Bill Stimson: Democracy is not for China

The following is a contributed post from my friend in Taiwan Bill Stimson. I do not necessarily agree with all of Bill’s points and I offer some commentary of my own at the end.
——————————————————————————————————————–

“Democracy Is Not For China”
by William R. Stimson

Out from China comes the repeated argument that it can handle its own internal affairs without meddling advice from foreigners about democratization. True, China will likely evolve a unique mode of government that fits its needs and aspirations. But, to the extent those aspirations include global leadership, that government better be a democracy.

This is because of the kind of exceptional individuals China will need, not just in politics, but in all areas, if it sets out on this course. As regards exceptional individuals, we turn naturally to the work of psychologist Abraham H. Maslow, who made a study of these, and who believed that to those nations most successful in producing them belongs the future.

Maslow tells us that the fullest development of human potential requires a good society, which he defines as one that is anti-authoritarian and anti-controlling. It places a greater stress on spontaneity and autonomy than on stability and external control. Healthy and superior people, Maslow found, do not like to be controlled. They can make their own choices and need to be free to do so in order to bring out their full potential.

For China to be global leader it must lead the way in solving some tough problems that face all nations – the erosion of human trust, the destruction of the environment, the persistence of poverty, exploitation, and inequality of opportunity. Problems of such magnitude only stand a chance of being solved to the extent we mobilize all of our individual and collective inner resources, and bring out in our societies, our communities, our families, our individuals – and our approach to problems – more of the whole human capability that we all have within as a latent potential. These farther reaches of our human nature await the right environment to emerge and to express themselves. That environment is an open and free democratic society; where corruption, mismanagement, greed, and waste can be challenged; and where ordinary people can organize in ways of their own choosing and disseminate whatever ideas they want.

Democracy is not for China. It’s not for the Chinese. It’s for every country, every people. To lead, China will have to become its champion because democracy is more urgently needed at this time in history than ever – not for outer reasons, but for inner ones: to call up the human intelligence, creativeness and sensitivity required to solve the
really big problems ahead.

* * *

William R. Stimson is an American writer who lives in Taiwan.
————————————————————————————————————-

All I want to add is this: I am no believer in a rush to Western-style democracy for China. However, I do get frustrated by arguments that “China isn’t ready for democracy,” made by some of my best and smartest friends here. I would agree that China’s system is not ready for democracy. After more than half a century of near-totalitarian rule, there is no other entity aside from the CCP that has the infrastructure and organization to rule China. This power vacuum was created by the CCP’s intolerance and it speaks to the inherent badness of the system. But the vacuum is real, and it means for now there is simply no alternative. The CCP stays.

But I agree with Bill that democracy is necessary for China, at least at some point in the future. Maybe not democracy as we in the West practice it, but there has to be representation for those who are taxed, and the people must be given an opportunity to have their voices heard. Today’s top-down system, where local officials answer only to the central party and not to those they ostensibly represent is a formula for exploitation, brutality and lawlessness.

This begs the question, Is anyone “ready for democracy”? Looking at America’s last two presidential elections, it can be argued Americans aren’t ready for it, either. Wedge issues, attack ads and litmus tests (abortion, taxation, etc.) manipulate the populace to vote against their better interests. And look at Iraq: we gave them democracy, and they voted for a theocracy.

Democracy can suck big time. Yet it’s still the best system we have. In the case of America at least, it tends to self-correct, as we saw in last year’s elections. Meanwhile, democracy at the village level in China has shown promising success, and I have to wonder why some very smart people stick to the mantra of China not being “ready.” At what point are people ready? Again, if people are forced to pay taxes to support their government, they should have at least some say in what that government does, no matter how educated they are. Those voting in the village elections are at the very bottom, yet many took the time to vote and saw it as a privilege. When the local officials can take away the people’s homes and brutalize them with taxes and cheat them on a regular basis, and when the people have no choice because those officials answer only to a bureaucrat in distant Beijing, we know the system is utterly rotten. And democracy is the only solution. Maybe if the CCP were ruled by a Lee Kuan Yew-type “benevolent dictator” who could do what was best for his people while tightly controlling corruption and abuse – maybe then China wouldn’t need democracy. But considering the sheer size of China and its population, such a solution seems unlikely, to say the least. Lots of people had high hopes Hu Jintao would be such a leader, and we were all mightily disappointed.

So bottom line: Yes, China needs some form of democracy. How and when it can achieve this remains unclear. And yet, many things in recent memory seemed impossible, but happened anyway: Apartheid was ended, the Berlin Wall fell, the USSR was dismembered. China’s chances of becoming a democracy within our lifetimes seems highly unlikely, but stranger things have happened. It will have to be a slow, grinding process; you can’t fill China’s power vacuum overnight. Still, the more the Chinese people demand it, the more likely it is to happen. Let’s hope the cause continues to move forward, no matter how impossible it may seem at the moment.

Bill, sorry for hijacking your post, but my comments are directly related.

The Discussion: 108 Comments

Richard, check out this LA Times article about the recent protest in Xiamen over a proposed chemical plant. It illustrates how Chinese people are mobilizing and taking direct action about the issues that are directly affecting their lives. This is an example of democracy at its finest – not in the system that allowed no other options than to organize and take to the streets, but in the democratic impulses of people determined to have a voice in their own lives.

June 3, 2007 @ 5:00 pm | Comment

Lisa, it’s tragic that I was in Germany when the Xiamen incident started, and couldn’t stay on top of it. I see great hope when I read this sort of thing.

There’s a wonderful collection of links on the Xiamen protests over here. The days when the CCP could totally ignore the voice of its people have past. The Chinese people will no longer tolerate taxation without representation, and shooting bullets into the crowds and declaring martial law won’t end the outrage, but will only exacerbate it. This is just the kind of thing that pushes China closer to the democracy that is inevitable, if still distant.

June 3, 2007 @ 5:22 pm | Comment

Xiamen RAWKS! Definitely on my list to return.

June 3, 2007 @ 5:30 pm | Comment

I love Xiamen, too. Right now, it literally rocks.

June 3, 2007 @ 5:44 pm | Comment

This Stimson fellow is in the same camp of those neo-con nuts who advocates Taiwan independence.

With this kind of credential, he is really a bad bad salesperson to promote democracy in China. He will have zero credibility in the eyes of most Chinese as soon as they know his position on Taiwan.

June 3, 2007 @ 8:23 pm | Comment

Welcome back, Steve, one of my favorite and most long-standing trolls. Can you not see what distinguishes Bill from the nocon nuts? Bill wants independence for a country he loves – and whether that is a right or wrong desire is irrelevant (and unprovable). The neocon nuts are using Taiwan as political bait and risking blowing up the entire world for their ideological ends. There is literally no comparison, and anyone who draws such a comparison is demonstrating a pronounced lack of critical thought.

June 3, 2007 @ 9:17 pm | Comment

Richard: I don’t agree with your comment that there is no alternative to the CCP. It’s thinking slightly laterally, but I don’t believe it matters if there is an alternative.

The CCP is a huge, huge party – 70 million members – so for that to be a cohesive body is simply unrealistic. If democracy is going to happen in China, it will come from WITHIN the party. For starters there is no other way it can happen, but also in the future the balance might shift in such a way that reformist, democratic thinking is considered a more effective way forward for the country.

At first it sounds hopelessly optimistic when I write things like that, but I’m not sure it’s quite such a pipe dream. Look at the protests in Xiamen, look at the way the party is struggling to retain control of the news agenda, look at the way systemic problems are hindering solutions to issues such as corruption and the environment. Already the upside to a more democratic system of governence is becoming clearer – it won’t take too many people becoming sick of playing defense for there to emerge groups within the party who would rather play offense.

June 3, 2007 @ 9:48 pm | Comment

Charlie, I don’t disagree with you. I just know the party’s history of treating members who dare to “think different.” There are many great people in the party. Unfortunately, the trend has always been for the party to be concerned with its own hold on power before what’s best for its people. If there are some eagles within the party who dare spread their wings and push for true reform and choice, I’ll be thrilled. But we all know the party has been ruthlessly efficient at clipping the wings of such eagles, as Li Peng would proudly tell you.

June 3, 2007 @ 9:54 pm | Comment

Looking back at recent history I couldn’t agree with you more – Zhao Ziyang is the most obvious example. I think there are reasons why this ruthless approach has worked in the past, but likewise there are new aspects that mean it may not be so effective in the future.

To quote Wen Jiabao, China has been in “the early stage of development” – the progress has been so dramatic and so obvious that it’s been easy enough to conclude that, on the whole, the party has been right.

Problem now is that new issues are emerging – and you’ve got to love the role of the internet in this – and unsatisfactory solutions to things like corruption, taxation woes, environment degradation, legal issues etc make it less clear that what the party is doing is right.

The sexy, external consequences is riots and dissent, but I’d say more important are the internal consequences: the belief among party members that THEY COULD DO IT BETTER.

Look at the way the property law was watered down – there was internal disagreement. The challenge to Hu and Wen and the next generation leadership is to keep enough people on side: they achieved a compromise with the property law, but inevitably new, more contentious issues will emerge. This is when the divides will appear (if they reach the public domain at all).

It’s not necessarily about one or two “eagles” – I imagine it will be much less dramatic, more about consensus and subtle shifts of opinion.

June 3, 2007 @ 11:10 pm | Comment

“There is literally no comparison, and anyone who draws such a comparison is demonstrating a pronounced lack of critical thought.”

Richard, what counts is the result. Pushing for Taiwan independence will lead to the same disaster results, no matter it is out of good or evil intention.

This Stimson fellow push for Taiwan independence either with evil intention of wishing for a war, or with good intention of wishing CCP’s giving up Taiwan. In the later case, he falls into “useful idiot” category in the eyes of neo-con.

June 4, 2007 @ 12:41 am | Comment

A Re-Statement of my Anti-Democratic Views.

My anti-democratic views have been expressed many times here. I feel I want to re-state them in a more formal way for all of you to see clearly. Also, to dispel some false notions, I am not a Chinese Communist Party Members, many of my viewpoints differ from the Communist Party of China. So any accusations of me being a paid propagandist is invalid.

Here are some of my summarized anti-Democracy viewpoints:

1) When I talk about Anti-Democracy, I define Democracy as made up of four main “pillars”: “Freedom of news” + “Freedom to form political parties” + “Multiple parties freely compete to govern a nation” + “Periodic general elections to elect from those Multiple Parties”. If your definition Democracy is totally different from mine, then you can stop reading.

