Like Tree42Likes

The growing appeal of China's model of authoritarian capitalism

Closed Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    12,323

    There is much about China to despise. But there is also a lot they have got right. "The West" appears to think it's their way or the highway; that democracy is an end in itself. It's not. It's a way to govern a country that is mostly fair - but then look at places like the USA. How "fair" is it that candidates have to spend a fortune on advertising to get into the race? The lobbying and pork-barrel politics of Washington is a disgrace to the founding fathers and a huge barrier to getting anything done. Have-money; will lobby. The poor don't stand a chance. There are many forms of democracy and finding a middle ground between the pure-form democracy without any strings and an authoritarian outcome for DEVELOPING countries in particular would be a win-win outcome.

    Once developed it's less important, but pure democracy holds back development. Look at India.... Philippines.. even Greece. Yes, they can learn from China. Learning from a country does not mean importing every aspect of it.

    Hurtmesome, Cho-man, shri and 3 others like this.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,687
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurtmesome:
    So what is left is accepting that the west can be just as evil as China if the need arises or keep denying it and come up with lame examples on how much worse China is. (Btw do read carefully I'm NOT denying anything you said)
    You are making false equivalence arguments. Perspective is exactly what you and the left always fail to grasp when trying to compare places like China or the middle east to western countries.

    Force feeding a goose is objectively not AS bad as boiling and burning dogs alive.

    Water boarding and humiliation is objectively not AS bad as body deformity physical tortures.

    Bring a people in a political party into court is objectively not AS bad as sending them off to be executed or break rocks in a labor camp.
    Cho-man likes this.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    662
    Quote Originally Posted by methosb:
    You are making false equivalence arguments. Perspective is exactly what you and the left always fail to grasp when trying to compare places like China or the middle east to western countries.

    Force feeding a goose is objectively not AS bad as boiling and burning dogs alive.

    Water boarding and humiliation is objectively not AS bad as body deformity physical tortures.

    Bring a people in a political party into court is objectively not AS bad as sending them off to be executed or break rocks in a labor camp.
    Are you saying that, if China used the same methods as other countries in regards of torture, political parties and treatment of animals, you would be totally ok with it?
    if not, do say so because that is what I'm reading.

    I however think torture in ANY form is wrong. Whether it's water boarding or beating with a cane or using electro shocks.
    I do however find it very odd that people can be abducted in a free democracy, transported to secret facility and be tortured, released because of some mistake and NOONE can be held accountable. If it was some poor chap in China, I would understand. It's China, no rule of law, no human rights. But the USA? What are your thoughts on this?
    As for the political parties: don't get me wrong here both Martijn (pedophiles) and Golden Dawn (racists/nationalist) are despicable in their own right BUT, if you look into how they were shut down, it was all politics and zero court ruling. People in power didn't want to see these parties to get a platform to develop and spread their ideology. Specially Golden Dawn was getting very dangerous. I would say, read into this how a whole party got banned because some members are bad apples.
    as for treatment of animals: I have never visited an abattoir because i heard the way animals get slaughtered would turn me vegetarian immediately. I would never eat dog myself. Because I think dogs have character. A vegetarian once told me, cows have character too. I didn't know what to say. So unless you are a pure vegetarian (no eggs or dairy either) you have no rights to lecture anyone on their eating habits.

    I know you want to keep it on perpective level because than its not so bad. If you like to keep fooling yourself, don't mind anything I have written.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,687

    My argument is not that western countries don't have problems. My argument is that there are levels of severity of those problems and to claim that China's severe problems are equivalent to the west's far less severe problems and hence China has as strong a position to comment on those problems is a logical fallacy.

    Cho-man likes this.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by HK_Katherine:
    There is much about China to despise. But there is also a lot they have got right. "The West" appears to think it's their way or the highway; that democracy is an end in itself.
    Once developed it's less important, but pure democracy holds back development. Look at India.... Philippines.. even Greece. Yes, they can learn from China. Learning from a country does not mean importing every aspect of it.
    I guess the reason the article was so weak that no one can deny the transformation of China has been impressive but the writer seems to make it look like some utopian centrally planned development model citing how the west has failed due to growing income disparity even though the vast majorities of representative democracies have a much better Gini coefficient.

