The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,474
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Nov 25, 2019 15:10:30 GMT
Now that last bit I do agree with  |
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Nov 25, 2019 16:53:46 GMT
Whilst not everyone wants liberal democracy, we take it for granted that it's better because it is. Liberal democracy is the kindest and most decent form of government that we, as humans, can form. Therefore you are making a value judgment based on your own outlook and experience. You may be right, but that doesn't mean that others will see things in the same way. The Whiggish view of history, that everything would continue to get better and better and progress along a pre-set path , was every bit as prescriptive as Marxism, but no more accurate! I don't think Forfarshire Conservative 's arguing it's the best because people like it. IMO it's the best regardless of whether people like it or not, though there are cases in which it's temporarily not viable (e.g. where and when sufficient numbers of people despise it). |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Nov 25, 2019 17:04:14 GMT
Thats how you see it, but then you are western. Others without the same background and socialisation may find the idea of prioritising individualism, for example, very curious indeed.Therefore you are making a value judgment based on your own outlook and experience. You may be right, but that doesn't mean that others will see things in the same way. The Whiggish view of history, that everything would continue to get better and better and progress along a pre-set path , was every bit as prescriptive as Marxism, but no more accurate! I don't think Forfarshire Conservative 's arguing it's the best because people like it. IMO it's the best regardless of whether people like it or not, though there are cases in which it's temporarily not viable (e.g. where and when sufficient numbers of people despise it). Yes, but as I say, that is an opinion, not 'objective fact', and its an opinion derived from your own western background. The problem is that often we fail to appreciate that many of the things we assume are exactly that - assumptions - and so to others , appear strange. I do think there was an assumption that economic prosperity or at least the spread of capitalism would lead to more obviously 'western liberal politics', but that hasn't happened in China or Russia, and there is no indication that it will. |
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Nov 25, 2019 17:08:20 GMT
I don't think Forfarshire Conservative 's arguing it's the best because people like it. IMO it's the best regardless of whether people like it or not, though there are cases in which it's temporarily not viable (e.g. where and when sufficient numbers of people despise it). Yes, but as I say, that is an opinion, not 'objective fact', and its an opinion derived from your own western background. The problem is that often we fail to appreciate that many of the things we assume are exactly that - assumptions - and so to others , appear strange. I do think there was an assumption that economic prosperity or at least the spread of capitalism would lead to more obviously 'western liberal politics', but that hasn't happened in China or Russia, and there is no indication that it will. Insofar as my life is derived from my background. Everyone here's done at least a bit of study on the alternatives, I'd imagine. It was happening in both states and reversed (earlier for Russia with the rise of Putin, and later for China with Jinping coming to power), but in China's case specifically, some indicators suggest demand for it may still be rising. Despite the dire rural/urban economic divide, their society as a whole (outside of a few very underdeveloped provinces like East Turkestan) keeps moving up Mazlowe's hierarchy of needs. The 'inevitability' clearly wasn't but that doesn't mean democracy is bad, merely that it isn't inevitable. I agree that people, by and large, fail to appreciate that. |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,504
|
Post by Khunanup on Nov 25, 2019 21:34:35 GMT
China have completely misplayed their hand with Hong Kong. They're going to have a full scale rebellion on their hands as it's clear that they have utterly failed to pacify Hong Kong and bring them round to their way if governance over the last 22 years and if anything the doubling down on oppression on the mainland is alienating the SAR ever more. Hong Kong will not go lying down and I expect there either to be an invasion by the PLA before 2047 (and that is a can of worms no-one wants to open) or we get to it and Hong Kongers will not accept their freedoms being stripped from them, which would have much the same result. Mostly, it depends what happens on the Mainland. I think if China's growth starts to slow year on year then that could be a catalyst to change, and at least move away from ever increasing oppression & state control. I think you are taking a very western, individualist perspective When China started to liberalise economically (it is far from marxist, no matter what definition you use!) there was an assumption that greater social and political liberalism would follow There is very little evidence for this, but I think it has far more to do with Chinese traditions - a bit like how we find it bizarre that Putin is actually popular in Russia, and the nationalist strongman appealing to notions of the motherland is of much more appeal that 'demoicracy', which was tried under Yeltsin, but they weren't impressed.... Individualist western liberalism is not an inevitability or anything hardwired into humanity. We take it for granted that it is better and that other people will want it, given the choice. A post of nonsense. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 25, 2019 23:08:49 GMT
They have very little power, though I simply don't see the Chinese government allowing a Western-style democracy as part of its country, and in handing HK back to China with a limited arrangement, we recognised that too. China have completely misplayed their hand with Hong Kong. They're going to have a full scale rebellion on their hands as it's clear that they have utterly failed to pacify Hong Kong and bring them round to their way if governance over the last 22 years and if anything the doubling down on oppression on the mainland is alienating the SAR ever more. Hong Kong will not go lying down and I expect there either to be an invasion by the PLA before 2047 (and that is a can of worms no-one wants to open) or we get to it and Hong Kongers will not accept their freedoms being stripped from them, which would have much the same result. Mostly, it depends what happens on the Mainland. I think if China's growth starts to slow year on year then that could be a catalyst to change, and at least move away from ever increasing oppression & state control. Rubbish. They have behaved well and better than expected under very sore duress. But if there is much more pissing about they would be wise to close down offending universities, sack the staff and conscript the students into 10-years of hard labour in the rice fields 'to encourage the others'! If the revolt turns even more nasty I suspect they will shoot a couple of thousand and makre the fine point that HK IS part of China and that China is not a soft touch snoflake form of Canada with a touch of harder socialism. |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,212 
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Nov 25, 2019 23:13:07 GMT
remains, far more important to understanding the national psyche of China than anything related to Marx, which Chinese people know absolutely nothing about, from my limited experience (visiting and teaching) Can't say, that this is always true: During my last visit of London (1996) a young PRC-woman heard of be speaking german and said: "You will certainly know Dy-ling!" "Dy-ling? Never heard." She, angrily: "But You MUST know Dy-ling! Anti-Dy-ling!" Oh, You mean Dühring, Eugen Dühring, the mentor and later enemy of MARX and ENGELS!?" |
|
