Beijing jailed dissident for 11 years

The irony of course being that capitalism causes the most severe forms of poverty found in the world (indeed, in the history of the world).

 

Except that the PRC defense always seems to be not so much a relative comparison but more of a "you guys did it so its our turn now."

 

Sorry for the potential derail. There is truth to that but at the sametime no other economic system has proven to be able to distribute resources more equitably. Socialism / command economy as we've seen led to even greater misery.

While unfettered Capitalism is very dangerous I would say that on the Capitalism vs Socialism scale so far more Capitalism has proved better for distributing resources and lifting people out of poverty.

 

That has more to do with the countries and people involved than the actual systems.

Do you think we would be where we are today if the US had first adopted Communism (somehow)?

 

Once again, technology (and other scientific developments) arises from need. There is no evidence the form of governance has any corrolation with technological advancement. Creativity wasn't non-existant prior to democracy, nor will it cease to exist should democracy ever fail.

So respectfully, that is your opinion.

I don't think I've misquoted you. India as a democracy is by any measurable means, a total failure. With the way we value economic progress, the tendency is for economy to "grow." So the real perspective is whether this "growth" is up to potential. And like I said, by all measurable indicators, India is not.

Its infrastructure is still **** and relics of British eras. Its "service industry" consists of call centres for the west. It isn't more diverse than some of the other equally sized countries but is far more prone to ethnic/religions violence and thus, lower stability.

I typically try not to compare China to India because the former has by far left the latter in the dust, but if want to compare similarly situated economies post WWII, this is the comparison. And China's growth shows India's incompetence.

I reiterate my previous post. You are of the opinion Pakistan is not stable because it is not a "perfect democracy." Once again, few things in this world is perfect, and it is unreasonable to assume ideal circumstances with regards to democracy. As I've mentioned, if Mao told you a "true Communism" is a Utopian, how inclined are you to follow him?

You are of the opinion that democracy led to capitalsim/industrialization led to technology/creativity when in fact the opposite is true. I've already sufficiently proven this in a prior thread though I cannot remember which one, so you'll have to search harder. But let me summarize my main points for you.

The wealth of a nation (aside from the few resource/commodity exporters) is invariably linked to industrialization level, meaning the more industrialized a nation is, the more wealth it is, at least in the modern world. Yet only one country in the world (the United States) industrialized under a democracy, and the conditions in which that lone country industrialized (i.e. two huge world wars that destroyed all competition and allowed a monopoly over the world market for nearly three decades) is unlikely to come up again (would you depend on that as your source of growth).

Every other country industrialized under an authoritarian system. Britain for example. After the Spanish acquired mass amounts of gold in the new world and the British wanted them, they industrialized. Feudal lords uprooted serfs from their lands, forcing them to seek jobs in cities and thus, became labour for the industrial machine, initially in the textile and other light industries.

During that time, while there was unprecedented growth in wealth, science and technology, the populace also suffered from disastrous work conditions, crowded living areas, polution, among other maladies. Sound familiar somehow? It should. I've basically just described what China is going through right now. And through those maladies, came the rise of democracy to change the conditions.

Hence, wealth and technology came about through industrialization in an authoritarian system, the by-product of which is democracy. The idea that democracy caused growth is a myth.

While it is theoretically possible for a country to industrialize under a democracy, I wouldn't bet on it.

See above.

Notice how no one argued that it is right for Liu to be jailed. You are the one that opened that can of worms by extolling the benefits of democracy (while ignoring the detriments), thus changing the subject.

And btw, authoritarian systems IS more efficient. You are dumbfounded by it simply because you are dumb.

 

You don't get into it with me because you've got **** for arguments. The best you've ever done is the moronic "brainwashed Chicom" routine. There never was any substance, there isn't any substance and there never will be any substance for your moronic rants.

Nor do you particularly care about mine or the Chinese view of the policies of the CCP. You'd rather engage in your worthless sloganeering.

So you have the best of interest of China in mind right? You believe in democracy right? Other than the aforementioned worthless sloganeering, what have you done for either lately?

I can state with a straight face I've done far more than you ever have.

 

I've tried to avoid divulging too much into my personal life, but I think in this case, to give the smackdown to a moronic little clown such as yourself, it may be worth it.

