By continuing you agree to eChinacities's Privacy Policy .
Sign up with Google
Sign up with Facebook
Q: What's do you think is wrong with China? IMO it's not the government
It pains me to even think about it for I have never been a supporter of any government back home or elsewhere, I have always defended the idea that people don't need a strong hand to guide them. But force is to admit that most of problems in China (and a plethora of problems there are) are not to be blamed on the CCP, at least not the highest instances and central organs or the Party in Beijing, local governments are a different story.
The multitude of problems in China come from the beliefs and behaviors of its people, a people that with all their traditions of wisdom behave today in the most atrocious, inhumane and despicable ways toward each others.
Chinese are not ready to fly on their own as individuals, most are still greedy peasants who need to be guided by a strong hand, was it the CCP or another leadership, a political, religious or imperial entity. And Chinese are certainly not ready for democracy. Imagine the chaos if every Hunan farmers (or other provinces) were granted the right to vote, and were allowed to protest or to go on strike.
Chinese need to be educated, to be prepared before gaining access to more freedom. Ever wondered why when you subscribe to satellite TV in coastal provinces most packages include CNN or the BBC, but not in most inner provinces? Simply because people tend to be more educated in those coastal provinces, they are allowed to see the rest of the world as it really is since the government knows that they won't go on strike thinking that the grass is greener in other countries.
The CCP is what it is, but it united China and without its strong hand this country would likely be much worse.
Once upon a time, China was a vibrant, open, creative civilization and the greatest nation of it's time. I'm speaking specifically of Tang Dynasty China, but other periods have approached it's greatness. These modern Chinese are the remnants of those people, so let's not downgrade Chinese people's moral and intellectual capabilities. And then the great "National Shame" came by the hand of foreign powers, starting at the end of the Qing Dynasty. This is where the huge problems started in my opinion. Never underestimate the power of face. Chinese psyche has never recovered from the Opium Wars.
I also see the modern day problem with China as education. The CCP's brand of educating is self-serving, designed specifically to keep them in power. To those who say the Chinese deserve this, I say no country's peoples deserve this.
andy74rc:
There's a quote from the philosopher Joseph de Maistre saying "Every nation gets the government it deserves".
andy74rc:
Sure not, but it's a general rule. See, the great quotes are the ones true no matter the context-age they've been created.
I can say the same about the Govt of my country. Admitting it, at least gives you the chance to do some introspection, first step for a change (if you can convince enough people to do the same).
xinyuren:
I wouldn't be so quick to conclude this about such a new nation as the PRC. That's like saying all children get the parents they deserve. You can't blame them for mistaking economic growth for good governance. But once that growth turns flat and they're left with the same massive problems, they will get a clue. Look at HK for example. Hong Kong experienced the difference and they aren't going back without a fight. What's the difference between mainland and HK? Education.
Shining_brow:
"What's the difference between mainland and HK?"
Ummm government? Influx of international investment? Contact with other cultures? At the very least, the vast majority of HKers are bi-lingual, if not quite multi-.
yes, I agree education is massively important - but for HK in particular, there are a few other factors. Perhaps Taiwan might be a slightly better comparison - less 'colonial' effect. And, shorter.
Really?
Spiderboenz:
The CCP is one of the worst things that has happened to China.
Imagine where China would be now if they hadn't ran all of the intellectuals out of the country during the Cultural Revolution? or if they hadn't destroyed the "4 olds"
China could ACTUALLY be considered a first world, developed country if the CCP had never come to power.
RachelDiD:
Do you really believe that, though? Do you really believe that Mao didn't just capitalize on already-inherent features of Chinese culture to make his little revolution happen? Hewas a horrible Chinese peasant, but the people basically just worked his will on themselves. Throwing their neighbors under the bus to pick through their belongings, using the Red Guard to settle their petty squabbles by having rivals beaten to death, and brainlessly turning on whoever was out of favor...Mao didn't invent any of that behavior. He didn't have the acumen. Like I said, he was just another stupid Chinese peasant who was about as effective as a leader as he was at anything else.
