Chinese Geopolitics

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lezt

Junior Member
Blackstone said:
You missed one of the most important point of Webster's definition: not legally disqualified. In the US, it means non-citizens of all flavor can't legally vote. Most reasonable people would agree the US has universal suffrage, and if China comes anywhere close, I'll say she has it too.
Click to expand...

Ahh, then my original statement that if party membership is required to vote, i.e. a legal disqualification of people without it to vote; then China technically have universal suffrage?

We are debating the letter of the definition, what most people think is not necessary true.

Besides, what Webster meant by not legally disqualified is that everyone can vote and there is no legal bias preventing some part of society from voting.
 
A

advill

Junior Member
Realistically speaking, there is no "perfect" political system. Some appear better than others IF they help can help their people enjoy a better life. A good number of democratic countries have so far done relatively well for their respective citizens, although some have not. Politicians in democratic countries who do not live to the expectations of their citizens will be booted out during general elections. China has done very well economically during the past 2 decades, and have raised the living standards of about half its population. The country is still in transition, and hopefully it would introduce some form of democratic voting in future. Hong Kong would be a "test case" i.e. Hong Kongers voting for the next Chief Executive.
 
Blackstone

Blackstone

Brigadier
Lezt said:
Ahh, then my original statement that if party membership is required to vote, i.e. a legal disqualification of people without it to vote; then China technically have universal suffrage?

We are debating the letter of the definition, what most people think is not necessary true.

Besides, what Webster meant by not legally disqualified is that everyone can vote and there is no legal bias preventing some part of society from voting.
Click to expand...

Most reasonable people would say China doesn't have universal suffrage, and most reasonable people would say US does.
 
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Western Europe and Japan have less resources than most. Which also points to countries which have less resources along with macro minded cultures tend to have violent histories over territory. Europe and Japan would be poor if world institutions weren't structured to favor the West. China in Africa alarms the West because Africa is the richest continent for resources. Africa has always been seen as the West personal backyard. That's why Africa during colonialism and the decades after never developed a lot because there was no competition. The West could makes deals under their own terms or nothing would happen. Enter China... Now Africa is developing because there is competition. The West isn't the only alternative now. It wasn't democracy and belief in human rights that put the West where it is. It was colonialism and conquering that made them rich. Look at Libya. The US and Great Britain were behind sanctions. No other country especially allies were allowed to do business with Libya and their high quality crude. Guess who got to all of the sudden say sanctions were over and then get first dibs on precious high quality Libyan crude? The US and Great Britain. No one else could decide for themselves that doing business with Libya was all right. Look the US $9 billion fine on PNB of France. That bank didn't violate any international laws or UN resolutions. It violated a unilateral American law that had no input from other countries. And why is it a law the US enacted on its own be enforceable on France. It's not because an international court ruled in favor of the US. It's because of the petrodollar and the US dollar as a world reserved currency. The US can use that to get what it wants especially from allied countries. None of that power was born from a belief in democracy and human rights.
 
Blackstone

Blackstone

Brigadier
China accused Britain of interfering in its internal affairs, and lodged "solemn protests" against it. Is London on its way back into Beijing's diplomatic freezer? Kind of odd Britain would strain relations so soon after repairing the Dali Lama tiff.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Beijing (AFP) - China on Wednesday accused London of interfering in its internal affairs after British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg met two leading Hong Kong pro-democracy activists urging greater freedoms from Beijing.

China "lodged solemn protests" with Britain over Tuesday's meetings with Martin Lee, founder of Hong Kong's opposition Democratic Party, and Anson Chan, the former number two in the city's government, the official Xinhua news agency reported.

"What Britain has done is interference in China's internal affairs. China strongly opposes it," said Beijing's foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei.

"Hong Kong's affairs fall within China's internal affairs. China firmly opposes any interference in Hong Kong affairs by any country under whatever pretext," said Hong.

Discontent in the former British colony, which was handed back to China in 1997, is at its highest level in years, notably over Beijing's insistence that it vet candidates before the vote for the city's next leader in 2017.

Under the "one country, two systems" deal at the time of the handover, the semi-autonomous city has guaranteed liberties not seen on the Chinese mainland, including freedom of speech and the right to protest.

