Democracy with all its "warts" is still a good preference, although there can never be a "perfect" political system. There are many who still feel that in a democracy you can "vote" and "boot" those politicians who do not cater for the good of the people. Some others are traditionally indoctrinated in their support of an autocratic 1-party rule. It is often forgotten that the people makes up the country and NEVER the country superseding their aspirations. "Without people where is there a country?". The younger generation will decide, as the global social media will make them judge for themselves which system (regardless of censorship, as they will find ways around it) of governance they would prefer. The bet is usually freedom of speech and their democratic choice of leaders. Culture not withstanding, the focus on material wealth is never the sole criteria for any country, as it commonly breeds greed and corruption.
Chinese Geopolitics
- Thread starter Major
- Start date
- Status
Equation
Lieutenant General
If you're going to give Democracy that kind of chance and leeway, you might as well do the same and say the same for Communism or Marxism. Look at China for example, whatever they're doing it works for them, but does that mean everyone in the world should implement it? No.
Blackstone
Brigadier
By "democracy" I mean government with modern concepts of universal suffrage, and the examples you gave are only partial or semi democratic. Examples of functioning democracies very widely in their internal governance structures, and a partial list includes USA, Taiwan Province of China, Singapore, Republic of Korea, Canada, Brazil, South Africa, UK, Germany, France, Italy, and Japan.
Blackstone
Brigadier
Agreed in principle.
Saddam Hussein "stablized" Iraq with terror and murder, so I'm not sure if Molaki is actually worse. But you have a point on little Islamist activities under Hussein. Economically, more money and opportunity are flowing to Iraq's citizens after Hussein than before, so I can't say the average Iraqi was better off with Saddam Hussein.
That's why Churchill said democracy's the worse form of government, except for all the others. No system is perfect, and democracy is the least bad. Who knows, maybe someone will invent a new type of government... SCWROL (State Capitalism with rule of law) perhaps?
JayBird
Junior Member
Abe is not going to be the Prime Minister of Japan forever, maybe the next leader won't be an Ultra Right-Wing trouble maker like Abe. China and Japan actually had decent relation before all the drama the last few years.
True, traditionally LDP is the party closes to US. The problem started when DPJ started the look west policy favoring relationship with China over US (it make sense, since trade with China increasing and future security issue needs China). That's where the trouble starts. Here US using her influence media, ngos, activitists with LDP to bring down the DPJ government. The current government is too anti China and does not make sense to reciprocate until a more amicable when it change over.
And dictatorship and communism is like Father knows best....or group of wise men...
Democracy beholden to lobby group...you can "buy" the Presidency. Here the reason capitalists favor democracy over communism because money useless for them to buy a communist government.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
If Xi was to okay a summit, right after Abe or someone in public from the right would hurl an insult. That has been his pattern. Same thing happened with South Korea after the last meeting pushed by the US when that was delayed because of an insult by Abe. China should never have a meeting with Abe. No meeting until a new Japanese government is elected.
I've been reading articles about how horrible Xi is because of the anti-corruption crackdown. One, I think was in The Diplomat (a Japanese right-wing rag), argued that they don't want Xi to be successful because that would be a success for the communist government and Xi which they want gone. All pluses in my book. I thought it was all about caring about people. That's what they hide behind and their only real objective is to serve their own interests. They're for making innocent people suffer if they can use it as a tool for regime change. Does that sound like they care about the people? What makes them any different from a dictator who has a basic disregard for the lives of average people?
I've been reading articles about how horrible Xi is because of the anti-corruption crackdown. One, I think was in The Diplomat (a Japanese right-wing rag), argued that they don't want Xi to be successful because that would be a success for the communist government and Xi which they want gone. All pluses in my book. I thought it was all about caring about people. That's what they hide behind and their only real objective is to serve their own interests. They're for making innocent people suffer if they can use it as a tool for regime change. Does that sound like they care about the people? What makes them any different from a dictator who has a basic disregard for the lives of average people?
it refers to Geopolitical theory, well, I think if Chinese have Geopolitical theory, it is totally different from the US, Britain, and Japan.China is a mainland country, not like these island(North America is a big island surrounded by Pacific Ocean and Atlantic Ocean). So Chinese view geography from a very different perspective: it is surrounded by different countries, in other words, different threats, during its 4000-year-history, it has been invaded and conquered by outsiders for hundreds of times. And every time, these invades causes terrible hurts.
Therefore, geopolitical security is the core of China's foreign policy, and I think that why in some cases, China act "aggressive".
China's terrain is also very strange, the Western China is very high, and the Eastern China is relatively low, the North is high and the South is low, so in history, most of invaders came from the Northwest part, for the central governments, the mountain and highlands in west is natural barrier to the invaders(and they built the Great Wall to protect the poor agriculture residents from nomadic tribes).That's why China is always alert to its western province,include Xinjiang and Tibet, as well as the big neighbours like Russia,India and Turkey.
The south China sea is another core interest for China, Taiwan, is the most important. for China, it is a door open to the Pacific, but now it is the crucial part of the first island chain. Taiwan will unquestionable return to China, but I think the probability of war is getting smaller and smaller. The Chinese government has too many peaceful methods to reunify Taiwan, it is foolish to use expensive missiles and ships.
China claims that the South China Sea is the "inherent territory", but I think this dose not means that neighbouring countries can not fishing or shipping in this water. The Chinese government hope to keep the sovereignty, in that the south China sea is economic lifeline and energy pathway.
Japan, Oh, for Chinese people it is historical hates, but in geopolitics, Japan is not so important, in history Japan invaded China twice, in the first time it is defeated by China and Korea, in the second time(the WWII), it brought about maximum pain and terrible memory. I think it is very hard for American people to imagine the suffering. The war is a genocide.The Chinese government do no think Japan is a big threat, but a disgusting threat.
Well, I'm not native speaker so please excuse my poor English. If you can point out the grammar mistake, I will be very grateful.
Therefore, geopolitical security is the core of China's foreign policy, and I think that why in some cases, China act "aggressive".
China's terrain is also very strange, the Western China is very high, and the Eastern China is relatively low, the North is high and the South is low, so in history, most of invaders came from the Northwest part, for the central governments, the mountain and highlands in west is natural barrier to the invaders(and they built the Great Wall to protect the poor agriculture residents from nomadic tribes).That's why China is always alert to its western province,include Xinjiang and Tibet, as well as the big neighbours like Russia,India and Turkey.
The south China sea is another core interest for China, Taiwan, is the most important. for China, it is a door open to the Pacific, but now it is the crucial part of the first island chain. Taiwan will unquestionable return to China, but I think the probability of war is getting smaller and smaller. The Chinese government has too many peaceful methods to reunify Taiwan, it is foolish to use expensive missiles and ships.
China claims that the South China Sea is the "inherent territory", but I think this dose not means that neighbouring countries can not fishing or shipping in this water. The Chinese government hope to keep the sovereignty, in that the south China sea is economic lifeline and energy pathway.
Japan, Oh, for Chinese people it is historical hates, but in geopolitics, Japan is not so important, in history Japan invaded China twice, in the first time it is defeated by China and Korea, in the second time(the WWII), it brought about maximum pain and terrible memory. I think it is very hard for American people to imagine the suffering. The war is a genocide.The Chinese government do no think Japan is a big threat, but a disgusting threat.
Well, I'm not native speaker so please excuse my poor English. If you can point out the grammar mistake, I will be very grateful.
- Status