The Chinese love to blame, blame, blame and make excuses. It is what they do to avoid introspection. Perhaps if they stopped blaming the Japanese, foreigners, and,yes, Mao (vile though he was) for every shit thing that they do and take the personal responsibility to change their own behavior...this place wouldn't be such a wasteland.
Eorthisio:
How would it have been any better with the nationalists, the KMT was unable to get rid of the warlords and unite the country during its rule. When the CCP came to power they launched an "open war on warlords" and it was a matter or months until they were all dead or gone.
Don't even mention the Imperial Family, they allowed the warlords to become so powerful in the first place.
As Rachel said Chinese love to blame and complain all the time. "The air is so bad, it's the government's fault" says a tuhao before climbing into his gasoline hole of a SUV.
ScotsAlan:
Mao was a smart man really.
He started his purges in the 30's, and thousands died. The nationalist encirclement campaign that led to the long march only caused the long March because Mao had already purged most of the officers in the Army. Pretty much the same as with Stalin when Germany invaded Russia, Stalin had destroyed the army on his own before the war even started, with masses of luck too it has to be said.
Mao almost did not go on the Long March, he was well out of favour, he was only invited at the last minute.
That's where his smartness came in. He played the political game. Stupid he was not. He knew how to do it.
His luck? The German Braun, as a scapegoat, and Edgar Snow who provided fantastic propaganda.
He was far from stupid. He was very smart.
What was the official party judgement on him? Was it 7 fingers good, 3 fingers bad? Or was it 6 and 4?
1) CCP says "we have to be a strong hand for our people, as they can't guide themselves on their own". And with a strong hand they guide them, freeing people from being responsible of their own lives, responsibilities and choices.
2) People thinks "a strong hand guides me. Responsibilities are annoying, so ma fan... Why should I care of consequences ? If I want I take, if I want I do no wait, if I want I do not think of anything else. Strong hand will make things run around, not me."
1) triggers 2)
2) triggers 1)
5000 years ?
RiriRiri:
Alas the 5000 years claim.
Yeah sure there's only 3000 of those actually accounted for, but still the consistency check goes on wheels: society is exactly the same as it was back to Neanderthal. I mean, plus all the stuff brought around by Europeans, IE absolufuckintedly everything. Minus compasses, paper and ink (let's let them that, with a nice pat).
andy74rc:
Compass as instrument for orientation has not been invented by Chinese. They just discovered that needles fall oriented with the Earth magnetic field.
DrMonkey:
For the famous "5000 years", yeah, I know. The oldest remains of "cities" (by our modern standard, a small town), are about 5000 years old for Eastern Asia (Luoyang). By the same standard of historical continuity, then East Africa, Middle East (Aleppo) and Europe (Argos, Athens) can makes similar or better claims (because it's a pissing contest, obviously).
My personal opinion on the relationship between the Chinese people and the CCP? They deserve each other. A sociopathic, corrupt, arrogant government for a sociopathic, corrupt, and arrogant populace. The Koreans have democratically achieved the same thing (yes, I mean the ones south of the 38th parallel). most of the time when Chinese
DrMonkey:
Hum, South Korea until the 90's ranged from harsh dictature to mild dictature :)
I believe it is the fault of the CCP in one major area, education. The behaviours we see in this society have always been there but when Mao decided it was going to be a good idea to get rid of the educated classes and to let loose the red guard he did more damage to the country than he could imagine. Education is the one thing that can pull China up to the standard of a first world country, can you imagine where China would be if Mao had pushed a policy of education for all to the highest achievable level. The differences we would see now some fifty odd years down the road would be striking. It didn't happen that way of course Mao wanted power and the only way to get it was to appeal to the peasant masses. Once he got it the last thing he wanted was a population educated enough to see through the fraud he perpetuated. The CCP have carried on this policy of non-education for pretty much the same reasons. Yes the Chinese we see lack empathy, morals, politeness and behave in ways that we deem to be unacceptable, but when we look at the history of our own countries we have all seen similar situations. How do you change people, you educate them to enable them to see the advantages of modifying their behaviour. So yes I do blame the government for their short sightedness.
