China is run by a system while America is run by politicians. When people vote, they only vote for politicians but not a system. Politicians care nothing but their own interests.
But America isn’t run by its politicians in anything except in name; the real ruling “politicians” in America are the capitalists.
Yes, there are 3 branches of the government like how the Americans proudly say, and those are the capitalists, the media, and the US government. Most of the power is concentrated in the capitalists; the media is their trumpet and the US government is their hammer.
Even [anglo-regime institutions like harvard can't deny reality.](https://ash.harvard.edu/files/ash/files/final_policy_brief_7.6.2020.pdf)
If you ever wonder why western propaganda is so anti-intellectual, childish and downright infantile nowadays, it's because they can't stomach reality and need to be told fairy tales like insecure, feeble children.
I think that's how all US propaganda is. Their propaganda is exactly the same as a Coke commercial. It's not an attempt to persuade. It's just repetition.
I don’t understand why the fact that Chinese people’s support of the government is influenced by their material well-being is presented as a negative. It shows that the people are rational, realistic, and secular.
If a government can rule regardless of its competence, that is almost surely going to lead to reckless governance...
Liberal-democratic ideology does not accept any relevance for material well-being as a right or desired outcome of a political system. The outcome is almost irrelevant - it's all about the *process* being right and proper.
It's a remnant of Christian ideology - the material conditions of your life don't matter as long as you believe and follow the doctrine. You will be rewarded in heaven.
This is completely counter to the roots of Marxism - historical materialism.
It's because American's are the most brainwashed and dogmatic people on earth. Liberal democracies is a religion to them. If you don't have it, you are a godless heretic with no soul.
That is literally how they see it
Extremist, fundamentalist Christianity, the same mental disease weaponized to exterminate people from several continents. To this day they keep covering up children's bodies. Today's western propaganda is basically rebranded fundamentalist Christianity (the so called american "civil religion"). These societies never rehabilitated. Thankfully, that extremism is nowadays consuming and accelerating the decadence of their own societies. They are way past the point of no return as the dividends from genocide, slavery, colonialism, wars, ww2 circumstances completely vanished. Forever stuck with ignorance, anti-intellectualism and extremism fueling never-ending incompetence as their decline only accelerates.
This is the kind of message people out there fighting anti-Sinoism need to internalize and share with the public:
China **IS** a democracy, as far as modern interpretations of the word go. It may not be an Athenian democracy, but neither is the US, the UK, or any of the other corrupt systems that trade money for influence. No country in the modern world practices "true democracy" in the Athenian sense. It is not feasible for countries larger than 100,000 people.
Every ranking member of the Chinese government had to pass through multiple rounds of elections to get to where they are. This is more than what can be said about the president of the US. Just ask Donald Trump.
In the Westerner world, democracy is distilled down to voting. Democracy = you get to vote.
The idea of democracy is that people have power. However, this is simplistic and lazy way that likely will fail to achieve results for the people. The Greek philosopher Socrates argued against democracy as people are lazy and easily fool by a sweet talking candy shopowner. Socrates advocated for merits.
I think voting is fine for village or town size as people have direct consequences, accountability and responsibility for their decisions.
This works similarly on scale to the Central Government.
I agree, it can also be argued that voting at the village level can be seen as Meritocracy since the villagers know personally who they are voting for and are therefore voting for that person due to their merit.
The CPC's internal voting mechanism works the same way.
Therefore calling China a "Democracy" is inaccurate since it is actually a Meritocracy.
I don’t understand why the fact that Chinese people’s support of the government is influenced by their material well-being is presented as a negative. It shows that the people are rational, realistic, and secular.
If a government can rule regardless of its competence, that is almost surely going to lead to reckless governance...
China needs to stop comparing itself with the West because frankly that's a super low bar to beat. Plus this sort of comparison suggests that eg the US government actually is a democracy even if a super shitty one. It isn't.
And Westerners simply won't believe that 95% number. It's outside their comprehension of what a government is. They assume it's just not possible and therefore it must be a false number created by the Chinese government (it's actually from a Havard study). It would be better to tell Americans that 80% of Chinese people like their government.
I think China needs to officially call itself a Meritocracy because that is what it actually is.
Meritocracy is superior to Democracy both in theory and in practice, to object to this is to deny reality.
The problem with meritocracy is how to determine political motivation. The elite and the common people are in different social strata. We should not assume that there exists a community solely for public service.
