 04 2007 08:14 Aphelion wrote:
I really think it would actually. Civic responsibility in China is at an all time low due to Communism tearing up traditional social roles and structures, and the sudden introduction of a capitalistic economy further strained whatever social fabric Communism put in place. This sudden transition is the real cause of today's rampant corruption (for all its vices, pre-capitalist Communist China had extremely low rates of corruption and bribery) and the heavy emphasis on material pursuits of the urban nouveau riche. Its my opinion that the civic culture has not really evolved to maturely handle democratic choice, and with the internal and external stresses China is currently facing (Taiwan, Tibet, rich-poor divide), this could easily tear the country apart or at least stunt its growth. Give it another 20-30 years.
Well, you might be true, wait and see ( i hope it will become better ). Nevertheless i'm wondering what would happen if ( for example ) United-States pressed China to make some democratical change, perhaps the country wouldnt collapse. ( i know this is just speculation ).
On August 04 2007 08:14 Aphelion wrote:
Oh, and primary and secondary education in China is very very good, and there's not much really in terms of actual propaganda (unless you count patriotic songs and civic education). And China actually spends a lesser proportion of its GDP on military than say, the US.
Yea i know that primary and secondary education in communist countries is very good, young know how to write, speak and count properly.
Btw i went to Vietnam ( it looks a bit like a small China ) last year and i was very impressed by young people, for example i remember of some secondary school guys who had the same level in mathematics than the average French student in a secondary school scientist section.
But on the other hand those guys didnt even know who Staline was -.- ( NO i'm not joking ).
I guess it is the same in China, there is a good ( or at least decent for this kind of country ) level for mathematics, grammar perhaps even in English but there is "problems" with subject such as history or even civics and i think that education is the main issue ( with Justice ofc ) to reduce corruption and criminality and to have a " viable" democracy.
I know that education isnt the same that in Mao era, and there is obviously less propaganda. Nevertheless i dont think that the "whole" history is taught to students and that matters.
|
On August 04 2007 09:00 Boblion wrote:
Well, you might be true, wait and see ( i hope it will become better ). Nevertheless i'm wondering what would happen if ( for example ) United-States pressed China to make some democratical change, perhaps the country wouldnt collapse. ( i know this is just speculation ).
Lol, if the US was involved, I would be certain that it would fail, the US has such shitty record at nation building. Not to mention the fledging democratic regime would be deeply unpopular and lampooned as US puppets.
As for historical teachings, well the basic secondary student would have a rough idea of WWII, WWI, Cold War etc, with a lot of background on dynastical Chinese history. As for the Cold War, I'd imagine it would be heavily biased and WWII would focus heavily on the Japanese Invasions in S.E .Asia. I don't really think it has significantly more omissions than history teaching anywhere else.
|
On August 04 2007 09:07 Aphelion wrote:
Lol, if the US was involved, I would be certain that it would fail, the US has such shitty record at nation building. Not to mention the fledging democratic regime would be deeply unpopular and lampooned as US puppets.
^^ I dont want the US to invade China i was just wondering what could happen if they pressed China to allow new political parties.
|
On August 04 2007 09:29 Boblion wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2007 09:07 Aphelion wrote:
Lol, if the US was involved, I would be certain that it would fail, the US has such shitty record at nation building. Not to mention the fledging democratic regime would be deeply unpopular and lampooned as US puppets.
^^ I dont want the US to invade China i was just wondering what could happen if they pressed China to allow new political parties.
US can't even get China to agree to help out the Darfur situation or change the yuan-dollar exchange rate. China would just laugh at US's face if they started trying to interfere in domestic policy.
|
On August 04 2007 09:34 Aphelion wrote:
US can't even get China to agree to help out the Darfur situation or change the yuan-dollar exchange rate. China would just laugh at US's face if they started trying to interfere in domestic policy.