Shall we start with a little family history? The old man served in the army, fought in a war for the country. He was the first class of post Cultural Revolution class university students after normal education resumed. Sent to the U.S. as a visiting scholar, offered a tenure at Cornell University. Upon this news he wrote the dean at his school (People's U in Beijing) asking whether he should accept the position to which the dean replied he should return to his country to rebuild the homeland.

Being the patriot (and moron) that he was, he did, resulting nothing short of career suicide (at the time any ways). The university including the dean was shocked. The dean asked why did he return, reply "because you told me to rebuild the homeland." The dean said, I only wrote the letter because it was my duty to, I never expected you to come back.

Fast forward to 1989, TianAnMen Square. When the military helicopters moved in in the second wave, the old man, with military experience, knows things are rapidly deteriorating, went to TianAnMen. Ran the blockade, convinced his students to leave, got shot in the arm in the process. The reason no one from his class died there was because he risked his own rear end to save them.

Disillusioned by the government (though he was not a Communist), he protested the government action in TianAnMen by leaving the country, this time for good, resulting his second career suicide. Bounced around quite a bit. First in Italy for couple of months (what the ***** is a non-Italian speaking family doing in Italy), Britain before settling in Canada. Then he moved to Hong Kong.

Me personally? I was at TianAnMen, protested against the corruption, got dragged by the old man full circle around the globe, and now contributes 10 grand to charities in the old country every year.

The question is, what the ***** have you done for China and democracy lately? The better question, what the ***** do you think you know about politics in China/TianAnMen Square more than me?

As I've said already, you don't actually give a **** what I actually think about the CCP. You'd rather engage in your worthless sloganeering. My opinion of the CCP is a multi-faceted one. The one pre-1978 is a significantly negative one and the one post-1978 is a positive one, especially considering that the CCP is now, nothing Communist in nature.

I don't give a rates ass whether the CCP is benigh. I tolerate the CCP insofar as they continue to do a good job.

Except what you've conveniently call propaganda is actually the truth. I haven't read those CCP articles from the past. I came to the conclusion on my own, with stats and facts to back them up. Between you and me, I alone possess the ability for rational thinking (or any form of brain activity).

Really? Coulda fooled me. Well then keep this in mind. There are people out there with far greater understanding of the situation in China than you (and me) who disagree with democracy in China, at least right now. Keep that in mind the next time you fling one of your robot/brainwashed one-liners.

 

Actually the US industrialized long before the World Wars (The name Eli Whitney ring a bell) one of the reasons why there was mass waves of immigration in the late 19th and early 20th C and also why the US had such success in WWII.

As far as your argument that every other country industrialized under an authoritarian system history doesn't bare that out. In Britain limited democracy and individual rights had already been established before the Industrial revolution with such things as the English Bill of Rights in 1689 and the Habeus Corpus act of 1679. During the reign of Queen Victoria when the industrial revolution took place the political trend line in England was towards more democritzation and less authoritarian control with things such as the Reform act of 1831.

In the much of the rest of Europe Constitutional democracies also arose at the sametime as the Industrial Revolution with France industrializing under the Second French Republic and universal suffrage granted to French male citizesn in 1848. Although Germany during the later half of the 19th Century was as progressive politically as France or England industrialization got going only after German reunification in 1871 which also had an elected Parliment, Reichstag.

So while its far from the case to say that industrialization depends on authoritarianism when that clearly isn't the case. Further I will add that while certain technological development can benefit from an authoritarian system it also hampers technological development in many ways. Consider that while the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany made huge strides in developing technology focused on heavy industry they did very poorly in innovating in other areas such as consumer goods and information technology. Even the PRC under a command economy industrialization effort, the Great Leap Forward, failed miserably to improve living standards and it took lossening up central control on the economy for things to take off. Authoritarian control even in the case of the PRC hampered rather hindered development.

 

MFW;

Your father sounds like a good man who was betrayed by his idealism to a flawed system. With all due respect it sounds like your attitude is driven by what you see as your father's foolishness interms of first letting his idealism lead him astray by returning back to the PRC durign the Cultural Revolution and then being led astray by his idealism in the wake of Tiananmen. There are a lot of people like your father who have suffered because they chose to follow ideals rather than the more pragmatic course. While that might make them morons in many ways that is also how progress ends up being made too.

Like you my own father has had his idealism betray him in regard to the PRC. My father didn't grow up in the PRC but as a young man in Hong Kong and later Taiwan he was caught up by the revolutionary and nationalist rhetoric coming out of the PRC and ended up being blacklisted by the ROC even though he was a brilliant student at the National Taiwan University. My dad later became very disillusioned with the PRC after Tiananmen but has since then softened his position.