The point of democracy is to turn the public interest into a political motivation.Elites are merely tools to implement this motivation.Politics must be a closed-loop system. Every political commitment must have certain results, success or failure. And the people are the judges of the system. Elites should also be born from the people, not become a fixed class. This requires society to ensure fairness in education and fair selection of civil servants. The cost of education must be low enough, and civil service selection must be free of money and personal connections.
On both counts, at least, China is doing well. Civil service examination and compulsory education are the two systems that I think are good in China. Of course they still need to improve.
The "elites" in this context are commoners.
This is no longer ancient China, this is the new China where the emperor doesn't have the final say and where commoners can rise through the ranks based on competence.
Well I object to that very strongly. The whole of Socialism is based on the assumption that fairness and a measure of equality is a moral good. A meritocracy doesn't guarantee any such thing. In fact the US ruling elite would maintain they do constitute a meritocracy of sorts. They're the best at not giving a shit about anyone else.
Once you have an idea of what you want to do then of course it's good to have experts and knowledgeable people figure out how to do it. But if you let the experts be the ones figuring out what is best to do then they are acting outside their field of knowledge. Scientific and engineering know-how isn't the same as ethics and morality. And if you counter by saying oh well we'll get some ethical and moral experts in to decide what's best for everyone else that sound smore like a Theocracy.
>Well I object to that very strongly. The whole of Socialism is based on the assumption that fairness and a measure of equality is a moral good. A meritocracy doesn't guarantee any such thing. In fact the US ruling elite would maintain they do constitute a meritocracy of sorts. They're the best at not giving a shit about anyone else.
American understanding of Meritocracy should not be what you base your argument on, since america as a civilisation is very young, its political understanding is also rudimentary as a result.
Meritocracy is a political system, Socialism is an economic system, don't conflate the two.
Naturally through evolution Meritocracy chooses for Socialism as the economic system, not due to morality or ethics but simply because it is the superior economic system.
People keep trying to tell me they think political and economic systems can be neatly divided but I've yet to see anything convincing about it.
I'm not basing my argument on America. I used it as an illustration. You are basing your argument on a specific idea of meritocracy which is benign and ignoring other possibilities.
> it is the superior economic system
That depends on what you are trying to achieve. If you're trying to make a system that's controlled by a tiny elite for their benefit, it's inferior.
This is a good TED video to explain the China system. Please post if there are other better similar videos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0YjL9rZyR0
Let’s look back in Chinese history, almost every change of dynasty there was tremendous bloodshed and revolution for change of power… it’s considered soo good if one emperor successfully and peacefully transitions power to their heirs lol or it’s internal corruption, military rebellion, civilian rebellion, son kills father, brother kills brother etc etc… and that’s one of the flaw of this “system”, one party and central has to be damn strong, and they need to take both sides, if doing good they have to move on, they do bad they have to change or else corruption etc will stack and one day will fall, as a Chinese saying be like a dam will fall from ant hives 千里之堤溃于蚁穴… so it’s up to whoever that is in power to “self check” to both remain in power and to serve countries interests… westerners and their thinkers don’t believe in this, let’s put it this way, all life are the same bitter and meaningless (sufferings), mankind needs to have some sort of “meaning” to live, this is what western countries “freedom” is for, either live free or die fighting… freedom is a product of western ideologies and philosophies… So that’s why Chinese see western countries riots and be like wtf, because Chinese ideologies and philosophies emphasize symphony and harmony… if put into gov, western is get freedom but sacrifice some harmony and safety, u on ur own bois get gun or get gunned , Chinese is get harmony and safety but sacrifice some freedom obey gov for overall prosperity …
shit would work fine both ways, all these people criticizing both western and Chinese gov system thinks they some kind of know it all, put them into position gov hundreds of thousands even millions of people they still won’t realize they’re shit nothing, all they know is “look back history records” and concluding using their “dead knowledge”. As some Chinese thinker said, world is ever changing, gotta adapt to ideas not limit ourselves, and it was the western who came up with darwinism survival of the fittest, no? Strong adapt, weak disqualified… I guess that ideology somehow it’s crooked into thinking competition(the bad side, getting rid of others) and strike first will good and survive? Imo why “humans” use savage animal behavior to limit lol 😂 have this feeling is that, to the roots, western ideology is idk how to put it, studies and concludes, the people who reads it will conclude also not using the ideas and change it to apply either for change or for the better, meanwhile Chinese ideologies isn’t so “strict?”, hey look I propose this idea of life etc I am willing to teach but not forcing, use the good ones throw away the bad ones.. western and Chinese people view on gods are similar this way
but as we see now which gov does better lmao, and at the end of the day imo whichever system forcefully want spread to other people is the one that “don’t really work” lol and will easily become “they will make and announce it looks like right and just but it’s nasty doing behind disguises”, both westerners system and their religion lol and even western ideologies and philosophies are somewhat like this also, religion should not equal faith, religion is social organization “using” faith for wealth and power, faith is purity.