Once upon a time, China was a vibrant, open, creative civilization and the greatest nation of it's time. I'm speaking specifically of Tang Dynasty China, but other periods have approached it's greatness. These modern Chinese are the remnants of those people, so let's not downgrade Chinese people's moral and intellectual capabilities. And then the great "National Shame" came by the hand of foreign powers, starting at the end of the Qing Dynasty. This is where the huge problems started in my opinion. Never underestimate the power of face. Chinese psyche has never recovered from the Opium Wars.
I also see the modern day problem with China as education. The CCP's brand of educating is self-serving, designed specifically to keep them in power. To those who say the Chinese deserve this, I say no country's peoples deserve this.
andy74rc:
There's a quote from the philosopher Joseph de Maistre saying "Every nation gets the government it deserves".
andy74rc:
Sure not, but it's a general rule. See, the great quotes are the ones true no matter the context-age they've been created.
I can say the same about the Govt of my country. Admitting it, at least gives you the chance to do some introspection, first step for a change (if you can convince enough people to do the same).
xinyuren:
I wouldn't be so quick to conclude this about such a new nation as the PRC. That's like saying all children get the parents they deserve. You can't blame them for mistaking economic growth for good governance. But once that growth turns flat and they're left with the same massive problems, they will get a clue. Look at HK for example. Hong Kong experienced the difference and they aren't going back without a fight. What's the difference between mainland and HK? Education.
Shining_brow:
"What's the difference between mainland and HK?"
Ummm government? Influx of international investment? Contact with other cultures? At the very least, the vast majority of HKers are bi-lingual, if not quite multi-.
yes, I agree education is massively important - but for HK in particular, there are a few other factors. Perhaps Taiwan might be a slightly better comparison - less 'colonial' effect. And, shorter.
Yeah, Agreed... If it wasn't for the party this place would have been a real mess.
Why?
Well, try naming one country with a massive population and it still developed as well as China did? and No I don't think China has grown because of it's big population, take any 100 people around you and look at them for few days and then decide how many of them are really cunning and smart enough or even hardworking? I am sure the answer will be less than 15%... others are just sheep in the herd, only to follow orders...
I will say this again, try not to compare China with west as if yet, compare it with other developing country, It still managed to do extremely well.
Shining_brow:
Depends on your definition of 'massive'. If you want to try this for an argument, then you've only got 1 comparison - India. However, the Caste system and the significance of religion there make it extremely hard to compare. And then add in the British colonialisation (which, again, has to be taken in consideration of those 2 other effects... so might be truer to say that India was mostly affected by the British at the upper echelon, and made virtually no difference for the rest of the masses).
I disagree for the following reasons:
And who is doing their best to keep the Chinese population dumb and misinformed? This makes it easy for the CCP to focus the Chinese mind on external received "enemies" be it Japan, USA, South Korea or whoever instead of focusing on the real, internal problems like education and misinformation. Yes, it's true China consisted of uneducated greedy peasants in the 1920's and 1930's, but it's all the CCP and Mao's fault for keeping the population at that stage for so long. Not only that, but also exterminating any dissidents (i.e educated people) who could have posed a threat. Today, with an uneducated and misinformed population it's easy to play on peoples most basic instincts (to get rich is glorious!). So the greed and short sightedness you see in China is just made worse by the so called "agreement" where the government allows you to get rich of you don't rock the political boat.
The second reason was mentioned byDrMonkey. The people here aren't allowed, and thus have no experience in taking an interest in how their country/province/town is being ruled, so of course the people here don't give a shit about anyone but them selves, There is this feeling of not being able to influence the society around them in any meaningful way. This also goes back to education, people here aren't taught critical thinking skills, so that also makes it more difficult for people here to make good choices about their communities. And who controls the schools and the curriculums?
Finally, I'm a liberalist (not in the modern American "liberal" sense, mind you) I believe people in most cases know best themselves how to live their life. And here's the kicker, I also think it applies to China! The problem isn't so much the people themselves, but more the fact that they've been indoctrinated to follow this nihilistic "money above all, and fuck everything else" mindset. I'm not saying to overthrow the CCP and start with elections tomorrow, but this needs to be a slow, gradual process, a process which the CCP is not in the least willing to start.
