I fully respect your stance, because I used to take the same. But not any more. If mod does not block me, I will explain why later.
Chinese Citizens REVOLT in Wukan!!
- Thread starter Mr T
- Start date
I fully respect your stance, because I used to take the same. But not any more. If mod does not block me, I will explain why later.
bladerunner
Banned Idiot
I think you are comparing apples with oranges.Over here and i should imagine in many Western countries, the owner is fairly compensated for his loss of land for public works.. The problem in Wuhan is that the people did not think they were getting a fair deal.
Equation
Lieutenant General
It happens here in Texas also, along with dozens of other places around the world. So the question is how come the one in Wuhan so much negative publicity my Western medias?
Joshluot-34-85
New Member
I must respect Chinese government's efficiency in dealing with problems as well as pointing the gridlock in our Congress. However, one must know that the U.S. has a representative government, meaning that the civilian's （老百姓）voice is heard. In China, the people must obey, and the government only relent in rare cases, like Wukan, for the sake of the country's stability.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
So you think that democracy will somehow make the government more responsive to the demand of the people . Nice theory. But it exactly the gridlock that will cause the government incapable to respond to any emergency. Case in point China's southern neighbor where nothing get done
Even US with 200 years of democracy have trouble now resolving economic malaise How can China with no previous democracy culture or anything resembling individual responsibility can fare better? And spare me the example of Taiwan because Taiwan is small county and democracy doesn't even prevent corruption If anything any snake oil salesman aka Chen Sui Bian will try to distract the Taiwanese with independent while he get his hand in cookie jar
By the way democracy as the guardian of Human right is nothing but bull . US does/t abolish slavery until 1890 and even as late as 1950 lynching is still common practice in the south.Women doesn't get civil right until after first WW II . Not to mention Chinese exclusion act.
A country like China undergoing seismic change in social and economic will experience social dislocation and yes there might be some collusion between civil servant and business man but we only hear the bad apple. How about the rest of civil servant.?
China will try to correct the social problem and unlawful land grab. That is why they have experimentation like Congging model where the farmer will get city hukou in return for leasing or giving up their claim on the land or better still the Sichuan model where they don't need to give up their land
I though the liberal like Guangdong model where they follow closely the capitalistic system with minimum social assistance and derisively called the Chongging model harking back to cultural revolution
Last edited:
Mr T
Senior Member
Umm, it makes a massive difference. For example, I have a right to protest in my back garden - I don't have a right to break into yours and protest there.
Oh God, not more whining about India.
Guys, whatever chips you have on your shoulders about India, I suggest you get over it. China can be a better democracy than India.
And don't pretend that India "suffers" from democracy just because it's big. Belgium is tiny, but had a caretaker government for 541 days. Seriously. Why? Because the way by which politicians are elected is flawed.
But you're ignoring America's incredible rise. They built a whole country from scratch in double-quick time and became the most powerful country in the world. You can't denounce an entire political system just because there are sometimes disagreements on how to get things done. America has massively benefited from democracy and accompanying freedoms/rights.
How is any of that relevant to this discussion? We're talking about change in China today. China doesn't have to introduce 18th century "democracy". It can just grant modern democratic rights and freedoms to everyone. As I said earlier, China can choose how to bring in reform. It's not shopping from a catalogue with limited options, it can look at all the democratic systems in the world and pull good aspects from all of them.
For example, I would go with a parliamentary system. The president would have limited powers for emergency situations. He or she could be directly elected or appointment by parliament.
MPs would be elected by first past the post, making it easier for a party or parties to form a stable majority government. Parliament would also select the PM, who would be the nation's leader. This would avoid the situation in the US where the president doesn't necessarily have a majority in Congress. And that's just for starters.
There is no perfect political system, but China is in an enviable position of being able to pick and choose the means for which it will become a proper democracy.
Last edited:
China’s State-Run Newspapers Praise Government Handling of Village Protest
Q
By Bloomberg News - Dec 22, 2011 3:19 PM ET
inShare
3More Print Email
State-run Chinese newspapers today praised a government-brokered agreement that ended a two-week protest over land in the southern village of Wukan after having carried almost no coverage of the standoff this month.
The People’s Daily said officials promised to meet protesters’ demands with “sincerity” in a commentary published today while a China Business News article said the government had handled the issue “very well.” A Global Times editorial, titled “Put public first when solving land disputes,” called the villagers’ demands reasonable.
Wukan’s residents called off a protest march yesterday after a senior Communist Party official from Guangdong province promised to release villagers detained by police, address flaws in electing local officials and redistribute land that had been sold off unfairly. Barriers that had been blocking police from the village were taken down, the official Xinhua News Agency reported yesterday.
Local government officials should aim to put the public first and help them “fulfill reasonable interests,” the Global Times editorial said.
Until today, there had been little coverage of the Wukan protest in domestic Chinese press. On Dec. 19, when the protest was under way, there were no mentions of Wukan in more than 200 Chinese newspapers, according to the China Media Project.
Village Elections
The unrest in Wukan first began in September, when disputes over land, local elections and village finances between residents and local officials led protesters to attack police and overturn cars, according to the Shanwei city government. Protests flared again this month after police detained five villagers on accusations that they had led demonstrations and one of the men, Xue Jinbo, died while in custody on Dec. 11.
The decision to meet the villagers’ demands is part of a wider government strategy aimed at containing such protests before they spread, said Joseph Cheng, a politics professor at the City University of Hong Kong. The standoff and other protests have sparked concerns that unrest stemming from China’s growth could undermine the Communist Party’s rule.
The “flaw” in initial efforts by local officials to resolve the conflict was that they didn’t deal directly with the villagers’ “fair” demands, according to the People’s Daily commentary written by Zhang Tie. The article didn’t give more details of Zhang’s identity.
Another report, published in today’s Guangzhou Daily, said Wukan’s residents would cooperate with a team investigating the protest. The article described the scene as being “peaceful” with the village’s small shops operating as usual and local children running “happily.”
To contact Bloomberg News staff for this story: Nicholas Wadhams in Beijing at [email protected]
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Bloomberg News at [email protected]
I really hope china can go for something better than a democracy.
and during america's incredible rise, most of non-whites couldn't vote, and those who did, the elite essentially ruled anyways. the federal and state government being nothing but a small appendix of the powerful economic elite.
Yeah, and Russia did it quicker under stalin,
and China is doing it quicker under a Technocratic Communist Party. It has the highest growth rate for a contemporary Big country, ever. statistically, there is no other comparable data point to explainway the discrepency with the "theory".
because it is already an outlier.
if it is an utilitarian argument for democracy. it certainly point toward the opposite way.
Last edited: