The far-right populist Alternative for Germany party rejects a values-based foreign policy, just as much as it rejects NATO and the US. That approach has attracted the attention of Beijing.
It’s okay to admit you don’t know something. Like the other person said, Chinese people can vote
Learn yourself so that you can make informed opinions
It’s better to have no knowledge than negative knowledge (knowing “facts” that are completely wrong because of a gut feeling assumption rather than any evidence or research)
What are you talking about? Of course the people in China have a right to vote.
Honestly, how did you come to be so confidently incorrect about this? You would have to have done no research at all to think the people of China don’t vote, but a normal person who has done no research about a subject will have the humility not to assume they know what they’re talking about.
And in hindsight, not such a great person. Or at least had a lot of negatives to go along with his positives. Probably best to hard code not only a term limit, but an age limit on elected officials. I’m tired of the world being run by geriatrics. Culture seems to be consistently 20 year ahead of government.
Term-limits are blatantly anti-democratic and age limits are clumsy, but a cognitive evaluation and probably an MRI would be good for rooting out cases of cognitive decline.
There is an informal age limit in China and Xi is still below it, though just barely. I’m curious if he’ll go for another term after crossing it. I think he understands that he needs to retire sometime – no one wants to become a late '60s Mao.
Imagine for a split second that the strongest government in the world is constantly attempting to cause the overthrow of your legitimately popular government, despite it being popular and significantly beloved by almost all people there. This external, most powerful government in the world tried to cause unrest in every possible way, including funding all opposition groups and organizations regardless of their violent/genocidal intent (e.g. Falun Gong, Islamic terror groups) and cause unrest on your borders (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Korea).
What do you do? When good faith polling shows that you’re popular and fulfilling the needs and desires of your country’s working class but a foreign press tries to speak about the terribleness and need for overthrow, do you just let that happen with more money and propoganda than you can possibly provide to support yourself? Or do you censor the BS and report to your population that these images/ideas/orgs are actually subversive and attempting to change the government they legitimately love.
In this hypothetical situation, what do you propose? Allowing the propaganda but claiming it’s wrong has failed in many projects, and resulted in massacres once fascism won (Chile, Indonesia). Just trying to set up a wall of no information works for a bit, but info can cross anyways (USSR). Allowing limited access if you search for it but not allowing it’s widespread propagation is the method of china. A VPN allows you to see it all, but it can’t be spread too widely before it is stopped from being viral.
Do you have a better solution? Because this is how China presents itself and how the Chinese population sees it
Serious question, do you? When I criticise the US I do so from a position of knowing how power works between its three branches of government, how the senate works, how local governance works, how elections work, how the courts work. Do you know how China conducts any of these? Do you know how they govern 1.6billion people?
Though, in fairness, red man is actively hostile to LGBT people, migrants, and women whereas blue man is content to let LGBT people, migrants, and women suffer via apathetic neglect instead.
Weird how democracy didn’t stop the genocide of the Native Americans, or the Aboriginal People of Australia, or the First Nations. I guess “true democracy” has just never been tried.
It’s a one-party state with all candidates chosen by the party.
I much prefer all those two or three party states where the candidates are chosen by their respective parties on the marching orders of the capitalist class
It’s a one-party state with all candidates chosen by the party.
It may wear the skin of a democracy, but it is not a democracy.
This is the vaguest description ever and it’s not even correct with the vague points. There are multiple parties, and given that there are multiple parties the candidates certainly aren’t chosen by one party.
How are candidates chosen? Who elects them? When are elections held? What is the structure of the elections?
Do you know any of these things? Serious question. Have you ever investigated and learned this topic thoroughly? You know how the US system works I assume, I bet you vaguely understand some other systems too, like parliamentary ones such as the UK (or not, could be wrong). Have you ever actually investigated the topic or have you just passively repeated vague statements made by other people who are also passively repeating vague statements about it?
If you want me to I can in fact give you a fairly good summary of how the Chinese system actually works. But do you even want to know? Are you actually open to learning?
China is a democracy
President for life doesn’t sound democratic.
What’s that got to do with China?
Oh I think he’s talking about FDR, the most popular president in U.S. history and one consistently ranked amongst the best
Unlike in China, the people here actually have the right to vote. That right does not exist in China
It’s okay to admit you don’t know something. Like the other person said, Chinese people can vote
Learn yourself so that you can make informed opinions
It’s better to have no knowledge than negative knowledge (knowing “facts” that are completely wrong because of a gut feeling assumption rather than any evidence or research)
What are you talking about? Of course the people in China have a right to vote.