I'm willing to bet both my nuts that in the end, the CCP will be China's undoing, even though it seems to be working ok for now.
What a difficult question.
So, if you don't mind, I wont answer " What is wrong...", I will try to suggest " Why is it different"
I agree with much of what gouxiong says. But certainly not all.
So, could it be religion? The developed world tends to bt Christian after all. But nope. That's not why there is a difference. The Phillipines and Latin America are mostly Christian, and there are issues in those places.
Is the difference due to Government? Yes of course. Government set the agenda. They say what is right and what is wrong.
I the difference due to culture? Yup. This face thing has a lot to answer for. It gets in the way of empathy and compassion.
Is the difference down to education? I don't think it's the biggest factor. My wife went through the education system, and she is not a card carrying party member.
Corruption is the big one. But not the biggest.
I think the biggest contributer to the difference between China and the west is lack of socialism.
If people are scared for their future, they become corrupt. They become hoarders, and they become selfish. With no safety net in place, people have to put themselves first, and to hell with anyone else.
In the west, there is a deal between the people and the Government. The Government says " Let us rule, pay us tax, and we will keep you safe. We will educate you. We will feed you if you are down and out, and we will care for you when you are old"
That does not happen here. Is it all Government? Well no, because the culture is anti tax. The culture is certainly not pro Government. As other have said, the Chinese Government has a deal with the people too. " Go get rich, but don't rock the boat".
This is what gets me about the whole thing. China's way of doing things is almost exactly what the Conservative and Republican politicians of the west want.
Of course, I am looking at China with western eyes. I have seen the benefits of socialism. Chinese have not, at least not on the same scale.
I think China will work it out. The Government need to work within the culture, a difficult job. I think they are doing an ok job of it.
So yeah, I would say the culture limits what Government can do.
To "improve" China, for the good of the people, I would say a 60/40 split. 60 % of the work needs to come from the people, 40% from Government.
Burak43:
Some interesting points, but I have to disagree that a lack of socialism is somehow the reason for China's problems. Corruption is possible due to a huge, opaque public sector, and the opportunism it creates. And despite the tax not being the highest there is still very little in terms of property and economic rights. Low or high tax, China ranks very low on The Heritage Foundation's Index of Economic Freedom.
While I'm not a conservative myself (see classically liberal above), I struggle to see much similarities between conservatives and the CCP.
What is interesting though, is that I'm a free market advocate myself, yet I have very little love for the CCP, or indeed the Chinese society.
ScotsAlan:
Ha ha. I will probably be deported for this.
Just had a thought.
Imagine a country as a passenger ship in the middle of the ocean, it has been holed and is sinking.
A Conservative/Republican ship would have a few luxurious lifeboats with all facilities for the rich. The poor would having nothing, they would drown. As the ship went down, the poor would storm the lifeboats.
A European socialist ship would have life preservers for all. Everyone on board would have contributed to the cost, the rich paying more, the poor paying very little. Everyone would survive. The rich would have lifeboats, the poor would have life vests.
A Chinese ship would have a mixture of lifeboats and life preservers. But not enough for everyone. There would be chaos and battles. Because why should the rich subsidize life preservers for the poor.
A communist ship of course could not sink. If it did..... "What ship?"
Ha ha...
Life preservers for all. That's my outlook on life 
ScotsAlan:
@Burak
I hate the way libertarian and liberal look so much the same. But they are poles apart.
Liberal is good. I am a bit more to the left.
Libertarian is Rand Paul country. Not a good place to go.
Big Government is ok. It just depends on what they are doing. If they are looking after the sick and poor, watching over the banks, and ensuring a free market is running smoothly and properly for the benefit of all, then that is good.
My point about corruption and the socialist safety net is easy for me to explain. When I was in the UK, I used to spend a lot of money at my job, placing orders for machines etc. I had no need to take bribes or kickbacks. My aim was to get the best machine for the best price. If I done my job well, the shareholders were happy. I paid high tax to Government, so if I got sick or lost my job, they would look after me.
If you get sick or lose your job in China, there is no help beyond your family or friends. So the temptation to take kickbacks is greater, the machines might not be so good, and the shareholders would not be happy.