2) I strongly disagree with the statement that “Democracy is not right for China”. I believe that democracy is not right for any nation on earth. It itself is a wrong structure of government, and can bring many disasters. In other words, I’m not a psuedo-democrat who says things like “I agree Democracy is needed in China, but we cannot rush it, etc, etc”. I think democracy is totally wrong for not just China, but for the US as well. And I’ll be very very sad if China one day starts to have general elections and free media.

3) I do not believe democracy is a goal for humans to pursue. The goals humans want to pursue are welfare for your nation and happiness for your lives. In other words, anything that contributes to a nation’s welfare and happiness of your life, you should do it, and anything that does not contribute to those two things, you should not do it. But right now, some democracy-lovers and Rightists claim that “Anything that contributes to realizing democracy, we should, and anything that does not contribute to democracy, we should not do.” Of course, if you claim that “democracy contributes to the welfare of a nation and happiness of people’s lives”. Then please prove it. If you can show me strong proof of that claim, then I’ll support democracy. But that claim itself shows that you agree with me that “Welfare of a nation and happiness of your lives” are the goals of humans. Is there anyone here who believes that “Democracy is the goal of humans, if we can have democracy, then it is ok if we are poor/dying/unhappy, etc..”

4) I believe that of all the advanced nations in the world, not one of them became advanced and wealthy due to democracy. America did not, UK did not, Germany did not, Japan did not, etc. Those nations became wealthy and strong through market economies and exploitations of poorer nations.

America reached true superpower status in the 40’s. Yet even in the 60’s, Blacks and Whites still could not ride in the same bus, not to mention having a Black run for President. So can you refute me when I say that before the 60’s, America failed practice democracy as written in its own Constitution? Before America became truly advanced and rich, it never really obeyed principles of democracy. Of course if you say “Math, I think not allowing Blacks to ride good buses does not violate Democracy”, then you just successfully refuted me.

5) I believe the biggest harm of Democracy, especially in a multi-ethnic nation, is that it creates ethnic conflicts and leads to ethnic wars. In a multi-ethnic nation, the majority ethnic group will always win most elections and hold power, denying any chance for the minority ethnic group to run the country. And that inevitably creates tension and sharp conflicts between these groups. In a homo-ethnic nation, like Germany, democracy has the danger of leading to military nationalists being elected. Hitler was indeed democratically elected, and its WW2 is supported by Germans. Are you saying that the Germans were wrong to support Hitler? But they were simply following the rules of Democracy.

6) I believe that freedom of news cannot prevent the spread of bias and misleading information. In America’s society today, if an Arab is being tried for terrorism, there’s no way the media can maintain objectiveness during his trials. Most of the public will already see him as a terrorist as soon as he is “suspected”.

7) I believe that “checks and balances” can still be established within a single-party system. As long as enough study and research is made into the structure of a party, effective checks and balances are made within the party. If you don’t believe me, just look at Singapore, Hongkong, Sweden, etc. In fact, China’s Hu Jintao is already pushing for “intra-party” reforms, in which all party cadres are to be internally elected through a performance review process, rather than through personal appointments.

8) China’s one-party regime is the only reason it can achieve this rapid economic growth in the past 20 years. It ensured that there are no any ethnic tensions or conflicts in China, its decision making process is highly efficient, its effective micro-management of the economy made many economics from investment banks like JPMorgan and Merill Lync to claim that “of all the governments we worked with around the world, the Chinese government is the smartest and the most astute.” If every nation’s performance in the last 2 decades is rated, then China would certainly be on the top, and if the world is a corporation, then China would be promoted due to its performance, while many nations would be fired.

9) Of course that does not mean China’s system is the most advanced and perfectt. In fact, it has too many problems today, and it has a lot of areas for improvement. First, it must establish a more formal legal system, and mold its citizens in behaving according to laws. Second, it must import moral checks on its party cadres, and combine the most advanced elements from the West and East to create a more advanced political system.

To inform many of you, you can read more on the idea of “Asian Values”, a concept raised by the Prime Minister of Singapore in the 90’s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_values

But no matter what reforms China’s political system will take in the future, it will not be towards multi-party elections, but towards enhancing the Chinese Communist Party’s one-party regime system.

Finally, I want to summarize my anti-Democracy views in one sentence: “Democarcy is bullxxxx.”

June 4, 2007 @ 1:14 am | Comment

Since when did neocon become the new juden?

Seriously. Plenty of brilliant people with a plethora of Ivy League degrees coming out of their asses have made a strong case for using US military power to act where other groups like the UN and EU fail to act in order to make the world a better place.

When such starry-eyed idealism is tempered with just a bit of realism (and fully separated from corporate power), it is the true heir to FDR, Truman, and JFK.

If you don’t agree with it, fine. But it is the utmost in intellectual sloth to denounce any idea writ-large and the people who happen to believe in it.

June 4, 2007 @ 1:21 am | Comment

re: math…

You contradicted yourself in your anti-democratic rant.

Exhibit A:

1) When I talk about Anti-Democracy, I define Democracy as made up of four main “pillars”: “Freedom of news” + “Freedom to form political parties” + “Multiple parties freely compete to govern a nation” + “Periodic general elections to elect from those Multiple Parties”.

And later you say

Of course if you say “Math, I think not allowing Blacks to ride good buses does not violate Democracy”, then you just successfully refuted me.

Since you didn’t seem to include anything about racial equaliy in your own definition of democracy, then I guess I just successfully refuted you.

Exhibit B:

7) I believe that “checks and balances” can still be established within a single-party system. As long as enough study and research is made into the structure of a party, effective checks and balances are made within the party. If you don’t believe me, just look at Singapore, Hongkong, Sweden, etc.

Well I looked at them, and let’s see…they are all tiny countries. Singapore has 4 million people, Hong Kong has 7 million, and the behemoth of the group–Sweden–has 9. Micro-management of party discipline possible at those population levels is simply not feasible in a nation of 1.3 billion, when all 3 of those nations combined would still amount to little more than a rounding error. The difference is huge–literally.

Furthermore all of these “single-party” states were de facto, not de jure (as opposed to China) and operated under the rule of common law (HK, courtsey of UK), civil law (Sweden), or some combination thereof (Singapore).

9) Of course that does not mean China’s system is the most advanced and perfectt. In fact, it has too many problems today, and it has a lot of areas for improvement. First, it must establish a more formal legal system, and mold its citizens in behaving according to laws.

How on earth do you expect citizens to consider themselves subject to the law when the ruling party acts entirely above them? Not much of an example set there….

Second, it must import moral checks on its party cadres
Oh gee, why didn’t they think of that before? We can just ORDER our corrupt officials to “stop being corrupt!” Just think of all the billions we could have saved in New Orleans if we just ordered everyone to behave!

“If men were angels, government wouldn’t be necessary.” Sadly there are but two effective ways to discipline your party members for poor performance….with ballots, and with bullets.

June 4, 2007 @ 1:43 am | Comment

I am almost ready to believe that “Math” is a full time writer for Xinhua or something. Same grammatical style as China’s foreign press releases…alot of flowery emptiness.

And he/she will try to engage you endlessly mundane and empty dialogue until you get tired of responding, which will allow Math to declare victory.

“The CCP is a huge, huge party – 70 million members – so for that to be a cohesive body is simply unrealistic. If democracy is going to happen in China, it will come from WITHIN the party. For starters there is no other way it can happen, but also in the future the balance might shift in such a way that reformist, democratic thinking is considered a more effective way forward for the country.”

The CCP could make things easy for CHina and Asia and have an internal party breakup. There are already conservative and liberal factions in the CCP, so the everything exists for at least a two party system except the will power to achieve it. And with the other 8 “political parties” China could opt for a european or japanese parlimentary system.

But no, the CCP will maintain monolithic power, protests and anger will spread and chinese history will repeat itself. But this time, when the power structure collapses, foreign interests will see to it that China is permanently dismantled, with a few large asian states in its place and the liberation of Tibet, southern Mongolia, eastern Turkmenistan and no more pressure on Taiwan.

“The tigher you squeeze, the more star systems will slip through your fingers”.

There has been a program to improve provincial administration by having some officials come to work in US state bureaucracies, these officials have come back with a sense of more provincial independence from central rule and chinese translations of the US constitution, the US Federalist papers and state constutitions as well as decent knowledge of state and local law-making and regulation independent of the national gov’t.

Beijing is just becoming irrelevant.

June 4, 2007 @ 3:01 am | Comment

Provinces are being given more atonomy.

There are multiple levels of Democracy. The property rights laws China passed are great for the people of China.

Freedom is coming. These things take time.

June 4, 2007 @ 4:28 am | Comment

First, only US states can be called democratic government. The entire federation is acutally Republic or Al Gore will be our president. In addition, US did not have universal sufferage till the early 20s centry and Jim Crow didn’t end till the 1960s. All I am saying is that what’s the hurry for Chinese to adopt so call Western democracy when steady and good changes always come at a snail pace. Rapid social changes have never shown any great success.

June 4, 2007 @ 4:32 am | Comment

Completely agree that today’s CCP contains the basis for a multi-party system – the internal divisions are certainly distinctive.

June 4, 2007 @ 5:31 am | Comment

For all of the shots at the US’s progress compared to China’s, the US has only been around for a little less than 300 years, China for 4500 years. Who should have perfected things by now? Chinese leaders, er, bosses, don’t want to get things right, they want big face, power and trappings right now.

China just can’t and doesn’t want to get it right.

June 4, 2007 @ 5:50 am | Comment

Hello my foreign friends. I am a Chinese student currently studying in America. I was introduced to this blog by my friend ( I will not reveal his name here, hehe). I have read some postings and replies on this site, and all the diverse opinions are very interesting. I am very happy that so many foreign friends are concerned about China’s well-being. For this topic about China’s democracy, I would like to say a few things.

China’s is the world’s largest developing country, and is also one with the longest continuous history in today’s world. In terms of culture and civilization, China has 5000 years, while America has only 300 years. In this regard, China can be America’s big brother (hehe). Ever since ancient times, Chinese culture had very deep elements of democracy. This is evident in the works of Confucious, Lao Zi, Men Zi, and many other ancient Chinese philosophers. In my opinion, today’s Chinese government is also very committed in building democracy in China. Of course, democracy is a very general concept, and is subject to the cultural, historical,, and economic conditions of a nation. I think history has proven that there’s no one single form of democracy that works universally for all countries. The democratic system in America is very different from the democratic system in France, which is again different from the democratic system in Iran. China is of no exception. China is building a democracy system with Chinese characteristics, that fit the conditions of 1.3 billion Chinese people. This is not an easy task, and certainly the democracy situation in China today is not ideal. But just because something is not ideal does not mean it has no room to improve. Under the leadership of the Chinese government, the Chinese people have seen a dramatic increase in public participation of politics and a dramatic increase in people’s awareness of both local and central governments’ policies.

