United STATES OF SHAME

[orwellian]

Democracy might not be the best applicable system for countries over 1 billion people.

The number of people have nothing to do with the implementation of democracy. China is not a democracy in the western sense. I would argue that in some ways China is more democratic than the United States. Capitalism can never be democratic. In a true democracy there can be no classes, no power elite. What we have in the western world is not very democratic. Our democratic institutions are corrupted and controlled by the elite and they execute our leaders at their will. At least in China the communist party has the executive power and they are not ruled by a capitalist elite.
However, that being said. I don't favor the Chinese model. I would rather see a direct participatory socialist democracy with freedom of speech.

Go and travel in both India and China for an extended period of time and report...

I dislike this argument as you don't need to travel to a place to know something about it. I have never been to the United States but I still know a lot about it's government, history and foreign policies.

 

[fifilafiloche]

That s your big mistake, Orwellian.

To understand your environment, you need your senses, not just intellectual artificial constructions. You needs to see, feel, talk, place yourself in others souls. You need to go deeper than just appearances, to make your own conclusions based on what you sensed and understood, not what others reported that would slightly fit your philosophy.

Regarding the size of a population , you don t manage a small canoe like a big cruise boat, a small classroom like a big assembly. Big masses make everything more complicated, less flexible, especially with such big religious discrepancies like in China and India.

And your belief that because there is a communist party, China is communist is -sorry for patronizing- a nonsense. If you ever travelled there in the recent years, you would know. This is one of the harshest, most competitive environments in the world. The discrepencies between the richest eastwards and the poorest westwards hits records too. Even tho the competitive system installed 20 years ago allowed 300 million chinese to live on western standards (the population of the US), there is still a 1 billion resevoir of cheap labor to full growth for a least 3 generations.

Competition is at all levels. Regionalisation induced more poverty in the poorest regions and more wealth in the wealthiest. In hospital, patients have to pay for nurses or count on their family to cure them.

But yes, the very repressive police forces keep the population under control and criminality is very low. You can ride on your bicycle in Beijing by night and feel totally confortable, nothing will happen, unlike any big town in western democracies. Police will control you, and politely let you go if your papers are in order.

This is not an ideal system, there is none. But this is a system best suited for huge populations, to keep some coherence in a huge country with different beliefs and ethnic origins.

The country would simply implode like Yugoslavia after the fall of communism if it was to follow a western model of democracy. Religious and racial riots do exist, but much less often than in India.

 

[arty]

The number of people have nothing to do with the implementation of democracy. China is not a democracy in the western sense. I would argue that in some ways China is more democratic than the United States. Capitalism can never be democratic. In a true democracy there can be no classes, no power elite. What we have in the western world is not very democratic. Our democratic institutions are corrupted and controlled by the elite and they execute our leaders at their will. At least in China the communist party has the executive power and they are not ruled by a capitalist elite.
However, that being said. I don't favor the Chinese model. I would rather see a direct participatory socialist democracy with freedom of speech.



I dislike this argument as you don't need to travel to a place to know something about it. I have never been to the United States but I still know a lot about it's government, history and foreign policies.

The USA is a republic, says so in the pledge of allegiance.

You can study and read about a place all you want, but you will never truly get the feel of the culture and people until you visit it.

 

[orwellian]

And your belief that because there is a communist party, China is communist is -sorry for patronizing- a nonsense. If you ever travelled there in the recent years, you would know. This is one of the harshest, most competitive environments in the world. The discrepencies between the richest eastwards and the poorest westwards hits records too. Even tho the competitive system installed 20 years ago allowed 300 million chinese to live on western standards (the population of the US), there is still a 1 billion resevoir of cheap labor to full growth for a least 3 generations.

I never said China is communist. I stated that they are ruled by the communist party, which is in a way, more democratic than the illusion of democracy we have in the west.
And I was in China two years ago. I saw that the place was poor, that's about it. Can't say that I learned anything new about China from the experience. Had I spoken Chinese I am sure it would have been different.

The USA is a republic, says so in the pledge of allegiance.

Yeah so it's not a monarchy, what's your point? China and United States are both republics.

You can study and read about a place all you want, but you will never truly get the feel of the culture and people until you visit it.

I wasn't talking about culture or people.

 

[mini]

Democracy might not be the best applicable system for countries over 1 billion people.

I have a similar belief. But I'm not sure I'd choose the system they have now.

Go and travel in both India and China for an extended period of time and report...

No, thank you. Not interested.

 

[mini]

The number of people have nothing to do with the implementation of democracy.

I disagree with you on this. I find the best true democracy works on a small and local level. IMO, it works better in Switzerland than in a country as large as the US. It works better per state, but not so good on the national level.

China is not a democracy in the western sense. I would argue that in some ways China is more democratic than the United States.

What a fascinating statement. Can you elaborate? I'd be interested to understand how you come to this conclusion.

 

[steveinbsas]

The number of people have nothing to do with the implementation of democracy.

I disagree with you on this. I find the best true democracy works on a small and local level. IMO, it works better in Switzerland than in a country as large as the US. It works better per state, but not so good on the national level.

China is not a democracy in the western sense. I would argue that in some ways China is more democratic than the United States.

What a fascinating statement. Can you elaborate? I'd be interested to understand how you come to this conclusion.

Mini, There's no reason to debate Orwellian. He is not a master debater...just an obnoxious masturbator:

(I don't really want to think about what he may or may not have done with/to his mother).

I'm obnoxious, motherfucker can't you tell?
Run through Little Havana yelling: 'Viva Fidel'
Jerking off with the sheets when I stay at hotels...

 

[brocolliandtea]

Wealthy expats with a lot of free time and no job to go to monday through friday. This topic has nothing to do with surviving Argentina. Bah humbug!

 

[steveinbsas]

Wealthy expats with a lot of free time and no job to go to monday through friday. This topic has nothing to do with surviving Argentina. Bah humbug!

You're absolutely right, this topic has nothing to do with surviving Argentina.

Only a few of the threads do...

So, what's your point?

Semi (if not pseudo) inquiring minds want to know!

 

[orwellian]

What a fascinating statement. Can you elaborate? I'd be interested to understand how you come to this conclusion.

If you would like to influence something through politics you stand a better chance in China because there is no way the elitist are going to let you do that in the United States (or in Europe for that matter). And if you do manage to rally a lot of public support for your cause, you will get executed by the elitist (Kennedy brothers, Malcolm X, MLK, BPP etc). Unless of course your agenda is in line with theirs.