The Confucius Peace Prize lives on, and the winner is….Vladimir Putin!

Only a few weeks ago it looked like the Confucius Peace Prize was going to be scrapped by the government. This would have been a fine idea, since the prize had attracted only ridicule ever since its first recipient, former Taiwanese Vice President Lien Chan, refused to accept his prize.

Now, apparently in defiance of the CCP’s order not to award the prize again, the Confucius Peace Prize organizers are at it again, awarding their equivalent (in their eyes) to the Nobel Peace Prize to Vladimir Putin who, they say, “brought remarkable enhancement to the military might and political status of Russia.”

You really can’t fault the prize’s sponsors for lack of courage:

The award’s sponsors are professors and academics who say they are independent of the government.

The authorities’ hostility to the prize appears rooted in its desire to retain control over civil society and prevent independent players from seeking a role in Beijing’s foreign relations.

While the government has enthusiastically embraced the need for more robust cultural links to enhance China’s “soft power,” it wants that charm campaign to stay under the firm direction of the ruling Communist Party.

The group hopes to present a gold statue of Confucius, the ancient Chinese sage, at next month’s ceremony, but if forced to call it off, will simply begin planning for next year’s prize…

It should be interesting to see how the party reacts, and even more interesting to see whether Putin accepts his statue (why do I suspect the winner’s seat will be as empty as that in Oslo?). As the article notes, Putin is a rather bizarre choice for the award given his repressive tactics and willingness to throw political enemies in jail.

______________

Richard Burger is the author of Behind the Red Door: Sex in China, an exploration of China's sexual revolution and its clash with traditional Chinese values.

The Discussion: 44 Comments

Looks like they’ll be going 2 for 2 in terms of no-shows to their awards ceremony. Maybe that girl from last year can come back for an encore performance.

November 16, 2011 @ 1:45 am | Comment

Putin might accept if he’s permitted to arrive by mini-submarine, swimming ashore in scuba gear and rappelling into the award ceremony after blowing a hole in the ceiling.

November 16, 2011 @ 1:52 am | Comment

I think it’s actually an insult to Confucius. Some of his views are suspect (at least by modern standards), but I doubt he would hold Putin out as a model leader if he was aware of what the man has done.

Goes to show how morally bankrupt and politically motivated the organisers are that they don’t even understand the man their prize is named after.

November 16, 2011 @ 2:56 am | Comment

The authorities’ hostility to the prize appears rooted in its desire to retain control over civil society and prevent independent players from seeking a role in Beijing’s foreign relations.

I’m not intending to equate Gorbachev and Hu Jintao – but the prize committee is probably as independent of China’s rulers, as Gennady Yanayev was of the USSR’s last leadership generation.

November 16, 2011 @ 3:15 am | Comment

Beijings whole global soft power offensive reeks of negative charisma.

#2 LOL, but I would prefer Yeltsin. He could turn up from the grave well vodkad, goose the hostesses, do a jig and conclude by Bushing all over the MC.

If Beijing had any brains, they would have terminated this sorry saga ages ago, and sent all involved off to a Zingjiang labour camp.

November 16, 2011 @ 3:43 am | Comment

…Vladimir Putin who, they say, “brought remarkable enhancement to the military might and political status of Russia.”

Undoubtedly a great contribution to peace and harmony in the world, as worthy a recipient as Yasser Arafat when he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Next year it will be jointly awarded to Mao and Stalin posthumously, for their great efforts in eradicating famine.

November 16, 2011 @ 4:20 am | Comment

Let me be the first to say this: Obama.

Since that’s out of the way, yes, Putin is a bizarre choice. They don’t even try to indicate why they think he’s deserving of a peace prize, merely spouting some nonsense about how he deserves it because he’s made Russia “stronger” without examining the means by which he achieved this.

Yes, Obama’s Nobel was awarded on grounds that had everything to do with what he had promised to do, and not what he had actually done. Putin’s prize has been awarded based on goals which have been achieved through violence. Just as Churchill did not ever deserve to win the Nobel Peace Prize (although the literature prize was well deserved) because whilst he achieved much good, he did so through violent means, so it is foolish to say that Putin deserves a peace award.