June 4, 2007 @ 6:40 am | Comment

China will develop its own version of democracy. My sense is that it will closely resemble the ones in Singapore as opposed to the ones in the West.

June 4, 2007 @ 8:52 am | Comment

OK, I think everyone accepts that China will not have general elections tomorrow, I don’t think anyone denies that would not be a good idea. However, if the current regime really means business by building a democracy with Chinese characteristics, why doesn’t it allow anyone outside the government to voice dissenting views? Why does the government insist on maintaining monopoly on what can be said?

June 4, 2007 @ 11:11 am | Comment

I feel like one of the major blocks in the way of democracy in China is the Chinese people. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with the Chinese, but I think many of them view democracy with ambivilance or fear. The Chinese have never had a society or form of government that allowed for the open discussion of issues. For a long time China has had a very hierarchical society. For many Chinese (though especially those in the government) the open discussion of views and policy seems like disorder. This can be accepted amongst equals, but I think many Chinese find the idea of their leaders displaying disagreement and contentiousness to be very disquieting. The Chinese hierarchical system mandates putting faith in your superiors. (Your father or Mao Zedong, for example.) Seeing these superiors argue is very hard for those that have faith in them. This is one of the reasons many Chinese are okay with the insular nature of the CCP. They don’t want to know what’s going on. It would be harder to fulfill their roles as followers if they saw the internal power struggles. There is lots of evidence, though, that there are very vigorous internal power struggles. Changes in the party are not the product of one or a few eagles spreading their wings, but rather of certain factions gaining the upper hand. In some ways, that looks kind of like American party wrangling. In this sense, I agree with Charlie. I think democracy is much more likely to come from splits inside the party than from pressure outside it. (Though, there will certainly be a combination of the two.)

Regarding outside pressure, I’m not sure the protests in Xiamen show us a new tendency for Chinese people or necessarily mean a push towards democracy. Chinese society has a long history of public displays of disapproval for the government (it was not wrong to rebel against an emperor who lost the Mandate of Heaven.), but these are almost always a call for a new “Benevolent Emperor.” I think there is still a very strong Chinese belief in a patriarchal government. This runs counter to the Western belief that the people and the government are almost always at odds. (Except when people’s judgments are clouded by a Rally Round the Flag issue like 9/11.) In the west, especially in America, there is the feeling that all politicians are inherently slimy. Many Chinese now believe that there is something very wrong with their government, but there is still a tendency to deify leaders. Look at what the CCP has done with Zhou Enlai and ask young Chinese people how they feel about Zhou. There are almost unanimous positive responses. Zhou I think gives the people hope that they can find a new saviour from within the party, their job is simply to express their displeasure and call for this new leader. Many Chinese believe it is not their place to be making policy decisions. If you ask Chinese people what should be done about the problems China is facing, the general answer is: “That’s not my problem. That’s the government’s problem.” For democracy to be implemented, there must first be the belief that the government’s problems are your problems and that you are capable of picking the best solution. (I’ll save my rant on how this is the problem with Japanese democracy for later. I’ve already gone on much too long.)

Chinese democracy, if it is going to exist, first has to overcome these feelings of the Chinese people. Richard, I’m really interested in what you said about village level democracy. I know very little about this and maybe it will change my view of Chinese society to some degree. Do you (or anyone else) have any links I could check out?

Y’all will probably find lots of contradictions in this, and I’m sure it’s not all right, but who said society was never contradictory?

love,

milse

June 4, 2007 @ 1:38 pm | Comment

For all of the shots at the US’s progress compared to China’s, the US has only been around for a little less than 300 years, China for 4500 years. Who should have perfected things by now? Chinese leaders, er, bosses, don’t want to get things right, they want big face, power and trappings right now.

The first Chinese Republic was not found until 1911, and Chinese didn’t wipe out an entire race (that will include their language btw), and slave half of her population for over hundred years.

June 4, 2007 @ 1:44 pm | Comment

Milse, scroll around over here to see the mixed-bag of Chinese village elections.

Arty, you are a real piece of work. An angry young man, no doubt, suffering from an acute inferiority complex. Rant all you want, but no one will take that sort of nonsense seriously.

June 4, 2007 @ 1:53 pm | Comment

Arty – actually, Chinese forces (under Manchu leadership) committed acts of genocide in Western Mongolia/China in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries loosely comparable to the extermination of the American Indians. See Peter Perdue, CHINA MARCHES WEST.

As for the democracy issue, I’m writing a review of Daniel Bell’s BEYOND LIBERAL DEMOCRACY at the moment, which makes elitist/Confucian arguments for China better than most.

June 4, 2007 @ 2:17 pm | Comment

Ok so alot of us here are either westerners or under the influence of CCP propaganda (no offense, I know it’s not easy to get around it), so I want to bring up a perspective that isnt represented enough in the media, on the internet, and in general life, especially due to the supression of info and mind control, and even foreign manipulation… Also a lot of the masses of people who know the real deal are dead or scared poopless/hopeless or they dont have the means to tell people or they dont believe anyone cares.

Let’s please not forget the party we are dealing with and what kind of “political campaigns” they use to so-called improve the quality of life in China… Yeah, maybe theyll switch to some other way of working if the people threaten to throw them out otherwise, but truth will never be allowed cause if people were clear on, and the atrocities were allowed to be discussed and thought about, no one in their right mind would be able to be so inconceivable as to support such mass murders and idiots to be in charge of such an important country.

Land Reform, Suppression of Counter Revolutionaries Campaigns (1950-1952; 2.4-5 million killed)
-Through it’s violence, the CCP acheived three goals: 1) the total elimination of village leaders, who were replaced by CCP apparatchiks; 2) obtaining massive personal wealth from those killed; and 30 instilling deep, lasting fear of the CCP.

The Great Leap Forward (1959-1961; 30-40 million dead)
-In the aftermath CCP propagandists explained away the calamity as a “natural disaster”. No disasters, however, were recorded at the time.

The Cultural Revolution (1966-1976; 7-8 million killed or driven to suicide)
-Killing became the way to prove one’s “revolutionary’ status.
-Humiliations beatings, cannibalism, torture, rampant.

1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre (June 4th 1989; 600-3000 killed)
-To this day the CCP has not apologized or admitted any wrongdoing in the tragedy.

The Eradication of Falun Gong Campaign (1999-present); 5-7500 est. dead, as many as 3 million imprisoned)
-Is believed to be the largest, longest, most systematic, and costly campaign ever against a single group of people in China.

That is to say, even if CCP keeps doing superficial and practically nonexistent changes just to stay in power, how can we live under such a disgusting good for nothing criminal gang?

June 4, 2007 @ 2:50 pm | Comment

In Canada we threw out Paul Martin cause he did one bad scam of corruption. But here we have access to some truth so its different, but I just mean that shouldnt the leader of a country have some honour?

I like the idea of the benevolent leader, that would solve it ( : I think the movement away from CCP might end up like that, like maybe one guy who manages to stay alive will say to the people, “everyone be good, if you dont get all noisy, we can get rid of the CCP and have some stability, I have good intentions and I love China and you people, so trust me I’m going to do my best, and I will lead the country to greatness”

And because people hate the CCP in their hearts, they will welcome the grassroots movement for a great change that wont take 200 years or whatever line of crap the propagandists say….

June 4, 2007 @ 2:51 pm | Comment

Being an overseas Chinese does not mean that a person is not brainwashed by the CCP. A lot of Westerners are also fooled since 1/5 of the world is no small portion trained to spread fallacy,

But Arty is not a Westerner…

Here is an interesting paper about China’s United Front Work, its like the propagandsa department. What it does is it moves its most devious and obedient or thoroughly brainwashed who might be mostly young people who have no idea of the history or morals) and sets up organizations all over the world just to terrorize and control things through those Chinese communities. They do their coercion and mind control work from posts all over the world. They can use these set ups and lackies to influence foreign governments and influence policy and make threats and demands that govts follow the party line…

I think the paper doesnt really get what the parties motives are but if you search propaganda in their you will see how the Chinese overseas are expected to follow the party line and spread it…

http://www.asienkunde.de/articles/Barabantseva96.pdf

ok this may seem unrelated but I wanted people to know that people dont have to be in China to be party members and brainwashed.. I wanted to post it on a different thread ….

June 4, 2007 @ 3:22 pm | Comment

“The first Chinese Republic was not found until 1911, and Chinese didn’t wipe out an entire race (that will include their language btw), and slave half of her population for over hundred years.”

The US didn’t wipe out any “entire races” or their languages. China did however kill 50 million of its own people and the small minority villages in Yunnan are all that’s left of entire nations that were subjegated and reduced to nothing by Han.

June 4, 2007 @ 3:36 pm | Comment

Am I the only one that is sick and tired of the whole “brain-washed” rhetoric used to attack people who disagree? I think it is a ignorant and cowardly tactic.

June 4, 2007 @ 3:59 pm | Comment

The US very certainly did wipe out entire languages and cultures, sadly – or reduced them beyond the point where they could possibly survive. I believe at least one Amerind language continues to die a year, if not more. China’s record towards its minorities is distinctly mixed, though there certainly have been racist policies and acts of genocide in the past. Daniel Bell argues semi-convincingly, in the book I mentioned above, that democracy might well *worsen* the position of minorities in China.

June 4, 2007 @ 5:05 pm | Comment

The US very certainly did wipe out entire languages and cultures, sadly – or reduced them beyond the point where they could possibly survive. I believe at least one Amerind language continues to die a year, if not more. China’s record towards its minorities is distinctly mixed, though there certainly have been racist policies and acts of genocide in the past. Daniel Bell argues semi-convincingly, in the book I mentioned above, that democracy might well *worsen* the position of minorities in China.

June 4, 2007 @ 5:06 pm | Comment

Steve: Given that practically every British colony has received independence (i/4 of the population of this planet) what is the problem with supporting the will of the Taiwanese?

June 4, 2007 @ 9:00 pm | Comment

“Am I the only one that is sick and tired of the whole “brain-washed” rhetoric used to attack people who disagree?”

If your educators indoctrinate you with only one idea, stifle independent thinking, ostracise any individual who dares question the party line, and teach denial of anything that reflects badly on the ‘motherland’, then the shoe fits very nicely.