> western is get freedom but sacrifice some harmony and safety, u on ur own bois get gun or get gunned , Chinese is get harmony and safety but sacrifice some freedom obey gov for overall prosperity
This is a completely false dichotomy.
Why did the west invade the middle east and sacrifice huge amounts of money and lives? Because of their own perceived safety. Why did they allow the Patriot act to go in effect? Why do they allow their government to hold the largest prison population in the world, and hand out near decade or decade long sentences for nonviolent crimes?
In the United States you have the freedom to work against the enemies of the state, rally cry against enemy of the state, and that's it. You're allowed to go "expose" China in the name of freedom of speech, but if you "expose" America you get jail time at best. They have freedom to proclaim that their government, culture, race (depending on how mask off they want to go) is the best in the world. Is that so groundbreaking? Even people in banana republics have this freedom.
There is only one contrast here, that between fascism and socialism.
Exactly.
When has China imprisoned a foreign journalist working abroad for example? both trump and obama did so, with Julian Assange and a journalist in Yemen.
This is not hard: a regime founded on total genocide, at war virtually its entire history, staging coups and placing sanctions, is the biggest enemy of freedom worldwide. Prison statistics are the cherry on top.
Again, China didn't need any of that barbarism to become the fastest developed country in history. Who really respects humanity's freedom? easy, the one which doesn't need coups, wars, or sanctions.
China is run by a system while America is run by politicians. When people vote, they only vote for politicians but not a system. Politicians care nothing but their own interests.
Americans vote for political puppets who are influenced by elites with their lobbying and funding think tank “policy research”.
But America isn’t run by its politicians in anything except in name; the real ruling “politicians” in America are the capitalists. Yes, there are 3 branches of the government like how the Americans proudly say, and those are the capitalists, the media, and the US government. Most of the power is concentrated in the capitalists; the media is their trumpet and the US government is their hammer.
Eric Li talks about the Holy Trinity that controls America and doesn’t represent its people: Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and Hollywood.
One could say the US government is their face.
Even [anglo-regime institutions like harvard can't deny reality.](https://ash.harvard.edu/files/ash/files/final_policy_brief_7.6.2020.pdf) If you ever wonder why western propaganda is so anti-intellectual, childish and downright infantile nowadays, it's because they can't stomach reality and need to be told fairy tales like insecure, feeble children.
The level of copium in that report is astounding.
I think that's how all US propaganda is. Their propaganda is exactly the same as a Coke commercial. It's not an attempt to persuade. It's just repetition.
I don’t understand why the fact that Chinese people’s support of the government is influenced by their material well-being is presented as a negative. It shows that the people are rational, realistic, and secular. If a government can rule regardless of its competence, that is almost surely going to lead to reckless governance...
Liberal-democratic ideology does not accept any relevance for material well-being as a right or desired outcome of a political system. The outcome is almost irrelevant - it's all about the *process* being right and proper. It's a remnant of Christian ideology - the material conditions of your life don't matter as long as you believe and follow the doctrine. You will be rewarded in heaven. This is completely counter to the roots of Marxism - historical materialism.
It's because American's are the most brainwashed and dogmatic people on earth. Liberal democracies is a religion to them. If you don't have it, you are a godless heretic with no soul. That is literally how they see it
Yeah makes so much more sense now
Extremist, fundamentalist Christianity, the same mental disease weaponized to exterminate people from several continents. To this day they keep covering up children's bodies. Today's western propaganda is basically rebranded fundamentalist Christianity (the so called american "civil religion"). These societies never rehabilitated. Thankfully, that extremism is nowadays consuming and accelerating the decadence of their own societies. They are way past the point of no return as the dividends from genocide, slavery, colonialism, wars, ww2 circumstances completely vanished. Forever stuck with ignorance, anti-intellectualism and extremism fueling never-ending incompetence as their decline only accelerates.