Too bad for the first power.
|
[QUOTE]On August 02 2007 09:38 Haemonculus wrote:
[QUOTE]On August 02 2007 06:48 RebelHeart wrote:
[QUOTE]On August 02 2007 06:38 Cpt Obvious wrote:
Your signature goes just so well with what you're saying it's incredible.[/QUOTE]
exactly, left-wingsm depends on mass government intervention, state run enterprises, high taxing and redistribution to minority (read homosexual and feminist) interest groups, and "we know best" ideology[/QUOTE]
What if Jesus was aborted?
|
Boblion, understand that USA is not so powerfull that they can do things like these. They can't even put pressure on France, how could they put pressure on China. Do you think? putting pressure on China or Russia = insta-war, would you like that?
|
[QUOTE]On August 04 2007 10:22 MoNKeYSpanKeR wrote:
[QUOTE]On August 02 2007 09:38 Haemonculus wrote:
[QUOTE]On August 02 2007 06:48 RebelHeart wrote:
[QUOTE]On August 02 2007 06:38 Cpt Obvious wrote:
Your signature goes just so well with what you're saying it's incredible.[/QUOTE]
exactly, left-wingsm depends on mass government intervention, state run enterprises, high taxing and redistribution to minority (read homosexual and feminist) interest groups, and "we know best" ideology[/QUOTE]
What if Jesus was aborted?
[/QUOTE]
What if the Virgin Mary had a miscarriage? Or if Hitler was aborted?
|
What? Are you guys smoking crack? What's with all the hate towards China? I don't get it, as of right now, right here in time, the government is doing things to help the people. They're moving up, from being so-poor-that-nobody-cared, to being moderately-poor-so-that-they-have-media/tourism-where-people-can-see-how-poor-they-are-and-talk-crap-about-them-on-the-internet. That's a HUGE step up imo!
If you introduce freedoms in China today, I promise you there will be so much crime it'd be ridiculous. The whole area would just blow up. Since China has 5 times the population of the US, then for every in the US, there would be 5! Not to mention all those other insignificant Europeon/what? New Zealand places where you have like 50 million people. You guys should no be talking. A lot of these people are not educated in politics and sociology. All they care about is money, and if you let them run loose, bad things will happen.
The last major factor is that a lot of them have very little to lose. They don't all have McMansions and well kept lawns like we do here in the US. If there's a chance of getting richer in one day, of course they'd take it. You think you can control 1.3 billion people by just giving them freedom?
go ask any Chinese person, would you rather have some ideal freedom of speech or would you rather eat? Which would you pick? I'm sure you'd starve to death watching people debate on C-Span over dental health care.
|
Oh,
And of course there are poor beggars everywhere you douche! I live in Houston and there are many intersections where there's a beggar on each corner (we call it cooperative begging, no wait, that's just me). China has 5 times the population, less streets total meaning a MUCH higher density of poor people! Also, they know that foreigners buy into that stuff. A lot of them do it on purpose because of this. I'm telling you, right now the mindset of the Chinese people is make money. They dont' care about anything else, not face, nothin'.
|
Thanks Aphelion for throwing some light on the situation and fighting off a lot of the ignorance and bigotry in this thread. I can't claim to know China's political and economic situation first-hand, but I can definitely see that China is slowly and steadily bettering itself each day. Does the country have a lot to tackle in terms of polution, political corruption, poverty, civil liberties, and the like? Sure. What country doesn't?
Anyone that says that China should make a drastic political change or revolution overnight is a fool. That is what China has done in the past through civil wars and rebellions, which just leads into more turmoil and suffering. China, of all countries, knows that to reform a country as large as itself, slow and steady change is the only way to do it.
I'm really looking forward to the Olympics in 2008. Hopefully China can make a positive statement to the world that it is moving in the right direction.
|
|
|
Does the country have a lot to tackle in terms of polution, political corruption, poverty, civil liberties, and the like? Sure. What country doesn't?
I think the views of a lot of people weren't that every other country in the world is perfect, but more that many other countries have much less of these problems than China (esp. with regard to civil liberties and individual freedom issues). Also, I do think there are some countries that aren't doing so badly in many, most, or possibly even all of those categories you are listing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