Honestly, how did you come to be so confidently incorrect about this? You would have to have done no research at all to think the people of China don’t vote, but a normal person who has done no research about a subject will have the humility not to assume they know what they’re talking about.
And in hindsight, not such a great person. Or at least had a lot of negatives to go along with his positives. Probably best to hard code not only a term limit, but an age limit on elected officials. I’m tired of the world being run by geriatrics. Culture seems to be consistently 20 year ahead of government.
Term-limits are blatantly anti-democratic and age limits are clumsy, but a cognitive evaluation and probably an MRI would be good for rooting out cases of cognitive decline.
There is an informal age limit in China and Xi is still below it, though just barely. I’m curious if he’ll go for another term after crossing it. I think he understands that he needs to retire sometime – no one wants to become a late '60s Mao.
Term limits that silence the will of the people don’t sound democratic to me
Neither does censoring criticism of the government and proxy depictions of it.
Imagine for a split second that the strongest government in the world is constantly attempting to cause the overthrow of your legitimately popular government, despite it being popular and significantly beloved by almost all people there. This external, most powerful government in the world tried to cause unrest in every possible way, including funding all opposition groups and organizations regardless of their violent/genocidal intent (e.g. Falun Gong, Islamic terror groups) and cause unrest on your borders (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Korea).
What do you do? When good faith polling shows that you’re popular and fulfilling the needs and desires of your country’s working class but a foreign press tries to speak about the terribleness and need for overthrow, do you just let that happen with more money and propoganda than you can possibly provide to support yourself? Or do you censor the BS and report to your population that these images/ideas/orgs are actually subversive and attempting to change the government they legitimately love.
In this hypothetical situation, what do you propose? Allowing the propaganda but claiming it’s wrong has failed in many projects, and resulted in massacres once fascism won (Chile, Indonesia). Just trying to set up a wall of no information works for a bit, but info can cross anyways (USSR). Allowing limited access if you search for it but not allowing it’s widespread propagation is the method of china. A VPN allows you to see it all, but it can’t be spread too widely before it is stopped from being viral.
Do you have a better solution? Because this is how China presents itself and how the Chinese population sees it
How high are you right meow?
Do you not know what the structure of China is?
Serious question, do you? When I criticise the US I do so from a position of knowing how power works between its three branches of government, how the senate works, how local governance works, how elections work, how the courts work. Do you know how China conducts any of these? Do you know how they govern 1.6billion people?
It’s a one-party state with all candidates chosen by the party.
It may wear the skin of a democracy, but it is not a democracy.
So you don’t know the structure
According to their respective peoples, China has an infinitely more vibrant and responsive democracy than the United States.
I’d hate to think you’d be so blind to the irony of saying such a thing as ‘wearing the skin of democracy’ if you were living in the west.
Either way I’d be ashamed to act like you have and speak despite having such ignorance about the Chinese system of democracy.
Democracy is when you vote between red man and blue man, both of whom have the same policies.
And both are funded by the same Bankers, Weapons Makers and Resource Extractors
Though, in fairness, red man is actively hostile to LGBT people, migrants, and women whereas blue man is content to let LGBT people, migrants, and women suffer via apathetic neglect instead.
Truly a vibrant political system.
Democracy is when The People Decide if trans people should exist but the tax rate policy is written by the rich
Weird how democracy didn’t stop the genocide of the Native Americans, or the Aboriginal People of Australia, or the First Nations. I guess “true democracy” has just never been tried.
I much prefer all those two or three party states where the candidates are chosen by their respective parties on the marching orders of the capitalist class
This is the vaguest description ever and it’s not even correct with the vague points. There are multiple parties, and given that there are multiple parties the candidates certainly aren’t chosen by one party.
How are candidates chosen? Who elects them? When are elections held? What is the structure of the elections?
Do you know any of these things? Serious question. Have you ever investigated and learned this topic thoroughly? You know how the US system works I assume, I bet you vaguely understand some other systems too, like parliamentary ones such as the UK (or not, could be wrong). Have you ever actually investigated the topic or have you just passively repeated vague statements made by other people who are also passively repeating vague statements about it?
If you want me to I can in fact give you a fairly good summary of how the Chinese system actually works. But do you even want to know? Are you actually open to learning?
lmao dog you shoulda just said “i don’t know anything about that, why don’t you tell me?”
it still would have taken you zero effort and you’d have avoided embarrassing yourself