BTW – did anyone see who won the Zhou Enlai award? According to the flyer Richard received a few weeks back it was supposed to be awarded on the 11th.

November 16, 2011 @ 5:06 am | Comment

Actually, maybe I misread it. Perhaps it was only an exhibition which opened on the 11th? According to the blurb on their website:

“Once a year, on a date near Zhou’s birthday, the Zhou Enlai Peace Award will be presented at a special ceremony held in the Great Hall of the People.”

Zhou Enlai was born on the 5th of March.

November 16, 2011 @ 5:11 am | Comment

You just can’t kill this sorry saga with a shovel. We now have a breakaway World Harmony Prize according to Edward Wong/NYT.

November 16, 2011 @ 5:56 am | Comment

“given his repressive tactics and willingness to throw political enemies in jail.”

I believe you misspelled “willingness to have political enemies killed”.

November 16, 2011 @ 11:43 am | Comment

All things being equal, Putin is about as worthy of a peace prize as the guy who got the Nobel in 2009.

as worthy a recipient as Yasser Arafat

Must’ve been a bad year, look at the two arseholes who received at the same time.

November 16, 2011 @ 11:48 am | Comment

Perhaps the ZE Peace Prize doesn’t have official endorsement…

“The Zhou Enlai Peace Institute is registered as a non-profit corporation under the laws of the State of Hawaii. IRS taxexempt status, 501(c)3 pending.”

November 16, 2011 @ 12:37 pm | Comment

@Chaon – I believe you missed out “. . . using lethal radioactive substances which clearly mark you as a perpetrator and put hundreds of people at risk, in a country with which you’re supposed to be in friendly relations with.”

November 16, 2011 @ 2:46 pm | Comment

@FOARP

Erm… Churchill never got a Nobel peace prize.

I suddenly feel more British than you, which is weird.

November 17, 2011 @ 12:46 am | Comment

@RP – Which is why I said he didn’t ever deserve to win it. He did, however, win the literature prize for, amongst other works, A History of the English-Speaking Peoples.

Rest easy, you’re as British as Hu Jintao.

November 17, 2011 @ 2:04 am | Comment

@Richard

You make it sound like the Prize given to Putin was on the basis of his career rather than his opposition to the NATO-backed Libya War which was illegal and should be convicted of war crimes.

November 17, 2011 @ 2:41 am | Comment

He certainly deserves the Nobel more than Obama or Liu Xiaobo

November 17, 2011 @ 2:50 am | Comment

He certainly deserves the Nobel more than Obama or Liu Xiaobo

I’d say Liu Xiaobo certainly deserves any peace prize more than Putin because while Putin caused people to die, all Liu did was make a few comments and suggestions that some people found embarrassing.

November 17, 2011 @ 8:27 am | Comment

Given the response of Obama’s Nobel by the “western” press, I’d say he wasn’t deserving of it. Liu I dont know – not like he has done anything illegal, really…

November 17, 2011 @ 8:42 am | Comment

In that case Kim Kardashian should get the Nobel, because she didn’t kill anyone either :)

November 17, 2011 @ 10:29 am | Comment

“In that case Kim Kardashian should get the Nobel, because she didn’t kill anyone either”
—that is fantastic logic. No wonder you are what you are. Putin has blood on his hands, which makes him NOT qualified for the Nobel. That does not mean that NOT having blood on your hands is sufficient to make you qualified for the Nobel. Does everything need to be spelled out for you now?

November 17, 2011 @ 12:07 pm | Comment

SKC, as Gertrude Stein would say, “A troll is a troll is a troll.” Ferin has reached a new apex of idiocy, and I have to presume he’s just looking for you to react.

Speaking of trolls, has anyone else noticed that Hong Xing vaporized the very day we were told that Math had died of cancer? He never appeared again. Interesting.

November 17, 2011 @ 12:30 pm | Comment

FOARP, what did I ever do to you to be compared to Hu Jintao?

November 17, 2011 @ 3:14 pm | Comment

@Richard. Not so sure about that as I saw Hongjian on CS subsequently.

Funny as hell and even more worrying, I happened to agree with part of his Uber Hobbesian rant. Thought it was time to take some r and r from the Sinosphere.