I salute you for your dedication to the homeland and for the charitable work you are doing for them. I myself have helped raise money and worked on projects to help the recovery from Sichuan Earthquake. As an ethnic Chinese I am also very proud of the progress that the PRC has made and was very proud of the Beijing Olympics. That doesn't mean though that I don't think the PRC doesn't need to improve in many many ways or that I will subsume my own ideals to defend the political status quo of the PRC.

 

Umm, ok. Are you saying anarchy is better?

 

From a moral perspective, I cannot disagree with what he did. But he's still a moron. I'll just leave it at that.

Your problem is you are mistaking THE Industrial Revolution with the industrialization, which occurred much earlier. The pre-conditions for the Industrialization were set during those dark authoritarian years, the Industrial Revolution took those conditions, along with the rise of technology from them, especially technology in transportation and communication, leading to globalization and some say, mercentilism, to take off to a new level.

The bond upon the older version of industrialization wasn't democracy, it was technology (and mercentilism), the rise of both occuring in authoritarian systems.

Your argument that just because there is an authoritarian system doesn't mean there will be industrialization is true, but that merely says A does not necessarily cause B no matter how likely it might lead to B.

And you'd do well to look up the US' standard of living and industrialization level prior to the 20th Century.

I would hope you are not insinuating my different view from his in left-overs of lingering bitterness, because that isn't true. The old man always was more idealistic than me. Out of him, my mother and I, I am the most pragmatic and always have been.

As I've replied to YallMean, my views on the CCP is a balanced, mutl-faceted one. I have plenty of beef with them, but that does not preclude me from giving them credit where it is deserved, nor does it preclude me from defending them from unfair criticism.

As for the old man, I'm not sure what his exact political belief is (he rarely talks about them), but it isn't Communism/Socialism and probably isn't democracy. Like many Chinese, it's probably somewhere in the middle.

Well good for him. He can take the credit.

 

Because of what Jesus said?














kidding

 

Well, what Deng said is half true only. The system is very efficient - more efficient than a democracy sometimes - if the government knows what it's doing, has the full information, and has interests aligned with people. It's clumsy and inefficient other times. That's the life Chinese people are facing. They find they enjoy the system sometimes but hate it other times. And I think that point to the direction of Chinese politics in the near future - the important, big issues rest power in an authoritarian state, the lesser ones increasingly channeled to a more democratic system.

 

Like father, like son.

 

Deckard,

I think you are a little out of line employing the term "inferiority complex" to describe the posters who offer very intelligent insights and objective opinions. I wouldn't be surprised that they hold advanced degrees from prestigious universities.

Your post makes me want to say something about my experience dealing with Americans. I find that a lot of them don't really understand
Chinese culture. Most of them come to know China from Hollywood
movies, and biased media. Thus, they look like fools when they open their mouths. Does that sound like you, Deckard ? :grin:

Just to give you an example of some of the misconceptions that Americans hold on the Chinese people to illustrate my point. Most Chinese are reserved and quite on the outside in their day to day lives. Americans would look at that as a trait of lacking self-confidence. But have they ever thought of that they are just being humble ? Being humble is a virtue in the Chinese culture. Apparently, it's a sin in a Rambo's culture.

Chinese people believe that by being humble, you can improve yourself every day. If you are cocky, and conceited, you will have no room to grow; T-mac just come to mind of that image. Luckily, the rockets have Battier's humbleness to balance that out. He sets an example to the team and the young players to work hard and stay humble, and it will always yield good results.

China traditionally is a Taoist, and Confucius culture. Communism is just a short economic phenomenon in recent Chinese history. You can say it's just a blip on the radar screen in the five thousand years Chinese history.

Chinese people have always living and breathing the teachings of Confucius writings, Lao Zhi's "Tao Te Ching", " I Ching" , and other great Chinese classics every day as they had for thousands of years, not the "communist manifesto" that most uninformed Americans come to think of.

If you want to learn something about Chinese culture, I suggest you to pick up one or two books that I just mentioned. These are some of the most translated books and they are available in your local book stores and libraries. You can probably finish reading them in a week, but it will take you a life time to absorb the wisdom in these books. Do you have the patience for that ?

If you do that, you will gain much more insight about the Chinese culture and its people instead of the robotic regurgitating the garbage that biased media feed you .