- This topic has 4 voices and 10 replies.
-
Posts
-
A Chinese politician recently stated:In criticizing Western democracy, Mr. Li asserted that the Western system of elections simply benefited the wealthy and was warped by capitalism.?Western-style elections, however, are a game for the rich,? he said. ?They are affected by the resources and funding that a candidate can utilize. Those who manage to win elections are easily in the shoes of their parties or sponsors and become spokespersons for the minority.?Mr. Li added, ?As a socialist country, we cannot simply take the Western approach.?How could we best reply to his assertion?WillyD
Even if what Mr. Li says is true (and I don't deny some of it is true), the real reason why his country cannot adopt our approach is because it allows for more than one “influence” other than the state party. But sooner or later, China will have to adopt some form of our model because they have already embraced capitalism (yes a watered down version) that will only grow to resemble our own eventually because greed will never be completely factored out of the equation.
How could we best reply to his assertion?WillyD
We can respond by saying that it is not necessarily true. In the end, the voters must vote candidates in to office. Yes, wealthier candidates can get their messages out better. But the message still has to resound with the voters. Besides, what are corporations made up of essentially but groups of shareholders who want to see their investments prosper? So if these groups of people want to help Candidate A win over Candidate B, how is it any different from Union A or Special Interest Group B giving money to Candidate A to win?
Even if what Mr. Li says is true (and I don't deny some of it is true), the real reason why his country cannot adopt our approach is because it allows for more than one "influence" other than the state party. But sooner or later, China will have to adopt some form of our model because they have already embraced capitalism (yes a watered down version) that will only grow to resemble our own eventually because greed will never be completely factored out of the equation.I am at a loss to explain just what the Chinese system is. We were all taught that democracy and freemarkets, regulated, but not dominated by the government, was the magic recipe for a robust economic system and a healthy working democracy. They apparently have another recipe and it seems to be working for them.I do agree that this is temporary. At some point the Chinese government will have to grant a voice tothe governed if for no other reason than to preserve the edifice. History is replete with examples ofwhat happens when totalitarian governments fail to do this or do it too slowly.I must constantly remind myself that when we talk of China, we are referring to a culture that was mature when Socrates was a pup. The Chinese, whether they be mandarins , warlords or pseudoCommunists have been around a very long time. They can smile at our frustrations and tell us that thevexing problems they experienced in the 19th and 20th centuries were merely a blip on time's radar screen. Relatives of mine who have lived in Asia for years have a simple phrase that I believe is worth quoting:"If you think you understand the Chinese, you do not.It will be an interesting future.
We can respond by saying that it is not necessarily true. In the end, the voters must vote candidates in to office. Yes, wealthier candidates can get their messages out better. But the message still has to resound with the voters. Besides, what are corporations made up of essentially but groups of shareholders who want to see their investments prosper? So if these groups of people want to help Candidate A win over Candidate B, how is it any different from Union A or Special Interest Group B giving money to Candidate A to win?Actually wealth people can buy the office. Want to be Mayor of New York?If Corporations had any other function than to maximize the return on investments for their stockholders,I would feel more comfortable. They do not. Officers of a corporation have a fiduciary responsibility and if they failto live up to their responsibilities, they can be prosecuted.There is no such law governing their social responsibilities. Many corporations contribute much to the community, but it is motivated by a desire to be seen as a good corporate system, rather than anaction prompted by altruism.Corporations, unions and many other groups contribute money to the politicians of their choice. It wouldbe foolish to expect that they would expend the funds to somebody in opposition to their views. Theproblem is that Corporate America has lots of money, is organized by industry--Tobacco, Drugs etc. andhas many legions of lobbyists pushing their agenda. They are the biggest and the best at this lobbybusiness and have used both attack dog and Fabian tactics in the struggle. This is not a political question as both parties do it with varying degrees of success depending on the issue. The lobbyists are really good at their job. They win a lot and dress quite well at parties.In the back of my head I hear these words which, in light of contemporary events, makes me uneasy--"... government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.I suspect that this is in danger of being altered not to our benefit. How about you?
The Chinese system is simple. It is a one-party democracy. It doesn't get any fairer than that does it?The Chinese criticizing our system is kind of like Hitler criticizing Britain over their asylum system isn't it? Or as my mom would say, that is "the Pot calling the Kettle black."
I got it! I know why the Chinese are doing so well. 1) They use slave labor (saves on the overhead).2) They have an enormous market (us lazy Americans and their own 1.2 billion people).3) They don't follow environmental laws that have been foisted on the rest of the developed world.4) They aren't embroiled in foreign wars all over the globe.5) They are milking Hong Kong and Macao for all their worth.
I got it! I know why the Chinese are doing so well. 1) They use slave labor (saves on the overhead).2) They have an enormous market (us lazy Americans and their own 1.2 billion people).3) They don't follow environmental laws that have been foisted on the rest of the developed world.4) They aren't embroiled in foreign wars all over the globe.5) They are milking Hong Kong and Macao for all their worth.
Correct on all points.
The Chinese system is simple. It is a one-party democracy. It doesn't get any fairer than that does it?The Chinese criticizing our system is kind of like Hitler criticizing Britain over their asylum system isn't it? Or as my mom would say, that is "the Pot calling the Kettle black."Report to moderator LoggedAgree with all--except that it is not even a one part democracy--perhaps a gerentocracy, an oligarcy or an aristocracy with the word best defined as an inner party member a la Orwell.Loved the part about your Mom--she must have gone to school with mine. We have no kettles in our house.
I got it! I know why the Chinese are doing so well. 1) They use slave labor (saves on the overhead).2) They have an enormous market (us lazy Americans and their own 1.2 billion people).3) They don't follow environmental laws that have been foisted on the rest of the developed world.4) They aren't embroiled in foreign wars all over the globe.5) They are milking Hong Kong and Macao for all their worth.Do you imagine our Corporations envy them. They certainly benefit as so much of what used to be made here is no made elsewhere. Do Corporations have a loyalty to the country in which they are "persons" or just an obligation to their stockholders?Loved your use of the word "foisted" Are these not laws here in the USA--passed by our legislatures?If so, who "foisted"?