November 17, 2011 @ 5:47 pm | Comment

In that case Kim Kardashian should get the Nobel, because she didn’t kill anyone either.

Maybe Liu Xiaobo didn’t deserve the Nobel either. As I said, all he did was make a few comments and suggestions that some found embarrassing, but to many people are nothing more than simple common sense. If that is all you need to do for a Nobel then probably many of us here would qualify :-)

November 18, 2011 @ 5:12 am | Comment

@KT – Hongjian is not the same as Hongxing – one is based in Germany, the other in the US.

@Richard – Now only if you can get the remainder to go away.

November 18, 2011 @ 6:16 am | Comment

K: As I said, all he did was make a few comments and suggestions that some found embarrassing, but to many people are nothing more than simple common sense. If that is all you need to do for a Nobel then probably many of us here would qualify :-)

I’m not sure we can say that’s ALL Liu did. He did, after all, put himself in a position where he faced almost certain arrest by preaching democracy. Not saying he should or shouldn’t have preached democracy (I may not have if I knew it would land me in jail for ten years) but he did put his ass on the line.

November 18, 2011 @ 8:50 am | Comment

SK Cheung
Putin has blood on his hands

I bet you believe your precious West has never spilled the blood of any innocent person, right?

Lets just ignore those Muslims in Egypt who finally had enough with their US puppet of a leader and threw him out.

November 21, 2011 @ 3:01 am | Comment

“I bet you believe your precious West has never spilled the blood of any innocent person, right?”
—say, help me out here. Fetch me an instance where I have said or suggested that. Here’s the lesson yet again: argue against what people say; not what you hoped they had said. It can’t be that difficult, can it? We know that logic and avoiding disingenuous arguments are not your strong suits. Now let’s see if you are also afflicted by a learning disability, shall we?

November 21, 2011 @ 6:23 am | Comment

SK Cheung
Fetch me an instance where I have said or suggested that

Your entire posting history? You have yet to come up with one single reason why China should become a corporatocracy.

November 21, 2011 @ 7:56 am | Comment

“Your entire posting history?”
— lol. Even in the face of a direct question for which you have no answer, you still don’t have the strength of character or quality of upbringing to acknowledge as much. It’s one thing that the Ccp can’t find someone smarter or more logical. But you’d think they can do better than such trash like you. Oh well.

“You have yet to come up with one single reason why China should become a corporatocracy.”
— that’s because it’s not my decision to make. What system of governance china evolves into is a decision for Chinese people to make. My point all along is that they should be allowed to make it. You, on the other hand, insist on playing daddy. Just like the Ccp. The fruit really doesn’t fall far from the tree.

November 21, 2011 @ 3:16 pm | Comment

SK Cheung
What system of governance china evolves into is a decision for Chinese people to make

More unsupported claims from the child.

November 22, 2011 @ 8:21 am | Comment

“More unsupported claims from the child.”
—huh? Letting Chinese people make decisions for themselves is a concept that requires supporting evidence? LOL. I know it’s a concept you and the CCP are allergic to. But you shouldn’t foist your problems onto Chinese people. You’re gonna need to address those yourself.

November 22, 2011 @ 1:59 pm | Comment

Letting Chinese people make decisions for themselves

Utter nonsense. “Chinese people” wouldn’t be “making decisions for themselves”.

What proportion of any population do you think makes 100% of their decisions “for themselves”? The difference is that in America, the uber rich decide most people’s fates rather than the central government.

Deny it if you want, you’ll just look stupid.

November 22, 2011 @ 2:08 pm | Comment

““Chinese people” wouldn’t be “making decisions for themselves”.”
—why wouldn’t they, pray tell. What is absolutely irrefutable is that they certainly aren’t making decisions for themselves now under the CCP. There’s nowhere to go but up, considering their current starting point. Great system you’re supporting, btw. Too bad you aren’t even there to enjoy it yourself. Why is that, pray tell. LOL.

“What proportion of any population do you think makes 100% of their decisions “for themselves”?”
—oh brother. Yes, of course we don’t have direct democracy; we have representative democracy. As for what Chinese people would want, I’d have to ask them. Sure wouldn’t bother asking an idiot like you, who insists that Chinese people live under the grips of the CCP, but don’t even have the strength of conviction to submit yourself to that same fate. Nice.