June 4, 2007 @ 10:54 pm | Comment

Brainwash the first:

“In terms of culture and civilization, China has 5000 years, while America has only 300 years.”

This nonsense ‘argument’ is planted deep in the cerebrum. It’s the same line Wu Yi used when insolently lecturing a recent trade delegation from the states.

Brainwash the second:

“…with Chinese characteristics…”

Oh, How clever!! Such originality; such sophistication.

While China remains a punitive regime why not take a flail to the hide of any citizen uttering this infuriating appendage.

Great way to validate snow’s comments about China’s United Front Work, sql !

June 4, 2007 @ 11:24 pm | Comment

brainwash (vb) – to force somebody to accept your ideas or beliefs by repeating the same thing many times and/or preventing alternative thinking.

As long as education in China conveniently side-steps Tiananmen (and other issues), or attempts to justify their leaders’ actions on that fateful night as ‘necessary’, then the term ‘brainwashing’ is appropriate.

It was 18 years ago today.

Democracy for China? Not until the day they light their candles on this anniversary with the same alacrity that they choose to remember the victims of Nanjing.

Time to introduce a flame to the wick, I think.

June 4, 2007 @ 11:58 pm | Comment

“what is the problem with supporting the will of the Taiwanese?”

The problem is that a nuclear power with 2nd biggest economy is ready to sacrifice everything to prevent that from happening. Is that clear?

June 5, 2007 @ 12:32 am | Comment

Arty, you are a real piece of work. An angry young man, no doubt, suffering from an acute inferiority complex. Rant all you want, but no one will take that sort of nonsense seriously.

? What the? I hope you have access to my ip address, then you will know who has inferiority complex. I walk to my work restroom and I can see Nobel prize winners. You think my statement about American history is wrong?

The US didn’t wipe out any “entire races” or their languages.

Some Native American tribes have their own unique languages do you consider than as indiviual race. We estimated that we wipe out about 80% of Native American populations including whole tribes. For example, majority of California Native American tribes can only be found in history. Btw, I have no doubt Han Chinese has done similar things but Chinese is not the one pretending to be all just and mighty.

June 5, 2007 @ 2:10 am | Comment

I know the debate about political system would lead to personal attack. Everytime!

Just have a few things to add. I am worried more about Chinese economy than her politics.

Wen’s ability to lead Chinese economy is widely questioned, at least online. He cannot fix the problems in banking system, real estate markets, and now the stock markets. Everyone I had talked with seems lose confidence in him.

Secondly, I do not believe that the provinces should have more atonomy. Chinese history clearly shows that only leads to chaos or even civil wars.

Oh btw, I really like the brainwash idea. Isn’t that a convenient and efficient tool in debate?

June 5, 2007 @ 3:32 am | Comment

But Arty is not a Westerner…

I came to the US at age of 16 from Taiwan. So if I am brainwashed, I should hate CCP to death. If I came to US any earlier or was born here, you are probably going to call me ABC or banana. I know all the things you have mentioned and I still think Falun Gong is a cult. Also, how do you define Westerners? Do you have to be white, fat, bald, and ugly complaining about not able to find a minimum wage job because of all the illegals?

I just don’t like people talk about democracy when they don’t even know what it is. Ever heard of that “Democracy is two wolves and a very well armed sheep deciding what’s for lunch.” It is the same thing that when you talk about Communism and peasantry: Communists know what’s the best for the peasants except the peasants don’t get to decide what’s the best for them (I mean is Karl Marx a peasant).

June 5, 2007 @ 4:43 am | Comment

Wen’s ability to lead Chinese economy is widely questioned, at least online. He cannot fix the problems in banking system, real estate markets, and now the stock markets. Everyone I had talked with seems lose confidence in him.

A democratically elected leader will have the answers? Come on! Democracy has no means to solve problems that are structural. There will be no real solution for illegal immigration in the US, no solution for jobs outsourced to foreign lands, no solution to attract American kids with the best brains to choose a career of hard science in exchange for a cab driver’s salary, no solution for Americans’ terminal addiction to cheap imported goods, no matter who gets elected into the office. Democracy, if working idealistically, is a process in which people vote according to their own, immediate best interest, which is inseparable from greed, shortsightedness and selfishness. China is facing structural problems, but they are countering them with a will to reform, at the risk that no democracy will have the courage to take. The much maligned family planning policy, the special economic zones, the speedy, heavy investment of infrastructure, … none of those can happen easily in a democracy. If China has a glimpse of hope of scceeding, that will be for its not being a democracy. The Chinese leaders believe they choose policies with the best collective interest of China in their minds. Their belief is sincere, at least more sincere than most democratically elected leaders in the world. Many of you guys appear laughable when you try to prove your intelligence by showing your “doubts” of the Chinese system. Yes, the Chinese system fails in many ways to address the discontent of the society, but please take this message home: THIS IS A TRANSITIONAL SYSTEM. China is in transition. Real jobs need to be done and done quickly. Democracy does not deal with the structural basis of problems; its value is being an institutionalized outlet of discontent. Democracy keeps the status quo of the society with all its potentials and limitations; it offers no hope of going beyond that because theoretically it is dead-ended. Chinese government needs to be more creative in dealing with societal discontents, but until all measures are used up, China should stay away from western-style democracy. Switching to democracy may bring a sudden burst of changes, which may be exciting but in the long run it does nothing but keeping the status quo, which in developing countries is translated as quagmire and despair. China’s structural problems can only be solved by industrialization and urbanization.

June 5, 2007 @ 5:09 am | Comment

asia needs a transparent constitutional meritocracy with some democratic/socialist elements more than democracy.

leaders should be chosen for creativity, intelligence, compassion, and dedication not popularity.

June 5, 2007 @ 5:42 am | Comment

“Democracy has no means to solve problems that are structural.”

Democracy means that the decision makers are held responsible for the decisions they make.

June 5, 2007 @ 5:48 am | Comment

“. We estimated that we wipe out about 80% of Native American populations including whole tribes. For example, majority of California Native American tribes can only be found in history.”

The Spanish, then the Mexicans were waging full time war against native tribes while the English colonies were still hemmed in by the French possessions in the Mississippi Valley.

And during that time, native tribes made alliances with the foreign powers to wipe out their adversaries.

June 5, 2007 @ 5:51 am | Comment

China moves at its own pace. Nothng to fuss about.

The last thing the U.S. needs to do is to start hammering on China any more than we aleady are.

Look at what our foreign polocy is doing to Russia. Putin feels he is being pushed so he is going to re- aim the nukes.

America needs to back off a bit and stop telling the entire world how to do everyting. Our invasive ways are getting us hated by too many.

June 5, 2007 @ 5:58 am | Comment

“Steve: Given that practically every British colony has received independence (i/4 of the population of this planet) what is the problem with supporting the will of the Taiwanese?”

After they’ve been colonized with bloodthirsty thieving murderers who steal all their resources. Luckily India did not receive this fate.

June 5, 2007 @ 5:59 am | Comment

Democracy means that the decision makers are held responsible for the decisions they make.

So, for the most part, they do NOTHING.

June 5, 2007 @ 6:13 am | Comment

America’s democracy means you get your 8 year romp and then you drop off the face of the planet with your loot.

It should be easier to impeach bad leaders.

June 5, 2007 @ 6:16 am | Comment

American style democracy means if you have $$$, you basically control most of everything, and you get stuck with a bunch of idiots for several years !

June 5, 2007 @ 6:45 am | Comment

First one tihing.

Democracy is designed not to put the best men in Government but to take the worst of them out. Some peple just forget it.
If you are lucky you will get good enough guys most of the time, and sometimes maybe someone really nice.
The bad ones you will have to bear them, but not for a long time. (At most two terms in the US ๐Ÿ˜‰

On the other hand, a society is a complex machinery and like all complex machinery you need things that tell you what is going on, identify what is going wrong, and means to fix them.
From a political point of view it can be resumed in three principles.

Transparency: if you do something, good or bad, it will be known.

Accountability: if you do something that is not right, you will be held accoutable for it. No matter who you are

Democracy: if what you do is perceived as harmful, you will be taken out of power. No matter your justification to get it in the first place, religious , ideological… whatever.

You can compare it to a very complex machine.
You need sensors and instruments that tell you what is going on, that is transparency.

You need the ability to identify what goes wrong, That is accountability.

And you need the ability to fix what is going wrong. That is democracy.

June 5, 2007 @ 7:50 am | Comment

People should not be trusted to put the best in power. But they can be trusted to remove really bad people from power.

That’s why it’s important to have analysis put in in the place of bipartisan propaganda. I knew George Bush would be a failure as a leader when I realized he was mentally retarded.

June 5, 2007 @ 8:06 am | Comment

Richard: I have been observing your blog, and don’t you think the comments are very predictable that they actually become funny? Everyone has their role it seems. It seems like a bad comic play.

– snow is venting his pro-Falun Gong and anti-CCP theme, it almost becomes spamming.

– nanheyangrouchuan complete denouncing and belittling China (and not only CCP) whenever he can. Very fun to read!

– Arty. ferins and others hitting back by denouncing the US.

– Math writing long stories that nobody takes seriously.

It is too funny! ๐Ÿ™‚

June 5, 2007 @ 8:35 am | Comment

Quebechotel:

A developing country is not going to pull itself out of the rut by having leaders that are merely “not the worst” or “not harmful”.

June 5, 2007 @ 8:45 am | Comment

Democracy means that the decision makers are held responsible for the decisions they make.

Really, so when is W. Bush is going to face his music?

The Spanish, then the Mexicans were waging full time war against native tribes while the English colonies were still hemmed in by the French possessions in the Mississippi Valley.

Mexicans are Spanish and Native American mix called mestizo. Clearly you don’t even know how many different looks exist in Mexico range from full caucasian features to african/native mayan look. And they never see themselves as gringo. However, regardless, if you google R. J. Rummel who is as critical of Chinese as to American own democides. He states that: “Even if these figures are remotely true,” writes Rummel, “then this still make this subjugation of the Americas one of the bloodier, centuries long, democides in world history.” Who by the way wrote the book called China’s Bloody Century.

June 5, 2007 @ 9:30 am | Comment

– Arty. ferins and others hitting back by denouncing the US.

Well I won’t say denoucing, I think I am very critical of my own country pointing out her weakness which is what a true patriot does. In addition, althought I am a register Democrat, I vote for both parties not just democrat alone.