Socialism benefits the free market. It benefits the rich. It is the difference between life and death for the poor.
dongbeiren:
Your life preserver analogy is quite interesting and generally spot on - to play devil's advocate the conservative/republican would likely argue that the poor had every chance to procure their own life vest before getting on the boat or when the boat was sinking but since they weren't responsible enough to do so, they will have to suffer the consequences and drown. The Ron Paul libertarians would demand that individuals take responsibility for their own lives rather than depending on government life boats - if you get on ship, bring your own damn life jacket! If you don't have one, stay where it's dry or learn to swim! The government also wouldn't provide the luxurious life boats to a few - actually that is more likely to happen in a country like China where the government can directly dole out favors to its own officials and well-connected people. That happens in any country where there are close relations between the public and private sectors creating conflicts of interest. In the libertarian world, the government wouldn't be providing boats to anyone but people who managed to build a fortune and have a large lifeboat all to themselves would be able to choose whether or not to let those folks who forgot/couldn't afford their life vests onto their boat or not. It would come down to the kindness of the man in the large life boat.
ScotsAlan:
The kindness off the man in the big lifeboat is key. We cant depend on his humanity, or lack of. We need to legislate to force him.
Free markets are fine. They just need to be legislated so the poor don't get poorer to pay for a fancier lifeboat.
gouxiong:
ScotsAlan,
I dare to say that your example reminds more the dream rather than reflecting reality.
Simple reason for it being that the resources are limited while the requirements are not.
That in case of EU results in increasing tax burden and when the states realize that with increased tax the total tax collection decreases (because the richer ones are 'optimizing' the taxes) so they go into the budget deficits.
Huge deficits are then quite a problem for many EU governments (not just Greece) and this problem is not solvable within the frame of current 'game rules'.
The 'rules' will have to be restructured.
Of course, the states may increase the taxes and strengthen the repressive apparatus. But how would you solve the problem in case the people earning money would simply leave the country? Or move their production elsewhere - in current EU it's enough to any other EU country.
Therefore there are huge movements in many EU countries against so called 'Polish plumber' calling basically for abolishing the free workforce circulation.
The natural next step would be re-establishing the borders followed by limiting of free goods circulation.
And that would be the end of Europe how we know it as individual states would not be competitive in the world economy.
Chinese system is in this sense much more competitive even though there is quite a long way in front of China.
Burak43:
@ScotsAlan
First of all, I'm not a libertarian, even though I share some views, I'm disagreeing on a fundamental level, I'm not a huge fan of Rand Paul or Ron Paul. This might seem like splitting hairs, but as you brought it up I felt the need to clear it up.
Now, back on topic
I don't agree with your assessment that more uncertainty will necessarily lead to more corruption. I haven't seen numbers on corruption, but in US crime has famously fallen independent of the economical situation. So when the economy was bad, crime still fell despite people being worse off. I wouldn't be surprised if this was also the case for corruption.
I also just can't see how socialism should be better for rich or for poor. Comparing similar countries with similar cultures the less socialist countries tend to have higher standard of living and be more wealthy. This is for me, the strongest pragmatic argument in favor of freer markets, as opposed to socialism. Not to mention USA in the late 1800's and early 1900's how many people were lifted out of poverty in the states during that time? And that was nearly a completely free market society at the time.
The strongest pragmatic argument the other way is perhaps the Nordic Model. Now, I grew up, and lived in Norway for over 20 years and I'm familiar with this system. What I saw were large inefficiencies in the public sector, worst roads in Europe (worse than in Albania a study found), long queues to get into hospitals or see specialized doctors, public school buildings falling apart and so on. Yes, of course Norway is much better than China, but for the level of wealth there, it shouldn't be like that.
Comparing the Norwegian public vs private sector has made me believe that given the chance, private actors could do these services (education, health, and so on) better and cheaper than the public sector. Also with the added benefit of removing inefficiencies in the economy, lifting real wages, and this would also help the poor. And for those who would still have "fallen off" I do think charity would be a better and more efficient way to help those in need. Nimble "on the ground" organizations who know the problems is better than an ivory skyscraper in Oslo full of grey bureaucrats. Would it work? Well people already do give to charity as is, and I remember a story from Chicago around 1912, where the yellow pages stopped adding new charitable organizations in their phone book because there were too many.