There you go again with the “uber rich” nonsense. Man, i think they intended for you to only take a drink of the kool-aid; not dive in head first as you’ve apparently done.

November 23, 2011 @ 1:22 am | Comment

SK Cheung
why wouldn’t they, pray tell.

Are you actually childish enough to believe your one vote matters?

What is absolutely irrefutable is that they certainly aren’t making decisions for themselves now under the CCP

Uh yes, they are. They have many freedoms Westerners don’t have like walking the streets at night without being murdered or raped. Of course you want the Chinese to have “democracy” before wealth – you don’t want them to be competitive for world resources you believe belong only to the West.

Too bad you aren’t even there to enjoy it yourself.

Yeah, it’s too bad I haven’t enjoyed the benefits myself, it was only my family on Taiwan who enjoyed the benefits of rapid industrialization. Those high living standards and low mortality rates are such a horrible thing.

for what Chinese people would want, I’d have to ask them.

You mean you’re going to ask 51% of Chinese people what the other 49% should be forced to do, stupid.

There you go again with the “uber rich” nonsense. Man, i think they intended for you to only take a drink of the kool-aid; not dive in head first as you’ve apparently done.

Oh yes me and everyone at the OWS protests are the kool-aid drinkers, not the retarded guy who thinks China’s government should be destroyed overnight.

November 23, 2011 @ 4:41 am | Comment

“Are you actually childish enough to believe your one vote matters?”
—one vote doesn’t matter, no. But everyone each having votes together matters, as a group. So as a group, Chinese people’s collective voice matters. As it stands now, their voice doesn’t matter, under the CCP. That would be the difference. You’re such a silly little doggie.

“They have many freedoms Westerners don’t have like walking the streets at night without being murdered or raped.”
—you are an idiot. I guess you’ll next try to tell me that murders and rapes don’t happen in China. After that, you’d have to tell me how that has anything whatsoever to do with their political freedoms, or lack thereof. What does this have to do with Chinese people not being able to “make decisions for themselves now under the CCP”? Relevance. One more thing on your to-do list.

“Of course you want the Chinese to have “democracy” before wealth – you don’t want them to be competitive for world resources you believe belong only to the West.”
—this is getting extremely old, but where have I said that, exactly? Besides, as you’ve nicely (albeit inadvertently) shown, lots of people in China are already plenty wealthy. And apparently poor farmers can sell their land for food. LOL.

“it was only my family on Taiwan who enjoyed the benefits of rapid industrialization.”
—so even your lineage isn’t from China. Yet you’re busy telling PRC citizens how they should live. THis just keeps getting better, doesn’t it? Besides, what your family enjoyed or didn’t enjoy is in the past. In the present, YOU are the one who is patently incapable of taking your own medicine, yet you’d like to force-feed it to PRC citizens, and probably Taiwanese too, by the sounds of things. How sweet.

“You mean you’re going to ask 51% of Chinese people what the other 49% should be forced to do, stupid. ”
—you haven’t asked yet, so why pretend you know the answer? I certainly don’t know the answer, which is why I’d ask them. You don’t know the answer…but clearly that’s never stopped you before, has it? And even if we lower ourselves to the level of simpleton where you reside, and assume democracy to be nothing more than majority-rule (which any sane person would realize to be a gross over-simplification of the concept), representing the will of 51% of Chinese people would be a gargantuan improvement over the current state of affairs.

“Oh yes me and everyone at the OWS protests are the kool-aid drinkers,”
—umm, the OWS is about changing the way democracy works. You are about denying people the right to democracy, period, full-stop. You are not in the same league, pal. But nice try anyway.

November 23, 2011 @ 1:10 pm | Comment

SK Cheung
But everyone each having votes together matters, as a group.

No it doesn’t, stupid. Having two parties mean every vote for one party merely cancels out the vote of another. Before you insert anecdotes about the antics of minor nations like Canada and some European nations, keep in mind that the pressure on them to convert into two-party corporatocracies is not so great.