June 5, 2007 @ 9:41 am | Comment

I’m not certain that the argument that $$$ buys power in democracy more than in authoritarian systems stands up. Looking at Transparency International and other anti-corruption agencies, authoritarian governments regularly have much higher levels of corruption than democracies – which is hardly surprising, given the lack of accountability.

June 5, 2007 @ 10:08 am | Comment

What Problems can Democracy Solve?

When fans of “democracy” discuss how Chinese society needs “democracy”, they often cite rampant corruption, prostitution, high crimes, unemployment as the major reasons. Their conclusion is that China must have “democracy” today, otherwise everything will go down in flames.

Now, I can’t help but be reminded of an infamous quack in ancient China named “Hu Wanlin”. This Doctor Hu gave only one kind of medicine to all his patients, and that is sulfuricum. If a patient went to visit Doctor Hu, he’d invariably tell him/her, “You have sclerosis of the liver, over-acceleration of the heartbeat, accumulation of gas in the lungs, and ulcer on the stomach, therefore you must take sulfuricum!

Are there are lot of problems in Chinese society today, a lot of ills? Of course there are, and some of them are rather serious. But can this drug called “democracy” cure all those ills?

To determine whether a certain drug can cure one or more than one type of disease, there is at least one way to find out. And that is to look at those patients that have taken that drug, and see whether their symptoms have subsided after taking the drug. If out of all those who have taken the drug, half of them see their symptoms subside, I will concede that that particular type of drug is effective. Ok, fine, even if 1/10 of the takers see their symptoms subside, I’ll say that the drug is potentially effective.

Therefore, I want to see which countries or regions of the world had certain types of social ills and saw the symptoms of the ills reduced after taking “democracy”. Even if I can only find one such country, that at least gives SOME credence to the drug.

Let’s first look at corruption. The countries that took “democracy” in recent decades include: Russia, East European countries, Yugoslavia (now Serbia and Montenegro), the Philippines, South Korea, Indonesia, and some African countries, plus Taiwan. Now, did corruption in Russia subside after taking the drug? Did it subside in Serbia and Montenegro? How about in South Korea? Indonesia?. I believe it did not subside in any of those countries. Is corruption not rampant in Russia today? Of course it is. And recently cases of human smuggling have been on the rise in Eastern Europe.

Now, onto unemployment. Russia, Eastern Europe, Taiwan, the Philippines, Indonesia, did they solve unemployment? No, not only did they not, unemployment is more severe in those countries. I’m someone who places great emphasis on practical results. If there’s such an example of a country that saw its corruption greatly curbed, and unemployment rate greatly reduced after taking the “democracy” drug, then I’ll clap my hands and sing praise for “demoracy” everyday. To those gentlemen who are already singing praise for “democracy”, please give me a such example. Some people use Taiwan as a classic model of how democracy leads to wealth, and visit different Internet forums carrying the question-and-answer: “Do you know why Taiwan is so wealthy? Because it practices democracy!”. Did Taiwan really grow wealthy under democracy? Or did it grow wealthy under the reigns of the Jiang (Kiang) family, and only start to squander the wealth after the introduction of democracy?

There’s this illusion that as soon as China opens up its press and starts general elections, the officials will suddenly become very clean, all the prostitutes will go home, the employment problem will be solved, crime rates will go down. Haha, I of course do not believe that. Those who disagree with me, let us hold a simulated election here on the forum for those fans of democracy, and let those who want to run for the president of China give us a policy outline on how he/she plans to tackle corruption, unemployment, prostitution, crimes. And let us compare his/her proposed policies to that of the current Communist Party of China, and see which side’s policies are better!

Not only can they not solve any social problems, they’ll create new ones. Then why are they still singing praise for that “miracle drug”? I think, they deliberately want to weaken and destroy China.

June 5, 2007 @ 10:32 am | Comment

Zyzyx

You can add that

-stuart always bashes China.

-sp will call anyone who does not agree with him a Maoist.

June 5, 2007 @ 11:06 am | Comment

Math:

What problems can democracies solve? Well, no democratic country has allowed its citizen to starve to death in mass famine. As Nobel prize winning economist Amartya Sen has shown, India has not suffered a major famine since independence. The last one took place in 1943 under British rule. Do I need to remind you about the Great Leap?

June 5, 2007 @ 11:33 am | Comment

and India has 220 million chronically malnourished as compared to China’s 130.

June 5, 2007 @ 12:06 pm | Comment

I dont know how many people read this thing, but it’s interesting to me to see that it seems like there is a variety of intention going through the words.

I’m sorry if some people find my brainwashing talk offensive, but it is a fact that the CCP employs extensive means to make sure the Chinese people tie the CCP together with China, (“the mother land”) along with other CCP benefiting garbage. Thats the facts and its important to remember otherwise we might just follow along how the CCP wants.

That comes back to what I was saying about intentions… Are we playing a game here or are we being true?

Personally, for me this is a serious humanitarian concern. I just wanted to share that.

June 5, 2007 @ 12:47 pm | Comment

On the democracy thing, well, I think the first thing Chinese people need is to erase the CCP mind control, then they can become better people and stop being so hopeless and lawless.

The CCP has instilled in Chinese that its ok to do anything for money as thats the example it sets and promotes (behind a very thin veil of propaganda)

I think the people of China have a bad reputation for being able to get it together cause the CCP is so crappy, but without the CCP, they’re probly pretty good people who can think and act properly.

I think we have all basically agreed that democracy is not exactly hot stuff.

I agree with: “”””””””””””””””Democracy means that the decision makers are held responsible for the decisions they make.

So, for the most part, they do NOTHING.”””””””””””””””””

Thats the thing is that with democracy you have to bend to the will of bad/stupid people and good people, so if those bad people have some money or speak up more or there are more of them, well, you get a bad nation somethin like that,

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” (Edmund Burke)

http://www.tartarus.org/~martin/essays/burkequote.html

June 5, 2007 @ 12:55 pm | Comment

ferins: did you get that comparison from the big commie statistics book?

Factor in food and water made undrinkable because of pollution and China is headed for another 1950s famine.

http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2007/06/03/china-disgruntled-students-tear-up-campus/

June 5, 2007 @ 1:06 pm | Comment

My argument for ousting the CCP ASAP is a question of dignity…

People mention this prop. slogan “Chinese characteristics”

HAH! import communism under Russia, Kill, cannibalise, and oppress religiously under Marxist/Leninist good-for-nothings who destroy peoples hearts and the environment,,Hmm, doesn’t sound too Chinese to me,

But I’m a “westerner” (non Asian…) so what’s this Chinese characteristics all about if the CCP wiped out Chinese characteristics and replaced them with commie/atheist, killing and hating characteristics?

Just wondering, heres some cool science that, to me is pretty Chinese ( :

http://www.pureinsight.org/pi/index.php?news=1363
http://www.pureinsight.org/pi/index.php?news=1405
http://www.pureinsight.org/pi/index.php?news=1519

June 5, 2007 @ 1:38 pm | Comment

“Zyzyx…You can add that…stuart always bashes China.”

No so. But when the CCP lackies hijack a thread they don’t like, some of us have got to stand up.

You need to read my comments more carefully. Criticism of China does not equate to anti-China. If you believe so you are suffering the over-sensitivity produced when foreigners highlight the problems and issues that the CCP refuses to talk about. To the blinkered this is perceived as ‘bashing.’

June 5, 2007 @ 2:07 pm | Comment

“ferins: did you get that comparison from the big commie statistics book?”

yeah it’s called the cia world factbook. leave your brainless quips for the people stupid enough to swallow your pigshit- neocon america.

factor in republican voting america’s propensity to be fat and disgusting physically and morally and you’re looking at a demographic implosion after a mcdonald’s critical mass:

http://www.bfeedme.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/fattest-states-2006.png

they might as well just drink pure blubber. united states of obesity, catchy.

June 5, 2007 @ 3:41 pm | Comment

Sometimes I check into these threads, shake my head and back out slowly towards the exit.

This may be one of those times.

June 5, 2007 @ 4:14 pm | Comment

otherlisa, couldn’t agree more.

I think one of the problems here is that the debate, if it can really be called that, is focusing on CCP communism and US style democaracy (communism with Chinese characteristics and democracy with American charactersitics -please forgive me!) but neither of these concepts are fixed. I for one do not like the Amercianization of British politics. That’s not to say that I dismiss American style democracy as being bad, I just don’t think it’s suitable for the UK. Equally China should find it’s own path to a democracy that fits in with China’s history, culture, ethics and social values.

Nevertheless, for any meaningful change to occur in China it has to come from the Chinese themselves, which I’m sure most people here would agree with.

It would certainly help matters if there were freedom of the press, a more rounded education, particularly regarding history, and a change in the way in which educators, policy makers and the media shape and define Chinese identity and the place/role of China in the modern world.

I’m afraid I’m neither a panda hugger nor a dragon slayer so I’ll probably cop it from both sides (or be totally ignored!) but I think if both sides took a more concilatory approach then, and only then, will any kind of progress be made. (Ok I think I’ll go hug a tree now)

June 5, 2007 @ 5:37 pm | Comment

“Richard: I have been observing your blog, and don’t you think the comments are very predictable that they actually become funny? Everyone has their role it seems. It seems like a bad comic play.”

So, what is he to do? Keep only the posts he agrees with? Censor them all? Sounds quite a bit like China Daily to me…

“I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”

-Voltaire

June 5, 2007 @ 8:33 pm | Comment

authoritarian governments regularly have much higher levels of corruption than democracies – which is hardly surprising, given the lack of accountability.

I really want to see some proofs of this statement. Singapore is a autocrat, yet it has very little corruption. Mexico is a democracy yet you don’t even want me to rant how corrupt its government is from bottom to top (wait, I am bashing Mexico now). Similar thing could be found during Japan, Korea, and Taiwan that you pretty much has a dictatorship yet the corruption is minor (when I said minor I mean the corruption didn’t stop the development process). Is India a democracy yet its government is extremely corrupt (that’s why the harbors, roads, and railroads that it needs for its projected growth are still not built)?

June 6, 2007 @ 1:57 am | Comment

@Fatbrick, Math, and all those faithful to the Communist regime and enemies of the Chinese people:

First of all, fatbrick, i don’t see anything wrong or abnormal in calling you or Math or CCT “Maoist”. You guys defend Mao and are ready to put out all sorts of arguments to “whitewash” his crimes. When we talked about Cultural Revolution and Great Leap Forward, you people either deemphasize it or divert attention. Despite Mao’s evil crime against his own people, i have never heard you people said, “Yes, Mao is an big egg too.” You have some many arguments when it comes to denouncing Western “interference”, but what are your so defensive when it comes to Mao, the butcher of 30million Chinese? I would call a spade a spade, name a Maoist a Maoist for i believe in calling evil for what it is.