But concerns are growing that these freedoms are being eroded.

A string of attacks on media workers has raised fears for press freedom, while Beijing published a "white paper" last month on Hong Kong's future that was widely seen as a warning to the city not to overstep its bounds.

Chan and Lee appeared before a British parliamentary committee on Wednesday, urging London not to turn a blind eye to "attacks" on freedoms in its former colony.

The outspoken campaigners told the Foreign Affairs Committee that London had been failing in its responsibility towards democracy in Hong Kong.

"It is vital that the British government does not turn a blind eye to current developments in Hong Kong," Chan told the committee members.

The pair heavily criticised a British parliamentary report earlier this month in which then-British foreign secretary William Hague said the city's unique constitutional framework has worked well and that there was no "perfect model" for electoral reform.

Hong Kong's current leader Leung Chun-ying was chosen by a pro-Beijing committee.

An unofficial referendum on how the next leader should be chosen drew a massive turnout of almost 800,000 people last month, angering Beijing.

It was followed by a huge pro-democracy march on July 1 which organisers said was the biggest protest since the 1997 handover.
Click to expand...
 
Equation

Equation

Lieutenant General
Blackstone said:
Most reasonable people would say China doesn't have universal suffrage, and most reasonable people would say US does.
Click to expand...

Yeah but has universal suffrage resolved any or all of the major domestic and economic problems that so many of the democratic countries are facing so far? Does that mean universal suffrage is the final end game for all? Most reasonable people would say that whatever China is doing to move 500 million out of poverty the line is working without universal suffrage.
 
Equation

Equation

Lieutenant General
Blackstone said:
China accused Britain of interfering in its internal affairs, and lodged "solemn protests" against it. Is London on its way back into Beijing's diplomatic freezer? Kind of odd Britain would strain relations so soon after repairing the Dali Lama tiff.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...

I wonder how the British would feel if China would just start to talk to one of the pro secession party leader of Scotland in the up coming referendum vote?
 
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
The British don't believe in universal suffrage since they never gave democracy to Hong Kong. Even the US back in the early part of the Cold War tried to convince the British to establish democracy as a counter to the dictatorship on the Mainland but the British chose to be dictators themselves. What does it say when the British were in control of Hong Kong, they didn't believe the people of Hong Kong deserved democracy yet only supported it when they couldn't convince Beijing to give them an extension on the treaty? Only then they decided to give Hong Kong a pseudo-democracy where they got to elect low level officials but never what makes a true democracy which is electing the leader. I remember watching on the news during the Hong Kong handover where they interviewed a man who when he was a child back in the sixties was sentenced to prison for a few years just because he and his brother wanted the truth to be taught in school about the Opium Wars and how Hong Kong was acquired from the British.

The British Empire wasn't built on the principles of democracy and human rights. It was in fact the complete opposite.
 
C

clone7803

New Member
​
Equation said:
I wonder how the British would feel if China would just start to talk to one of the pro secession party leader of Scotland in the up coming referendum vote?
Click to expand...

Mm,Scotland later,but Xi is talking about Malvinas right now.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

......
Last year, President Cristina and I met at the G20 St. Petersburg Summit. We had an in-depth exchange of views on increasing exchanges and cooperation between our two countries in all fields. The meeting is still vivid in my memory. China appreciates Argentina's commitment to the one-China principle and supports Argentina's claim on the sovereignty of the Malvinas.
 
M

marrob

Just Hatched
Registered Member
I think the biggest problem between China and Japan is lack of trust and understanding between people of both countries. I've been to Japan and talked to people. Many believe that as soon as China becomes so powerful that in case of a massive slaughter of Japanese people by PRC, US wouldn't take serious action, PRC would attack Japan to take revenge by destroying all that is Japanese and put an extinction on Japanese people, culture and sovereignty. People seriously think that every single one of them will be killed. They think that Korea and China will be on united front. They will dictate their superiority to the rest of Asia. EU and US will be safe. I even came to some people thinking that the Japanese government has to buy some land in remote places to be safe and make a new Japan and save it from the inevitable apocalypse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top