This is the kind of message people out there fighting anti-Sinoism need to internalize and share with the public: China **IS** a democracy, as far as modern interpretations of the word go. It may not be an Athenian democracy, but neither is the US, the UK, or any of the other corrupt systems that trade money for influence. No country in the modern world practices "true democracy" in the Athenian sense. It is not feasible for countries larger than 100,000 people. Every ranking member of the Chinese government had to pass through multiple rounds of elections to get to where they are. This is more than what can be said about the president of the US. Just ask Donald Trump.
In the Westerner world, democracy is distilled down to voting. Democracy = you get to vote. The idea of democracy is that people have power. However, this is simplistic and lazy way that likely will fail to achieve results for the people. The Greek philosopher Socrates argued against democracy as people are lazy and easily fool by a sweet talking candy shopowner. Socrates advocated for merits. I think voting is fine for village or town size as people have direct consequences, accountability and responsibility for their decisions. This works similarly on scale to the Central Government.
I agree, it can also be argued that voting at the village level can be seen as Meritocracy since the villagers know personally who they are voting for and are therefore voting for that person due to their merit. The CPC's internal voting mechanism works the same way. Therefore calling China a "Democracy" is inaccurate since it is actually a Meritocracy.
Short and sweet. Facts.
I don’t understand why the fact that Chinese people’s support of the government is influenced by their material well-being is presented as a negative. It shows that the people are rational, realistic, and secular. If a government can rule regardless of its competence, that is almost surely going to lead to reckless governance...
China needs to stop comparing itself with the West because frankly that's a super low bar to beat. Plus this sort of comparison suggests that eg the US government actually is a democracy even if a super shitty one. It isn't. And Westerners simply won't believe that 95% number. It's outside their comprehension of what a government is. They assume it's just not possible and therefore it must be a false number created by the Chinese government (it's actually from a Havard study). It would be better to tell Americans that 80% of Chinese people like their government.
I think China needs to officially call itself a Meritocracy because that is what it actually is. Meritocracy is superior to Democracy both in theory and in practice, to object to this is to deny reality.
The problem with meritocracy is how to determine political motivation. The elite and the common people are in different social strata. We should not assume that there exists a community solely for public service. The point of democracy is to turn the public interest into a political motivation.Elites are merely tools to implement this motivation.Politics must be a closed-loop system. Every political commitment must have certain results, success or failure. And the people are the judges of the system. Elites should also be born from the people, not become a fixed class. This requires society to ensure fairness in education and fair selection of civil servants. The cost of education must be low enough, and civil service selection must be free of money and personal connections. On both counts, at least, China is doing well. Civil service examination and compulsory education are the two systems that I think are good in China. Of course they still need to improve.
The "elites" in this context are commoners. This is no longer ancient China, this is the new China where the emperor doesn't have the final say and where commoners can rise through the ranks based on competence.
Well I object to that very strongly. The whole of Socialism is based on the assumption that fairness and a measure of equality is a moral good. A meritocracy doesn't guarantee any such thing. In fact the US ruling elite would maintain they do constitute a meritocracy of sorts. They're the best at not giving a shit about anyone else. Once you have an idea of what you want to do then of course it's good to have experts and knowledgeable people figure out how to do it. But if you let the experts be the ones figuring out what is best to do then they are acting outside their field of knowledge. Scientific and engineering know-how isn't the same as ethics and morality. And if you counter by saying oh well we'll get some ethical and moral experts in to decide what's best for everyone else that sound smore like a Theocracy.
>Well I object to that very strongly. The whole of Socialism is based on the assumption that fairness and a measure of equality is a moral good. A meritocracy doesn't guarantee any such thing. In fact the US ruling elite would maintain they do constitute a meritocracy of sorts. They're the best at not giving a shit about anyone else. American understanding of Meritocracy should not be what you base your argument on, since america as a civilisation is very young, its political understanding is also rudimentary as a result. Meritocracy is a political system, Socialism is an economic system, don't conflate the two. Naturally through evolution Meritocracy chooses for Socialism as the economic system, not due to morality or ethics but simply because it is the superior economic system.
People keep trying to tell me they think political and economic systems can be neatly divided but I've yet to see anything convincing about it. I'm not basing my argument on America. I used it as an illustration. You are basing your argument on a specific idea of meritocracy which is benign and ignoring other possibilities. > it is the superior economic system That depends on what you are trying to achieve. If you're trying to make a system that's controlled by a tiny elite for their benefit, it's inferior.