And for all those who have argued against democracy in China, you people are simply the loyal servants of the CCP dictatorship. All sort of nonsense of what democracy is not for China, we won’t imitate the West etc etc. In this post, i shall once and for all seep aside all these crappy arguments.

When the Father of Modern China, Dr Sun overthrew the Manchu Dynasty in 1911 and est.the ROC, the idea was to have a democratic republic where there need to be checks and balances within the system. That’s why he had came up with the “Provisional Consitution of the Republic of China” in 1912. This was chiefly to define the scope and power of the government and limit its power so that China would not go back to the dark days of autocracy. Then, Dr Sun came up with the “Three People’s Principles” namely, Democracy, Civil Rights and Livelihood. He also stressed the rule of law, accountablity and a powerful consitution.

Now look at the PRC. What is the nature of the Communist Regime? Its a dictatorship, the Party is above the law, the citizens have no civil liberties, heavy censorship, control of the press, use of torture, kangaroo courts that deal with political dissidents or those who dared criticised the Party, use of brutal force, no elections to select the leadership, widespread corruption etc. In this sense, the PRC is the same old feudal dynastic China being revived by Mao, who was actually a Emperor who disguised himself in Karl Marx’s clothings. Mao wanted absolute power and created a political machine more brutal than any dynasties that had ruled China in 5000 years. The PRC, in essence, is the old China that Dr Sun and the revolutionaries had aimed to overthrow. But of course, a power hungry monster like Mao, wanted to revive autocratic rule so that he can rule just like an emperor in the name of the “Great Helmsman”, a wolf in a sheep’s clothing. The Party, is no different from the Imperial Court. Both are not accountable to the people or any democratic representatives of the people. The CPPCC and the NPC are just nice ornaments, good to look at as decorations, but are essentially rubber-stamp bodies for the Party. Similarly, the PRC consitution is nice to read but is essentially a piece of useless paper that guarantees nothing. and protects no one. So, the old feudal, autocratic China had not only been revived by the CCP, but further enhanced and strengthened, more formidable than ever in its business to enslave the entire Chinese race.

To say that democracy is not for China means alot of things. If democracy is wrong, then freedom is wrong. And if democracy is wrong, then the human conscience is wrong. And if democracy is wrong, then self-determination is wrong. What is left then? Slavery, oppression, subvertion of the human conscience and mind, distortion of rights and wrongs. And that means that Dr Sun and the revolutionaries have all along been wrong and Dowager Cixi, Yuan Shi-kai and Mao Zedong had been the right sages. That’s what Math and those who oppose democracy in China is implying.

Democracy is not a Western ideal, it is an universal ideal. Of course, the CCP leaders who fear losing their absolute power would try every ways and means to vilified democracy as a Western “plot”, “Trojan horse” etc etc. The truth is, isn’t this Marxism-Leninism thing also a “Western” product too? If Democracy is so undesirable, name me a country which has democratised but its people voted to be back into a dictatorship? None. That’s insane. Its like telling people to vote themselves back into slavery, would anyone do that?

The way to go is to establish a democratic consitutional republic in China. Thats the final emancipation of the Chinese nation. To fatbrick, Math and all those who tried to slander democracy, listen to what the Guo Fu, Dr Sun had said before:

“The tides of history are rapid and unstoppable; those who go with it would prosper; those who go aganist it would perish.”

Obviously, Maoists like Math are those who would eventually be swept away.

June 6, 2007 @ 3:47 am | Comment

@Arty,

“I really want to see some proofs of this statement. Singapore is a autocrat, yet it has very little corruption. Mexico is a democracy yet you don’t even want me to rant how corrupt its government is from bottom to top (wait, I am bashing Mexico now). Similar thing could be found during Japan, Korea, and Taiwan that you pretty much has a dictatorship yet the corruption is minor (when I said minor I mean the corruption didn’t stop the development process). Is India a democracy yet its government is extremely corrupt (that’s why the harbors, roads, and railroads that it needs for its projected growth are still not built)?”

What do you know about Singapore? Maybe not corruption in that illegal sense, but the ministers paid themselves with fat cat bonuses and their salaries are astronomical figures. At the end of the day, the money is still being squeezed out from the blood, sweat and tears of the people just as in corrupt places

June 6, 2007 @ 3:57 am | Comment

” Democracy is so undesirable, name me a country which has democratised but its people voted to be back into a dictatorship”

Oh I don’t know.. Nazi Germany? Democracy means rule by the people; i.e rule by the ignorant, savage, and selfish masses. I’d prefer a Lee Kuan-Yew type for China, just one that isn’t nearly so rough and legalist. The more transparency, accountability, and meritocracy the better.

Democracy and popular vote can go !@#$ itself and all the Hitlers they vote in. I think the checks and balances as well as the constitution are the main reason why America’s system is so much more humane than China’s (to their own citizens, of course. not to Iraqis.)

The haphazard electoral system is not a boon at all. People like Bush or 75% of the Republican party is not fit for office (same for many Democrats for that matter).

The same disaster occurs in Japan and Taiwan. Politics is all about lip-service and political infighting and not economic/pragmatic progress.

June 6, 2007 @ 4:03 am | Comment

@Arty

George W. Bush is already in deep shit. He is now essentially a political “has-been”. A lame duck. And who is resposible for giving this shit to Bush when he screwed up as presidency? Its the democratic political system of America created by the Founding Fathers in 1776. The mid-term elections totally annihalted his cabinet of hawks. You just need to ask Donald Rumsfeld how powerful this democratic thing is, so powerful that he was kicked out of his office in the Pentagon. He himself was “finished”before he could finish Osama bin Laden.

June 6, 2007 @ 4:05 am | Comment

“What do you know about Singapore? Maybe not corruption in that illegal sense, but the ministers paid themselves with fat cat bonuses and their salaries are astronomical figures. At the end of the day, the money is still being squeezed out from the blood, sweat and tears of the people just as in corrupt place”

And what about campaign money, the cost of getting nowhere because you have two ideologically backed camps of retards mutually destroying progress, corruption, bribes, lobbies, etc etc etc..

Singapore manages 7.5% growth, 1% inflation and hardly any corruption at all. It’s educational system does well and it’s a clean, safe, nation. This is a tiny city with no natural resources at all..

But yes IMO some of the legalist ways of Singapore’s leaders aren’t necessary.

June 6, 2007 @ 4:07 am | Comment

“George W. Bush is already in deep shit.”

Who cares? You can say whatever you want but he’s still in office along with his neocon maggots that have thoroughly penetrated the system. Like those whore judges that were instated.

“He is now essentially a political “has-been”.”

His administration saw huge profits for his inhumane oligarchy. And 8 year run with the most power in the world is way too much to give one of the stupidest, most incompetent man on the planet.

“A lame duck. And who is resposible for giving this shit to Bush when he screwed up as presidency?”

Sorry but I’m not thoroughly convinced that “shit giving” is valid as a way to remove bad leaders. This “shit” George has now been “given” doesn’t do “shit” at all.

“He himself was “finished”before he could finish Osama bin Laden.”

And America’s strategic positions were @#!ed 50 times over before Rumsfeld was “finished”

June 6, 2007 @ 4:13 am | Comment

@Ferins

Of course you are saying all these in the comfort of your bedroom

Singapore PM’s pay more than two million. Other ministers ard one million.

And in Singapore, you can see elderly folks in their seventies clearing the tables and cleaning the toilets.

Those in the lower level hardly survived on 1000 a month. And the govt won’t even increase social assistance from 260 to 290 dollars. 30 dollars is not approved for the poor but millions are approved swiftly for the ministers.

Those economic figures and what so ever economic jaggon does not make sense to the poor in Singapore.

June 6, 2007 @ 4:18 am | Comment

“… If Democracy is so undesirable, name me a country which has democratised but its people voted to be back into a dictatorship? …”

– Nazi Germany?
– Vladimir Putin’s Russia?
– Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela?

Don’t take things for granted. Blind faith is a dangerous thing!

I am not sure whether you have heard of the following saying:

“A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.

The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

– From Bondage to spiritual faith;
– From spiritual faith to great courage;
– From courage to liberty;
– From liberty to abundance;
– From abundance to complacency;
– From complacency to apathy;
– From apathy to dependence;
– From dependence back into bondage. ”

Which stage of the cycle are we in?
Apathy? Dependence?

June 6, 2007 @ 4:19 am | Comment

@ferins

well, at least i get to see Bush being put in his place and an asshole like Rumsfeld got fired.

But is it possible to put the CCP in its place? How?

And a genocidal criminal like Li Peng was not only fired for killing his people but get to stay on for another good old decade as the No. 2 leader of China.

June 6, 2007 @ 4:22 am | Comment

@ferins

“His administration saw huge profits for his inhumane oligarchy. And 8 year run with the most power in the world is way too much to give one of the stupidest, most incompetent man on the planet.”

Well at least democracy made sure that the shit lasts for 8 years. Castro’s 48 year old run from 1959 is still running except for a breif intestinal upset; Kim Il Sung’s run from 1949-1994 is continued by his son from 1994 till God knows when….

June 6, 2007 @ 4:27 am | Comment

@ferins

“And America’s strategic positions were @#!ed 50 times over before Rumsfeld was “finished””

Well, like i said, democracy made sure that Rumsfeld can only screwed up America’s strategic positions like what you said, 50 times? That’s as far as democracy would allow him to play around. He had his chance, his playtime and democracy made sure that he gets booted out.

Look at Kim Jong Il. He likes nuclear tests, firing missiles and starving his people and the difference between his game and Rumsfeld’s game is his game does not have a democratic function known as “game-over” like that of Rumsfeld’s.

June 6, 2007 @ 4:42 am | Comment

“Those in the lower level hardly survived on 1000 a month. And the govt won’t even increase social assistance from 260 to 290 dollars. 30 dollars is not approved for the poor but millions are approved swiftly for the ministers.

Those economic figures and what so ever economic jaggon does not make sense to the poor in Singapore.”

How is “democracy” going to fix this? If people in the ghettos of America get a infected tooth, they die.

“Well at least democracy made sure that the shit lasts for 8 years. Castro’s 48 year old run from 1959 is still running except for a breif intestinal upset; Kim Il Sung’s run from 1949-1994 is continued by his son from 1994 till God knows when….”

Sucks, but I’d still say Singapore’s way, while with many faults, is better than America’s.