This has gone slightly off topic, but thank you for engaging me in this debate, I haven't had a good debate for a long time.
Shining_brow:
Most European countries, and Aus and NZ are at least partly socialist. We have free or subsidised education until at least year 12, free medical/heatlh care for the majority of illnesses (certainly emergency care), and other welfare packages - such as unemployment benefits, sickness benefits, etc. We also have insurances which can cover these things (or, in the case of education, private schools).
This, quite clearly, works!
There might be arguments due to size of landmass or population, but it is fairly obvious the system works - and excuses about said population are simply that - excuses!
As for the sinking boat analogy - some arguments clearly don't fit this analogy - the first being, the poor people didn't choose to get onto this boat (with or without a life jacket, etc). Therefore, I think, this argument about free market economies, and "they should have bought one before they got on" doesn't work in the slightest! They are on... and they didn't have a choice! Now, what do they do given they don't have that choice? Well, some did well, and 'made something' of themselves. But not everyone is actually born equal - there are differences physical and mental, and there are opportunities that some get that others don't. Education clearly makes a significant difference - so those that get the education have a huge step up on those who don't! Obviously, just having that education isn't the only difference, and being well-educated comes well after being well-fed, well-clothed, and well-housed. Smart dying people aren't of any use to anyone - while healthy ignorant people are.
Tax - we must remember what tax is about... it's not about 'giving to the government' - it's about paying for the use of services and products that we use, and the government decides where and how the priorities are allocated within a limited budget. Some things are clear cut - we need to pay for roads to be built, for the power-stations, for the phone cabling, for the sewerage... and to keep using them. And to have them maintained and updated as required. Just because every cent sent to tax doesn't directly improve your life is no reason to stop paying that tax. (which is basically the argument used by the free-market people - "what's my personal direct benefit?").
A government is a reflection of the people that it governs to a significant extent. When the difference between the two becomes too great, the government will inevitably fall. Considering who it has to govern, the party is actually doing a decent job. Does anyone seriously think democracy could thrive in mainland China? That would require people taking responsibility for their lives and having a sense of civic duty. When you have a group of people that is largely incapable of thinking independently and blindly follows tradition, democracy cannot flourish. Where will the sheep turn without their shepherd? Chaos. Democracy requires an educated population with a sense of responsibility to the society. Democracy requires a belief in equality (one person, one vote) and no, I'm not claiming that all democracies honor that principle but at least people believe in it to an extent. Above all else democracy requires people who actually want to have democracy. No, I feel better with the party keeping the sheep in line.
xinyuren:
I think the big counter-argument to your point is, is the dog wagging the tail or is the tail wagging the dog? I could say that the Chinese people were duped by their government and were led into a system that caused their future generations to be ignorant. That they were bred this way and are not the products of their own free will. I think that, given a clear mind and functioning brain, most people want to take responsibility of their own destiny. So which came first, the chicken or the egg?
ScotsAlan:
I agree with dong.
I will add. this may be argued about, the cultural revolution had to happen. It was, unfortunately done for the wrong reasons and in the wrong way.
My 2 cents, related to Gouxiong and DrM posts. China is about to undergo a major restructuring in its economy, shifting from an manufacturing to export driven one (let's call it with its name: Neo-mercantilism) to a more balanced economy where the service sector and the consumption become the major drivers of economic growth. Is a path that every developed country followed. Nothing new under the sun, it's the normal way the economic development works. Now, to do this, in my humble opinion, a good quality of education, welfare or (better) both are absolutely key factors for such a shift. For China's good sake, the sooner it will be understood, the faster the benefits. So far, I'm sitting, popcorn in hand. And Gouxiong, you have, I believe, a hard time saying China is different here, China is different there. Yes, somehow, but for quite a few factors, like it or not, we live in a globalized world and furthermore, there's no need to re-invent the wheel over and over again.
xinyuren:
I also have a big ole' bag of popcorn because China's education sector is not equipped to transform it's people from drones to thinkers. Are they going to find a different way to do it? I'm waiting on the sofa.