    China's putting economic growth above all else with investment in education and roads helping it scrape itself off the bottom worked to some degree but the costs have been huge with environmental, social and cultural issues coming way down the list. No doubt millions have been lifted out of poverty but the wealth goes to the powerful. The recent moaist purges show how unstable the government feels it is. Ending up with a fragile government does not look like a good model to follow.

    The "let a few get rich first" policy of Deng did work in letting free market principles drive growth (which the author denies) but unfortunately the policy for the last 25 years has become "let a few get rich"

    Is it understandable as the author points out that developing nations look at China in awe, yes but as an enviable development model is another matter. Taiwan and South Korea seem much better examples of transitioning from underdeveloped autocracies to a functioning state.
    Last edited by East_coast; 21-07-2015 at 09:07 AM.
    pin and R.O. like this.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    662

    @methosb, I totally understand your point of view, you also have more then a valid point on the human rights issues in China.
    However, you are fooling yourself if you think rendition is less severe then any violation of human rights that China commits. I would say that rendition weighs even heavier if a western country commits this crime.
    The fact rendition exists in the west is bad enough but that people who had been victims of rendition cannot take their abductors/torturors to court is an issue I would not expect from any country with the rule of law. (You ignore my question on your views on this)
    As always, I'm ok with agreeing to disagree.


  7. #17

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,687

    I am totally against rendition but again don't find it as bad as the way China deals with their business. At least there could be some hope for victims of rendition to find a way into western courts with the right people involved, the right politicians and right lawyers. At the very least their voices can be heard.

    In China we know there is no hope for anyone ever trying to air their grievances about treatment by some part of the system let alone try to take some kind if legal action. They would have to be one brave person to risk their and their family's lives doing so.

    East_coast likes this.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    623

    At the end of the article:
    As Israeli historian Irad Malkin noted: "Democracy existed for about 200 years in the ancient world and has existed for about 200 years in the modern world, and other than that there has been no democracy in the whole of human history. Oligarchies have always existed."

    There's a flaw here.

    Through most of history, until about 200 years ago, most people were illiterate and impoverished. Men were there to till the fields, or whatever, in peace-time, and to be cannon-fodder in war-time. Women were there to - we know what women were for. In those times, the world had to be ruled by oligarchies of the rich and literate.

    Oligarchies now, buttressed by secret police, can last a long time, but they can't endure. They have to educate their people and improve their lives materially, but eventually the good things they do will undo them.

    For example, the British in India educated clerks, teachers, and lawyers, but that education, especially knowledge of English, gave them access to ideas of freedom and self-determination, which they turned against the British. As for material betterment: that will undo the oligarchies eventually, whether they succeed materially (as in South Korea and Taiwan in the 1980s) or fail (as in the Soviet Union in the 1990s).

    I first read the article a couple of days ago, and for some reason falsely remembered that the quote above was from a Singaporean historian. A useful mistake. Singapore has been a success (this ties in with Cho-man's Post 9), and it will be one of the best tests of the hypothesis, or the hope, that oligarchies are bound to fail.


  9. #19

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,745

    I think overdoing it will derail the process, train, insert here:_____


    Sent from my iPhone using GeoClicks


  10. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by methosb:
    I am totally against rendition but again don't find it as bad as the way China deals with their business. At least there could be some hope for victims of rendition to find a way into western courts with the right people involved, the right politicians and right lawyers. At the very least their voices can be heard.

    In China we know there is no hope for anyone ever trying to air their grievances about treatment by some part of the system let alone try to take some kind if legal action. They would have to be one brave person to risk their and their family's lives doing so.
    Surely It is a lot more common in China than the the West but just less publicised. Having been unfortunate to see a riot first hand in China the indiscriminate brutality of the state still shocks me
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_jails

    Suggesting China's development model is better because the US has an illegal rendition programme seems a flawed argument when the emigration pattern is only one way.

    China's GDP will probably grow at 6% next year which probably means the country will fall into the middle income trap. It's vast scale means it has weight to throw around but most of the smaller developing nations are mid-size countries.