I like the concept of Taiwan’s examination and control branches as well,

“Well, like i said, democracy made sure that Rumsfeld can only screwed up America’s strategic positions like what you said, 50 times? That’s as far as democracy would allow him to play around. He had his chance, his playtime and democracy made sure that he gets booted out.”

Who’s to say the next one won’t be a complete idiot as well? I mean it’s not up to the people to select cabinet members. America is more an plutocracy than anything else now.

But most people are starting to be aware of this and are getting seriously pissed off. I didn’t vote for Bush.

June 6, 2007 @ 5:04 am | Comment

morning grammar, blegh.

June 6, 2007 @ 5:08 am | Comment

sp,

When has US become so low that you like to compare it to the countries of North Korea and Cuba and you feel good about it?

June 6, 2007 @ 6:04 am | Comment

What do you know about Singapore? Maybe not corruption in that illegal sense, but the ministers paid themselves with fat cat bonuses and their salaries are astronomical figures. At the end of the day, the money is still being squeezed out from the blood, sweat and tears of the people just as in corrupt places

Yet, Singapore has one of the highest stand of living in Asia. Of course, you really don’t care about that or you probably don’t believe the statistics. So what if ministers are getting paid a lot of money. I will rather paying politicians on the table than having them trying to skim down the bottom. You are fooling youself if you think that when someone at the top holding power while getting paid nothing is not corrupt. Person like that are rare and I can only name less than 3 in the entire Chinese history. Also, in any society, there are rich and poor people. Using the extremes hardly help your arguments. If you are so smart, tell me exactly what do you propose to slove the homelessness problem or people who doesn’t make enough money because all they have is high school education, or old people didn’t save up enough for retirement.

George W. Bush is already in deep shit.

So is he going to jail for the lives we lost in Iraq? Also, Do you know Bush senior and Regan both have committed crimes that can end them up in jail if they are not former US president. In particular, they both allowed drug producers from South America to funnel drug into poor and low income Americans to fund wars down South (many academic studies and books have been published on this). Also, those Neocons who lose their jobs actually go a even better jobs (at least pay wise as usual).

June 6, 2007 @ 7:01 am | Comment

Yeah, Salaries for Singaporean ministers are unusually high. But consider their job performance and much higher pay for executives at many successful companies, their high salaries are justified.

June 6, 2007 @ 8:25 am | Comment

@ferins

“How is “democracy” going to fix this? If people in the ghettos of America get a infected tooth, they die.”

I am not saying that democracy can solve everything, but that’s the helplessness you get when you have an authoritarian one party govt. The difference is, in free societies, at least you can put pressure on the govt, in Singapore, the ruling party would always capture nearly every seat in Parliament. Parliamentary debates are just like going through the motions. I think you don’t have the experience like me having lived in Singapore before i left.

I know of folks who refused to get treated in Singapore for chronic diseases. One of them refused to go for dialysis and willing to die because the medical bill will screw his entire family. One man just committed suicide by jumping into the way of a subway train because of his desperation. Even some of my profs left Singapore because they cannot stand the stifling environment here.

June 6, 2007 @ 10:50 am | Comment

@ferins

“Who’s to say the next one won’t be a complete idiot as well? I mean it’s not up to the people to select cabinet members. America is more an plutocracy than anything else now.

But most people are starting to be aware of this and are getting seriously pissed off. I didn’t vote for Bush.”

In Singapore, you don’t even get to speak out even if a minister is obviously a complete failure. The press is owned by the Govt. You get sued until you are bankrupted if you criticised them.

And you complain about this and that when you can a genuine vote. You never know the pain of seeing elections with endless walkovers, consituencies with only the ruling party’s candidates because the Opposition parties had been crippled completely, and having to vote for the ruling candidate not because you like him but because voting is compulsory and he is the only one around?

The ruling party captures 55 seats of the 84 during Nomination Day because there is no Opposition. The whole process is entirely a joke and mockery of the will of the people.

June 6, 2007 @ 10:56 am | Comment

@Arty

“Yet, Singapore has one of the highest stand of living in Asia. Of course, you really don’t care about that or you probably don’t believe the statistics. So what if ministers are getting paid a lot of money. I will rather paying politicians on the table than having them trying to skim down the bottom. You are fooling youself if you think that when someone at the top holding power while getting paid nothing is not corrupt. Person like that are rare and I can only name less than 3 in the entire Chinese history. Also, in any society, there are rich and poor people. Using the extremes hardly help your arguments. If you are so smart, tell me exactly what do you propose to slove the homelessness problem or people who doesn’t make enough money because all they have is high school education, or old people didn’t save up enough for retirement.”

But the thing is, the income gap in Singapore is very wide, having lived in Singapore for so many years myself. I never said that the statistics but what’s the point if the wealth is so concentrated in only the hands of the minority? In fact, as an ardent believer in statistics, you should know that Singapore has one of the lowest mean wage among the more developed nations, yet its cost of living is no less expensive than that of Hong Kong.

What i am essentially saying is to expose the myth that an authoritarian govt is better than a democratic govt in governing. Having a one party govt has its dark side which few of the people in America knows. The people in Singapore have become so disillusioned with being involved with politics because they knew that whatever they say, whatever they do, anything that the Govt wants to do, the Parliament would pass it. Most youths don’t even bother to know who their PM is. Imagine a Magaret Thatcher govt able to pass every single legislation it proposes and Mrs Thatcher in power indefinitely. That’s pretty scary, isn’t it?

And ministers’ pay was not about them not getting paid, but about whether its fair. The people in Singapore got their CPF, part of their pay cut and was not restored. The Goods and Services Tax is also going up by another 2%. And you know what? Ministers give themselves 20% increase in pay when their salaries are already in millions! When CEOs and executives screwed up, they get fired, when ministers screwed up, they are not fired but they have pay increments. Honestly, if they are so smart, they won’t have screwed up the Suzhou industrial park project back in the 90s etc.

I don’t have solutions to every probelm too. But i guess we have paid the ministers well and too well already. Yet, they still increased their million dollar pay by another 20%. I don’t see PM Lee having a more difficult job compared to Donald Tsang. In Hong Kong, where there is freedom of speech and genuine political contest, the government is no less capable than that of Singapore’s govt. At least in Hong Kong, one won’t have to worry about the medical bills first.

June 6, 2007 @ 11:17 am | Comment

@Arty

“If you are so smart, tell me exactly what do you propose to slove the homelessness problem or people who doesn’t make enough money because all they have is high school education, or old people didn’t save up enough for retirement.”

Like i said, i don’t have solutions to everything too. But the difference between me and the ministers in Singapore is, i only earn a few hundred bucks while the ministers are paid millions of dollars out of the coffers of the country. And if you are paid a million dollars, you better come up with a million dollar solution to our problems. And you know what? They just lost Evergreen and Maersk line to Malaysia.

I just feel irritated whenever people use Singapore to champion the cause for authoritarian govts. Have you ever stay in Singapore like me? if not, i think you better shut your trap.

June 6, 2007 @ 11:24 am | Comment

@z

“Yeah, Salaries for Singaporean ministers are unusually high. But consider their job performance and much higher pay for executives at many successful companies, their high salaries are justified.”

Job performance? Like i say, they do have their fair share of failures, see my posts to ferins and Arty. And you do criticised them, be prepared to be bankrupted by law suits.

And the strange thing is, you people tend to attribute the success of Singapore solely and only to the Government. Where is the role of the pioneers of Singapore? Where is the role of the 4 million ordinary singaporeans who made Singapore what she is today? Singapore entrepreneurs? It just naive to think that the Government should claim all the credit for the success of Singapore.

Like i say, executives get fired, get their pay linked with performance of the company and their pay is approved by the Board of Directors. The ministers do not have to face the financial risks that private CEOs have to face, their pay never goes down but up up all the way. And the most wonderful thing is, the CEO needs to get his/her pay approved by a Board. There is no Board of Directors in ministers’ pay.

June 6, 2007 @ 11:32 am | Comment

@Arty,

“So is he going to jail for the lives we lost in Iraq? Also, Do you know Bush senior and Regan both have committed crimes that can end them up in jail if they are not former US president. In particular, they both allowed drug producers from South America to funnel drug into poor and low income Americans to fund wars down South (many academic studies and books have been published on this). Also, those Neocons who lose their jobs actually go a even better jobs (at least pay wise as usual).”

Well, at least the people in America get the chance to give a slap on his face in the mid-term elections and get his loyalists fired. Li Peng, Yang Shangkun not only don’t have to go to jail for their bloody crackdown on June 4 1989, Li even remained in power as long as till 2003. Can you sue Li Peng in China? In America, its possible to sue the Government and win. In China, before you sue the Government, you are already detained in some dark secret cells.

If you really dislike what you have in America, why don’t you defect to China or North Korea? You won’t have to bother yourself with the money politics in America when if you are in Pyongyang. All you have everyday are the loads of praises being heaped on the Dear Leader. That would be a much better life for you. I am sure many North Koreans are willing to exchange for your green card with their North Korean identification papers.

June 6, 2007 @ 11:45 am | Comment

@z

“When has US become so low that you like to compare it to the countries of North Korea and Cuba and you feel good about it?”

Winston Chruchill once said, “Democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.”

June 6, 2007 @ 11:48 am | Comment

@AC

“- Nazi Germany?
– Vladimir Putin’s Russia?
– Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela?”

Not to disagree with you entirely. I would prefer a gradual reforms and move towards a more democractic system, step by step, slowly but surely. But its one thing that some use it as an excuse to delay democratic reforms indefinitely. Look at the so-called reforms of the military junta in Myanmar, its obvious a farce and lip-service.

And those countries you mentioned. I would like to think that i am talking in the context of a functioning democracy. Do note that all these examples came about becase they have dysfunctional democracies before them. Yeltsin’s disastrous years as President and the tragic events of the Weimar Republic in Germany. I certainly do not favor a gung-ho rapid march to democracy and the “end of history”. But what we want to see a genuine and sincere moves to democratization.

June 6, 2007 @ 11:54 am | Comment

Arty,

“””””””George W. Bush is already in deep shit.

So is he going to jail for the lives we lost in Iraq?””””””””

So if this is your stance then you have to admit the CCP is in super deep shit for all the crimes it has committed. If you take the stance of justice, you have to admit that, right?

June 6, 2007 @ 12:04 pm | Comment

@Brgyags

“The much maligned family planning policy”

Well, obviously you are not living on the same planet Earth as the rest of us or you have not been catching the news.

