Chinese take on US media

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by mindseye
Haven’t we tread these grounds before (i.e. data point versus vector)?

Yes. I still hold to my belief that a halfway point doesn't really exist in matters of essential liberty. However, I will accept your word that things are improving in that arena.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by mindseye
I'd say they are suffering from Communism. A monolithic, single-party form of gov't is destined to have major problems. The Party's Number One priority, like any human institution, is survival. Survival of the Party, that is. The welfare of the country is also high on the list, but it is subservient to Party survival. From this single fact stems most of China's worst problems today, which would include:

The list of problems you provided could apply to dozens of non-communist, economically developing countries. It could also be argued that the communist party is keeping these problem under far better control than in many non-communist countries (e.g. Russia).

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by DanS
"I think most of China's citizens would not consider themselves oppressed, and would compare their society and political system pretty favorably with those of the US."

Heaven help us.

I thought Mindseye's comment were quite accurate.

Why do you write "Heaven help us"?

[DanS]

Comparing the political system favorably with that of the US? Does this need further comment?

[mindseye]

I would note that current stability is no indication of future stability. Indeed, the government is doing completely opposite of what is in the long-term interests of the country with regard to stability.

Are you talking about the PRC or the USA?

Yes. I still hold to my belief that a halfway point doesn't really exist in matters of essential liberty. However, I will accept your word that things are improving in that arena.

You are the very model of reasonability today! The way I look at it, if you are in church having a private dialog with your god, taking sacraments, etc, does it really matter all that much if your archbishop was chosen by a bureaucrat in Beijing, or a bureaucrat in Rome? Also, I think there really are degrees of liberties, but that's another discussion. Come visit China soon!

The list of problems you provided could apply to dozens of non-communist, economically developing countries. It could also be argued that the communist party is keeping these problem under far better control than in many non-communist countries (e.g. Russia).

I agree 100%! I provided that list for reasons of balance. Too often I find myself defending the rulers of the PRC, who I really dislike. China deserves far better, and I fervantly hope I live to see that day.

Comparing the political system favorably with that of the US? Does this need further comment?

Sorry, I did not write carefully enough. I agree with them in that, comparing urban middle classes, their daily life is not so different from life in the west (e.g. I live in a pretty typical middle class Chinese apartment building, and it's one of the nicest places I have ever lived).

Many Chinese really do think their political system is pretty good compared with that of the US, but here I do not agree with them. For some, their view of the US system is simply based on misinformation. They see the US system as being inherently unstable, prone to acrimony and corruption, and given to rampant imperialism (compared with their own peace-loving gov't). It's hard to answer if a Chinese person asks you if you think you vote counts as much as Ken Lay's.

[ranskaldan]

Let me just put it this way.

Most Chinese do know how democracies work and how dictatorships work. They know which countries are democracies and which countries are dictatorships. They know that they live under a dictatorship.

However, they consider Democracy and Dictatorship to be two systems both having merits and side effects, just like Socialism and Capitalism. In fact, if a system produces results, (as the logic goes) then it's a good system, and since the current Chinese system seems to be churning along nicely, why fix something that isn't broken? There's the fear that if you fix something that isn't broken, you'll eventually break it - and China's social and economic structure has been broken too many times in the past two centuries.

To quote something Deng Xiaoping said: "Who cares if it's a black or white cat, it's a good cat if it can catch mice." This sentence was then wildly and madly condemned by Mao, who considered it blasphemy against the principles of Only-Communism-can-work and Capitalism-can-go-to-hell.

Americans, on the other hand, generally go with the Universal Law that democracy is the only viable system, that no dictatorship can be moral and efficient. That's mostly true, especially if we look at prominent examples like Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. But we've got exceptions. The Chinese live under a pretty rare exception (another one would be pre-90's South Korea), and so their viewpoints sound highly warped to American ears.

And finally, to DanS:

We're all doing fine, so we don't really need any help from heaven right now.

[Lord Merciless]

People often forget the Rule of Law. Democracy with Rule of Law is just as corrupt as any dictatorship, India makes a prime example here. A dictatorship that can actually carry out the Rule of Law is often not corrupt, for example Singapore.

[ranskaldan]

Yep, Singapore is another good example. 30 years of a Dictatorship pretending to be a Democracy, and yet, 30 years of phenomenal economic growth. Singapore's GDP per capita, at $26000+, is 5th in the world (behind Luxembourg, US, Bermuda, Switzerland.)

The biggest problem, however, is that Dictatorships don't actually have any proper mechanism to maintain Rule of Law. So, examples like Singapore and modern China are rare exceptions.