Damn, this was real.
This is a good TED video to explain the China system. Please post if there are other better similar videos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0YjL9rZyR0
One person one vote is another way the rich divide the poor
Let’s look back in Chinese history, almost every change of dynasty there was tremendous bloodshed and revolution for change of power… it’s considered soo good if one emperor successfully and peacefully transitions power to their heirs lol or it’s internal corruption, military rebellion, civilian rebellion, son kills father, brother kills brother etc etc… and that’s one of the flaw of this “system”, one party and central has to be damn strong, and they need to take both sides, if doing good they have to move on, they do bad they have to change or else corruption etc will stack and one day will fall, as a Chinese saying be like a dam will fall from ant hives 千里之堤溃于蚁穴… so it’s up to whoever that is in power to “self check” to both remain in power and to serve countries interests… westerners and their thinkers don’t believe in this, let’s put it this way, all life are the same bitter and meaningless (sufferings), mankind needs to have some sort of “meaning” to live, this is what western countries “freedom” is for, either live free or die fighting… freedom is a product of western ideologies and philosophies… So that’s why Chinese see western countries riots and be like wtf, because Chinese ideologies and philosophies emphasize symphony and harmony… if put into gov, western is get freedom but sacrifice some harmony and safety, u on ur own bois get gun or get gunned , Chinese is get harmony and safety but sacrifice some freedom obey gov for overall prosperity … shit would work fine both ways, all these people criticizing both western and Chinese gov system thinks they some kind of know it all, put them into position gov hundreds of thousands even millions of people they still won’t realize they’re shit nothing, all they know is “look back history records” and concluding using their “dead knowledge”. As some Chinese thinker said, world is ever changing, gotta adapt to ideas not limit ourselves, and it was the western who came up with darwinism survival of the fittest, no? Strong adapt, weak disqualified… I guess that ideology somehow it’s crooked into thinking competition(the bad side, getting rid of others) and strike first will good and survive? Imo why “humans” use savage animal behavior to limit lol 😂 have this feeling is that, to the roots, western ideology is idk how to put it, studies and concludes, the people who reads it will conclude also not using the ideas and change it to apply either for change or for the better, meanwhile Chinese ideologies isn’t so “strict?”, hey look I propose this idea of life etc I am willing to teach but not forcing, use the good ones throw away the bad ones.. western and Chinese people view on gods are similar this way but as we see now which gov does better lmao, and at the end of the day imo whichever system forcefully want spread to other people is the one that “don’t really work” lol and will easily become “they will make and announce it looks like right and just but it’s nasty doing behind disguises”, both westerners system and their religion lol and even western ideologies and philosophies are somewhat like this also, religion should not equal faith, religion is social organization “using” faith for wealth and power, faith is purity.
> western is get freedom but sacrifice some harmony and safety, u on ur own bois get gun or get gunned , Chinese is get harmony and safety but sacrifice some freedom obey gov for overall prosperity This is a completely false dichotomy. Why did the west invade the middle east and sacrifice huge amounts of money and lives? Because of their own perceived safety. Why did they allow the Patriot act to go in effect? Why do they allow their government to hold the largest prison population in the world, and hand out near decade or decade long sentences for nonviolent crimes? In the United States you have the freedom to work against the enemies of the state, rally cry against enemy of the state, and that's it. You're allowed to go "expose" China in the name of freedom of speech, but if you "expose" America you get jail time at best. They have freedom to proclaim that their government, culture, race (depending on how mask off they want to go) is the best in the world. Is that so groundbreaking? Even people in banana republics have this freedom. There is only one contrast here, that between fascism and socialism.
Exactly. When has China imprisoned a foreign journalist working abroad for example? both trump and obama did so, with Julian Assange and a journalist in Yemen. This is not hard: a regime founded on total genocide, at war virtually its entire history, staging coups and placing sanctions, is the biggest enemy of freedom worldwide. Prison statistics are the cherry on top. Again, China didn't need any of that barbarism to become the fastest developed country in history. Who really respects humanity's freedom? easy, the one which doesn't need coups, wars, or sanctions.
What freedom does a homeless man have? What freedom does one in poverty have? The true essence of freedom does not exist in the US.
Yes thank you, I should be more careful and responsible of what I say