The people in Guangxi just rioted against the one child policy. There were family planning work teams dressed in military fatigues and helmets carrying sledge hammers as they marched through Guangxi villages. Giving fines to farmers and taking properties with them if they have no money.

Wow. Sorry for “maglining” the “wonderful” and “humane” family planning policy, your dearest scared cow.

June 6, 2007 @ 12:49 pm | Comment

I know of folks who refused to get treated in Singapore for chronic diseases. One of them refused to go for dialysis and willing to die because the medical bill will screw his entire family. One man just committed suicide by jumping into the way of a subway train because of his desperation. Even some of my profs left Singapore because they cannot stand the stifling environment here.

We have this kind of problem here to, one of the hospitals in LA just got into serious trouble by dumping patients on the streets (caught on camera). Hack these things happened in all societies. Also, where is their health insurance (oh wait they don’t have one)? We have tons of people who doesn’t have any health insurance here, too. However, your examples are still extreme. And in what way does democracy fix these things? There are poor people in the most developed nations. As of health care, do you know there are people in Canada died while waiting for a doctor (they will get care for sure due to the universal health care but the wait is kind of long)?

As for your profs, are you sure he/she left because he/she didn’t get tenure or lied on his/her resume curriculum vitae (I know one in U of Singapore).

If you really dislike what you have in America, why don’t you defect to China or North Korea?

Appreantly when I critized my country, I either became dislike America or un-partriotic to you sp. If you are a Chinese, I guess China really isn’t ready for democracy. Currently Bush’s approval rating is like 25%, so are you telling all 75% of America to leave? Also, in what statement did I say or show dislike of America. I may dislike the current government and the president which I believe is an American’s right and duty to question our government. We did kill tons of Native Americans, slaved African Americans, etc. Even today racism still exist, I know an African-American who earned his Ph.D. from Caltech was refused of service because he is black and this happened in South California (all he wanted was a burger)!!!

I can give you positive things about America: I think we have the best education system that produces scientists and engineers who could actually build and invent things. We have billionaires that gave away all their money for society sake. We have very high standard of living overall (our health care is a mess though). Although, I really don’t like So Cal life style; it is way too auto central and polluting the earth. Northwest is more of my style, and if I really miss it, I will move back. Here is another part I like, many parts of America have different kinds of lifestyle and you are free to choose from. What else? Oh, regardless who you are, if you can be the next Bill Gates as long as your abilities allow.

So if this is your stance then you have to admit the CCP is in super deep shit for all the crimes it has committed. If you take the stance of justice, you have to admit that, right?

Of course, unfortunately I doubt when the time comes none of the key players for CCP’s crimes will be alive. They will definitely have their pictures or statues destroyed, and have their bad names noted in history. However, I can tell you, it is not now. Maybe 10 or 20 years from now.

June 6, 2007 @ 2:57 pm | Comment

sp,

Singapore is not a scary place as you said. I am sure you can go on with more examples about the darker side of the country (just like any other countries). I lived there for a few years. My impression is that most Singaporeans have very high regard for their leaders and have no problem with the political system. Of course, if you are political active and happen to be on the other side, then Singapore is not a nice place to be.

June 6, 2007 @ 4:37 pm | Comment

@Arty

Well, Arty, i am not saying that democracy is the holy grail and it is the wonder drug for every single problems. But democracy is the form of govt that at least gurantee your civil rights and at least with human dignity. On the other hand, authoritarian govts don’t do that. Like your dissent and criticisms of your country the USA, at the very least, you never had to worry about voicing out your opinion anytime and anywhere and your right to dissent is respected in the US as in any other democratic society. Do you think you would be able to write so freely in this blog if you are in an authoritarian police state? Thats sth you shd think about.

I never said that you need to leave America because of Bush. But as far as we have seen, your dissent is aimed at democracy itself. Whether Bush is president or not is irrelevant to you, but you seem to have a discontent of the political system in general. That’s why i tell you to go to China and North Korea to have a look. Despite all the flaws in democracy, would you still prefer living in a totalitarian police state?

June 6, 2007 @ 5:26 pm | Comment

@z

“Singapore is not a scary place as you said. I am sure you can go on with more examples about the darker side of the country (just like any other countries). I lived there for a few years. My impression is that most Singaporeans have very high regard for their leaders and have no problem with the political system. Of course, if you are political active and happen to be on the other side, then Singapore is not a nice place to be.”

Look z, when i present the dark side of Singapore to you, which you and Arty have not refuted, i am not trying to be a scare-monger and say that Singapore is a scary place. What i want to do is to expose the myth that people often use Singapore as a example of the triumph of authoritarianism as a form of government. Far from being perfect, it has its own fair share of woes.

What i am saying is that, if you think Singapore can be used as a fine example to show case authoritarianism, then you are just not well-informed. And how many walkover elections have you witnessed in your few years of stay in Singapore? Do you even bother watching the parliamentary debates on TV when you are in Singapore? Some MPs are even caught sleeping on camera. Hardly surprisingly in a chamber where every bill propsposed would be passed without the slightest hitch.

June 6, 2007 @ 5:35 pm | Comment

The Republican debate of June 4th was superb. Unlike the Democrats, the Republicans actually speak their minds.
Hillary, Edwards, and Obama look like children compared to the Republican field. From an intellectual standpoint, the
Republicans far out do the “tripple failure” that is Hillary, Edwards, Obama.

June 6, 2007 @ 8:00 pm | Comment

Ames, you wily old fascist, you – nice to see you trolling again. You can have all of Giuliani that you want. I’m sure his rantings about the terrible threat we all face – a threat that can only be vanquished if we keep sending boys into the meatgrinder of Iraq – gave you a big woody. And when Brownback declared our No. 1 most pressing issue to be abortion, I’m sure you were in seventh heaven. Yeah, those rethugs were superb. Let’s see you eat your words come November 2008, when we give all those scoundrels a dramatic thumbs down.

June 6, 2007 @ 9:58 pm | Comment

It’s crap like this which makes me feel lucky to be a Norwegian expat with dual citizenship currently living in Tasmania. I get a pick of two socialised medical systems that actually work, genuine free speech even outside of ‘free speech zones’, semi-competent political leadership (ok, only if you ignore the northern state governments), and a choice of two hemispheres in which to survive the nuclear fallout when you idiots inevitiably destroy the planet.

June 7, 2007 @ 12:00 am | Comment

your dissent is aimed at democracy itself. Whether Bush is president or not is irrelevant to you, but you seem to have a discontent of the political system in general.

I don’t know which one of my comments give you this idea. I have nothing against US democracy except our voter turn out is way to low. I remembered a few weeks ago, there is a news article about a mayor of a small town didn’t even go to vote for himself. He won the election because he is the only candidate with zero vote. If you can policitical systems in Taiwan (close but not yet), Mexico, Phillipine, India etc. democracy, be my guest. And US is a Republic federally, and democratic locally which I think is a very good system. This way we protect the small or low population states.

June 7, 2007 @ 1:07 am | Comment

@Arty

“As for your profs, are you sure he/she left because he/she didn’t get tenure or lied on his/her resume curriculum vitae (I know one in U of Singapore).”

By the way, pls don’t be too presumptous. University of Singapore no longer exist in today’s Singapore unless you living in the 1960s-70s. I really don’t know how you get to know a prof in a university which was defunct long ago back in the 1970s. Are you on another plane of existence? That’s pretty eerie…

June 7, 2007 @ 3:33 am | Comment

I mean National University of Singapore. Sorry for the mistake. I see their hiring ads all the time, but never pay to much attention. Or maybe I am a ghost.

June 7, 2007 @ 7:08 am | Comment

The thing is, with all those points about Singapore being stifling, yeah I can see it.

That’s why a good system shouldn’t be so legalist and brutal. It’s not even necessary, as history dictates.

But China can’t afford to vote in some complete dickhead like George Bush for 8 years. It’d collapse on itself in that time.

June 8, 2007 @ 11:22 am | Comment

Letter to Editor, TAIPEI TIMES. June 9 , 2007

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2007/06/08/2003364356

Wake up to China, America

Friday, Jun 08, 3007, Page 8

To the American people and the US Congress:

It’s time to open your eyes regarding the basic agenda and very real
threat posed by communist China — that country you love to put on an
exotic pedestal festooned with technicolored tourist photos and pretty
Chinese movie stars.

Let’s not mince words: China is a dictatorship ruled by an aggressive
Communist Party that does not believe in human freedom, human dignity,
morality or the pursuit of happiness.

Stop your love affair with communist China. Wake up and smell the
Starbucks being roasted by Chinese chauvinists inside the Forbidden
City tourist trap. China is out to squash the US and will use every
means possible to attain this end. This is not your grandfather’s
China. This is the Chinese Communist Party of the People’s Republic of
China.

But it is a not a “republic” and it is not run by the people or for
the people. It is the old Soviet Union in Chinese clothing.

China is not our friend, by any stretch of the imagination. Yes, Gong
Li (鞏俐) is gorgeous, and Zhang Ziyi (章子怡) is slim and beautiful, but
don’t get distracted by China’s Hollywood exports. Don’t be fooled by
the 2008 Beijing Olympics “show.” China’s leaders, like the leaders of
the former Soviet Union, are bent on world domination. Fly too close
to Hainan and they’ll threaten to shoot your planes down.

No amount of friendly smiles and warm handshakes will change their
agenda. It is not a free, democratic country and never will be, at
least not as it is currently set up.

Did someone say pet food? Did someone say toothpaste? Do you remember
who dumped dangerous chemicals into a Chinese river and didn’t alert
residents living downstream? Who burns coal in coal-fired power plants
as if there were no tomorrow? Does the term “acid rain” ring a bell?

China is a country that covers up SARS and bird flu. Global warming?
China’s leaders never heard of that Western concept.

God? There is no God for China. China is one of the most godless
nations on Earth. So why is the US sucking up to China?

This China you so love to do business with is dangerous. This China
needs to be confronted.

Wake up, America. China is polluting the world, and not only with
carbon dioxide emissions and other atmospheric pollution.

If you hated the old Soviet Union, you should hate the current
People’s Republic. Different clothing, same evil empire. There should
be no compromise with this state.

China is a threat to the American and European way of life. Darfur?
You know the drill.

Stop kissing the ground the Chinese government stands on. Tear down
that Great Wall of lies and deception full of state-sanctioned
cover-ups and fabrications.

The US needs a transparent and democratic China. And the Chinese
people are up to it. But Americans seem to be turning a blind eye.

DAN BLOOM
Taiwan

June 8, 2007 @ 1:24 pm | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.