But like I’ve always said, democracies are fine if they’re small scale. China is not small scale.

you are an idiot. I guess you’ll next try to tell me that murders and rapes don’t happen in China.

You are an idiot. I guess you’ll next try to tell me that abuses of power don’t happen in the West. Oh wait, you already have … a million times.

so even your lineage isn’t from China. Yet you’re busy telling PRC citizens how they should live.

I should save this line for every moron Westerner who thinks China should be forced to change. Yes, I have “lineage from China”, stupid. Ever hear about the Chinese Civil War, perhaps?

YOU are the one who is patently incapable of taking your own medicine

Oh yes, I’m so incapable of taking my own medicine that I live and work in both China and Taiwan frequently. Taking advantage of those horrible high living standards the evil authoritarians provided in Taiwan, and Singapore, and South Korea. We must stop the CCP before they inflict long life spans, economic growth and education on the entire Chinese population!

(which any stupid person would assert to be a gross over-simplification of the concept)

Nope. Democracy is merely mob rule – of course, once you exceed a local or regional scale.

representing the will of 51% of Chinese people would be a gargantuan improvement over the current state of affairs.

Nope, you’d be representing the will of corporations which ironically would probably be owned by the CCP. Also foreigners and others not interested in the welfare of the Chinese people. China would go from being authoritarian to being a corporate crony of the West. Well, maybe not, given how well educated they will probably be in the future – there’s still no point in completely destroying the government overnight though. Oh wait, here’s where you make yourself look like a complete idiot by denying this is what you want.

So you think the CCP will WILLINGLY step down? Maybe they will, like the KMT did. Either that or detail your laughable childish plans for a violent coup.

You are about denying people the right to democracy, period, full-stop.

Explain how “democracy” is a right, you raving, politically challenged teenybopper.

November 24, 2011 @ 4:08 am | Comment

and no, OWS is not about changing how “democracy” works. It’s about MITIGATING THE DAMAGE done by democracy.

So you’re so stupid you admit that democracy has such major flaws that hundreds of thousands (if not millions) take to the streets for months in protest, and you think China should risk destabilization and ruin for this?

You’re not as depraved as slim who calls economic growth “bread and circuses” (as if feeding, clothing and educating Chinese children is contemptible), but you’re essentially agreeing with utter insane, criminal stupidity if you continue to imply China ‘needs’ to democratize.

So what this all boils down to is that you’re whining like a petulant child in hopes that the CCP will just peacefully step down when it has been delivering on every front for 30 years.

You automatically lose.

November 24, 2011 @ 4:11 am | Comment

“Having two parties”
—oh brother, are you so stupid that you cannot comprehend things beyond the US 2 party system? The US is in fact rather unique with its 2 party format. And even then, votes don’t “cancel” each other, because at the end of the day, you still have one party with more than the other. Those “extra” votes would not have been “extra” votes if others didn’t cast their votes for that party. So yes, as a group of voters (even just for one party), those votes matter. And again, let’s not forget we’re talking about a nation in China under the CCP whose people get no (0) votes. They definitely don’t matter. And you seem ok with that. Good for you.

“I guess you’ll next try to tell me that abuses of power don’t happen in the West. Oh wait, you already have … a million times.”
—LOL. Quote one. C’mon, not asking a lot of you, cuz you’re clearly limited in capacity. Name one time where I’ve said that. Chance for glory, my little puppy. And even when you try to talk smack, you lack the imagination to go beyond taking my phrase and changing a few words. Seriously, are you the best the CCP can do? That is rather pathetic. But you keep doing what you gotta do.

And you’ve still yet to tell me how that stupid comparison has any relevance to political freedom whatsoever, or to Chinese people being able to make decisions for themselves. You really are a tool…and not a very sharp one.

“Yes, I have “lineage from China”, stupid.”
—LOL, you’re Taiwanese, dude. That ain’t China, no matter how desperately you might like to think so. As surveys linked on other threads show, most people from where you came don’t “think” of themselves as Chinese, nor “say” they are. Too bad, so sad…for you. Besides, your opinion doesn’t even matter, such as it were, since you’re American.

“every moron Westerner who thinks China should be forced to change”
—as opposed to the CCP who are actively forcing CHinese people not to. How nice.