[Lord Merciless]

China is still far away from the Rule of Law. Just look at traffics on any road and you will realize how much laws mean in China.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Lord Merciless
China is still far away from the Rule of Law. Just look at traffics on any road and you will realize how much laws mean in China.

Yup.

In Hong Kong driving can be pretty hair-raising, but at least the drivers pay attention to most of the rules.

Taipei is freaky. They haven't learned the concept of driving in lanes.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Lord Merciless
People often forget the Rule of Law. Democracy with Rule of Law is just as corrupt as any dictatorship, India makes a prime example here. A dictatorship that can actually carry out the Rule of Law is often not corrupt, for example Singapore.

Other than the fact that Lee's son will become the next prime minister, a daughter-in-law was recently named to run a major state investment corporation, and Lee is still in charge of the Government Investment Corporation (whose accounts are kept secret).

Edit: Forgot to mention that one of Lee's son is the CEO of Singapore Telecom.

Of course, we can't write that in Singapore, otherwise we'd end up in court.

See:

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/29/opinion/29SAFI.html

[:) Smiley]

To the person that said Mao is spinning in his grave... he's been probabaly spinning so much since Deng came to power, he's bored his way to the center of the Earth

That's really funny seeing how he's not actually buried, rather, enclosed in plexiglass and put on public display in that tomb of his in Tiananmen.

[DanS]

"Many Chinese really do think their political system is pretty good compared with that of the US, but here I do not agree with them."

Precisely. It is dangerous for the Chinese people to think that their political system is good. It breeds complacency in the long term.

The system that is in place in particularly incapable of flexibility. It was even incapable of dealing with a relatively minor protest 12 years ago. Is it really a stable system when the only way to deal with a protest is to bring out the tanks?

Sure, there are no tanks in the streets now. But that doesn't mean it's stable. Likewise, if you have millions protesting in Washington, it doesn't mean the system in instable.

[mindseye]

(Chinese) consider Democracy and Dictatorship to be two systems both having merits and side effects
(...)
Americans, on the other hand, generally go with the Universal Law that democracy is the only viable system.

I think that's a very accurate observation. I would only replace "viable" with "desirable" - other systems might work and survive, but democracy is seen as the most favorable. I personally agree ... but then, I'm American.

People often forget the Rule of Law. Democracy with(out) Rule of Law is just as corrupt as any dictatorship, India makes a prime example here. A dictatorship that can actually carry out the Rule of Law is often not corrupt, for example Singapore.

Excellent point. One can be oppressed under either. I suppose the difference is that under a dicatorship, the oppression can be actively directed by the gov't, whereas in the case of a corrupt democracy, it is a failure of the system. Good poll thread topic: which would you rather live under - a corrupt, inefficient democracy, or a benign, efficient dictatorship?

In Hong Kong driving can be pretty hair-raising, but at least the drivers pay attention to most of the rules.

Jeez, compared to mainlanders, HK drivers are quiet, patient - even downright polite! On occasion they will yield to you, even waving you ahead! Shocking! And they seldom honk their horns! Shanghai is the Wild West in comparison - right turn on red without stopping (or even slowing), rampant red light running, Law of Tonnage (must yield to larger vehicles or be killed), not to mention the horrendous horn-honking cacophony (banned in other civilized places like Beijing). From what I have seen, the outer provinces are even worse. In Xi'an, I remember taxis driving down crosswalks, and even on the sidewalk!

[mindseye]

The system that is in place in particularly incapable of flexibility.

Well, I don't know about that. They seem to be doing a reasonably good job of grafting a capitalist economy onto a Communist political system - no one's successfully done that before. That required quite a bit of flexibility, especially in terms of ideology. Jiang was criticized recently for his push to allow capitalists - capitalists! - into the Communist Party! They can even be given "Model Worker" Awards!

Is it really a stable system when the only way to deal with a protest is to bring out the tanks?

I don't think that was the only option considered, although it was ultimately the one which carried the day. . According to what are widely considered the most reliable sources, it was Li Peng and some elderly, retired rulers from the old guard that finally persuaded Deng that military action was the right solution.

Sure, there are no tanks in the streets now. But that doesn't mean it's stable. Likewise, if you have millions protesting in Washington, it doesn't mean the system in instable.

Great point!

I think one of the greatest threats of instability under the current Chinese system comes from the lack of any defined process for the handover of power. It all comes down to secret, behind-the-scenes power struggles within the Party. That kind of transition can be peaceful ... or it can lead to a Cultural Revolution.