“I live and work in both China and Taiwan frequently.”
—sure you do. You might “live” there while you’re working there, but we all know that’s not where you live. Time to give that schtick up.

“We must stop the CCP before they inflict long life spans, economic growth and education on the entire Chinese population!”
—those parts are fine. It’s the other stuff, like lack of political freedoms, extrajudicial punishment, censorship, corruption, lack of enforcement of laws, and that sort of thing, that need to go.

“Nope. Democracy is merely mob rule”
—like I said, you’re as stupid as advertised, but clearly not shy about repeatedly flaunting your stupidity. More laughs for me, so well done.

“China would go from being authoritarian to being a corporate crony of the West.”
—ahh, you have such a heart-warming impression of the capacity of Chinese people. Your parents must be so proud. Clearly they’ve done a bang-up job with you.

“Explain how “democracy” is a right”
—democracy is a right, just as freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion etc are rights. No wonder you’re out to deny rights to Chinese people, since you’re a CCP apologist and that’s all you know. Well, you are self-serving enough to know not to live under the CCP for long periods, just to travel there and work from time to time. LOL. Way to stick to your convictions. Yet another awesome trait that was probably handed down to you.

The CCP has delivered on some fronts over the past 30 years. Convenient of you to ignore the first 30, when she did sweet jack all if not screw things up worse for Chinese people. And actually, all the last 30 years shows is that capitalism works in China. So really, for someone to assume a stupid position such as yours, they’d have to assert that capitalism only works in the context of authoritarianism. Which is patently retarded…and if nothing else, you are that. Despite your multiple wet-dreams, I’ve never said democracy is perfect. So it should be up to Chinese people to determine how they are to exercise and promote their democratic rights. There is no stipulation that they do things like the Americans have done, which is the entirety of your argument. You don’t like how things are done in America (though clearly you don’t dislike it enough to move to China). But no one is calling for a democratic China to mirror or replicate the US of A. The principle of democracy is one that Chinese people can apply for themselves. The only reason why they haven’t is because the CCP forcefully prevents them from doing so. I don’t know how the CCP will disintegrate eventually. But I’m confident that Chinese people won’t put up with that crap forever.

November 24, 2011 @ 6:56 am | Comment

SK Cheung
those parts are fine. It’s the other stuff, like lack of political freedoms, extrajudicial punishment, censorship, corruption, lack of enforcement of laws, and that sort of thing, that need to go.

But extrajudicial punishment, censorship, corruption and lack of enforcement of laws and that sort of thing … don’t need to be stopped in India, Brazil, America and other “democracies”. Oh, and lets keep the incredibly high crime rates and imploding societies of these three democratic utopias as well. Clearly, democracy is a cure-all that will solve (or even mitigate) all of the ills you have listed! Oh wait, democratic Brazil and India are more corrupt, more violent and more unequal than China.

Your nonsense on political freedom is grade A claptrap and is thus dismisses as garbage.

democracy is a right, just as freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion etc are rights.

Uh, no. Something isn’t true just because you were brainwashed by equally stupid, uneducated morons. China has a right to good living standards first and foremost. This is where you source your claim that democracy actually improves anything. If you weren’t stupid, you’d realize that there is no such proof to be found.

Convenient of you to ignore the first 30, when she did sweet jack all if not screw things up worse for Chinese people.

Oh yes, life expectancy up 30 years – really screwed up. Care to make yourself look like more of an idiot? Here, I’ll help, lets talk about when America’s democracy barred blacks from voting with intimidation and violence. Oh, but 40 years is too long! 30 years is just right! I’m sure that’s what you’ll say. You’re certainly dumb enough to.

So it should be up to Chinese people to determine how they are to exercise and promote their democratic rights.

Yes, and there should always be rainbows in the sky and every river should run with chocolate. Grow up, stupid child.

The principle of democracy is one that Chinese people can apply for themselves.

Oh yes the “principle of democracy” i.e mob rule. No but it includes rule of law and transparency! A chicken in every pot! Double rainbows!

You’re clearly retarded.

But I’m confident that Chinese people won’t put up with that crap forever.

Yes I’m sure the Chinese will all rise up next year or so and decide once and for all that they don’t want rising wages. They don’t want better schools. They don’t want technology or science. They can’t stand that their properties are rising in value. And that increasing life span? Intolerable. Then they’ll up and overthrow the government. They’ll go “strolling” and boom! CCP gone. Oh wait, that’s the puerile wet dream of retards like yourself.

November 24, 2011 @ 8:06 am | Comment

“But extrajudicial punishment, censorship, corruption and lack of enforcement of laws and that sort of thing … don’t need to be stopped in India, Brazil, America and other “democracies””
—sure they do. Doesn’t change the fact that they need to stop in China. Man, you really can’t do anything without comparing, can you? And when it comes to those issues, China does have it in a uniquely bad way with Chinese characteristics, under the CCP at least. Does “democracy” alone eliminate those things? No. The other features of a functioning democratic state are required. Even in democracies with those other features, are those things eliminated? No. But are those fundamental flaws of democracy or democratic institutions? Also no. It’s in how democracy and its institutions are applied. Democracies can work better. But the CCP needs to improve that much more, since authoritarianism doesn’t have the capacity for eliminating those things. Stopping extrajudicial punishment, removing censorship, fighting corruption and guanxi, and enforcing laws? That’s just not in the CCP DNA. They’re mutually incompatible.

Of course democracy is not a cure-all. But it’s up to Chinese people whether they want to make use of it. It’s not up to the CCP, and certainly not up to overseas Taiwanese-American idiots like you. And I must say there are quite a few of you running around.

“China has a right to good living standards first and foremost.”
—capitalism is taking care of that, slowly. And capitalism certainly doesn’t need the CCP. Just look at what the CCP did without capitalism in those first 30 years. Fun times.

“lets talk about when America’s democracy barred blacks from voting with intimidation and violence”
—hey, it’s 2011 here. What year is it in China, do you figure? Oh yes, life expectancy went up during those first 30 years. Too bad being alive wasn’t so peachy back then for many of them. But hey, if Chinese people don’t want democracy, that’s their call. I’m just not so much of a buffoon as to insist from afar upon how Chinese people live their lives. Unlike our cute little puppy over here. Good doggie.

“there should always be rainbows in the sky”
—Chinese people exercising self-determination is a pie-in-sky concept for idiots like you? I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. Yes, Chinese people need to be told what to do by a Taiwanese American living in America. Fantastic stuff.

““principle of democracy” i.e mob rule.”
—there you go again with your dictionary sophistication. Is that standard issue for you CCP apologists? Hey, how about naming that democracy which exists on voting/majority rule alone? Yet another of the many challenges you’ve been utterly incapable of rising up to. I have to wonder if the CCP is getting their money’s worth with you. At the same time, they are probably not able to afford truly intelligent help, which is why I have yet to come across a CCP apologist who isn’t challenged between the ears. Fret not, mansbestfriend, you’re not the only dumb dog in the kennel.

“they don’t want rising wages.”
—you know what, you should park the dictionary, and just learn to read for starters. Sure, Chinese people want all those things. The point is that they can have all those things without those special extras that the CCP forces upon them. At some point, they’re going to say no to those unwanted extras. Right now, the people who don’t want those nasty extras have to leave the country. Probably not next year, and likely not the year after that, but at some point, Chinese people will want to enjoy the fruits of their labour at home without getting screwed by the CCP.

November 24, 2011 @ 1:45 pm | Comment

China does have it in a uniquely bad way with Chinese characteristics, under the CCP at least.

Absolute rubbish.

China is less than most Asian, Africa, South American, and East European countries. China is a little more corrupt than developed countries like Italy, and soores the same as Greece on the corruption index.

China is less corrupt than India and Mexico and Argentina – all ‘democracies’

http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2010/results

November 24, 2011 @ 2:03 pm | Comment

To Wayne,
China is corrupt. More than some, less than others. She is more corrupt than some democracies, and less corrupt than some democracies. So do you have a point in there somewhere about corruption of the CCP in relation to democracies?

And how about some of those other things, like censorship, enforcement of laws, and extrajudicial punishment? I just love how you guys cherry pick one thing in a sentence, and ignore the rest.

November 25, 2011 @ 1:30 am | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.