ScotsAlan:
Service sector is the wrong way to go. It only creates wealth by moving money from A to B and charging for it. Consumer society in China is an old story. It was always the plan. I saw a recent report about the balance of trade in China, China is nearing the cusp of exports equaling domestic comsumption ( don't quote me)
Consumption is good. Want to sell something? you need to make it. Manufacturing creates jobs. Jobs create wealth, and it cycles onto creating consumers.
Service sector just makes a few select rich. Namely, the bankers.
xinyuren:
That import / export report is a little misleading. They are approaching parity partly because of reduced export business in China, not because increased consumption of domestic products.
HK and mainland used to be one people were they not? Yet, right now, I bet no one would argue that the mainland is the better place to live (except probably gouxiong, haha). HK people are cleaner, respect the rule of law, have better manners (even if perhaps more arrogant), and less xenophobic. How did this vast void form in such a short timespan? Education and openness, two things that the CCP can't afford to let its people have. Yet they were once one people. Now they seem like different countries.
Tigers and flies.
I have a swarm of flies around me at the moment.
Or maybe they are mozzies. Too small to be on the radar.
Ha ha. No problem, they get a shit wage. Just trying to negotiate how much of my wage they want.
No point telling them I actually pay full tax..... I would lose face 
Although Chairman Mao hated America and other western nations, he did believe in democracy for China. He thought that it had to be gained through Communism. Communism would educate and prepare the people for democracy rule. I thought that was very interesting. Of course, those in power in the CCP would never think of giving up their power.
Besides that, I tend to agree with your assumptions. We are talking about a population of people that have spent so long behind the Great Wall from the world, that it is hard for them to change overnight. It will take several generations for them to catch up culturally and socially to the rest of the world. North Korea would have similar issues if they ever gained access to the open world. But, change is happening. And, it happens very slowly. The government is not helping much in preparing the people. I understand why. They are the product of the same society. So, they all learn and change together. Those in power learn and must pass it down to the masses. People complain about the pollution in China. Again, changes are being made. But, it will not happen in a blink of an eye. I remember America in the 1970's and 1980's. It takes time to change policies. But, it takes even longer to get people to conform to those changes. It took a river in America to catch fire and endless media reports of smog and sanitation issues in various cities to get people to change their minds about pollution and the environment. That change continues today in fact. So, while it is easy for us to bitch, moan and groan, about China's never-ending problems, they are changing. Patience is just needed for the changes to happen.
The devastation the Chinese education does is unfathomable. If you think about it... we could have lost more than a few Chinese Einsteins simply because the CCP deemed it self-serving to keep these types of people down or destroy their creativity through conforming to policy.
It is quite likely that if China pushed education, rather than serving up a dose of indoctrination... they would be far ahead of other countries in many technological advancements.
I do blame the government. It is they that steal the innovation of the people and instead insert a deep seeded hatred and dull cow-eye look in their people. Look what
happened with the islands dispute for example...
The government would actually run documentaries on how the islands belong to China and many Chinese went nuts... over some islands where nobody even lives... ridiculous.
Dumber and uncreative people are easier to control but fortunately... you can't control people forever. Freedom is far more desirable than money.
I change my answer.
The problem is the people. Not the Government.
Scots Alan and the other Panda Huggers are at it again...
Let us look at all the excuses
1: China has too many people
Again India has a democratic government. Oh granted India is a disaster in many ways, but a large population can have a democratic government. The USA has over 300,000,000 people, and has a democratic government. Also China is likely to experience population decline in the next century as educated women have fewer children. Chinese democracy would be different than Indian or American democracy, but it could happen.
2: We need to give China more time to change
This has been pointed out by various experts as the great lie. For ignoring the events of 1989, and encouraging trade with China, the west has been rewarded by a richer, more aggressive, less open, and paranoid regime, with Xi being a maoist! How is that progress?
3. Chinese people lack the organic capacity for democracy
Objection...see Taiwan
4. China has been too closed to the west
Objection...both Japan and South Korea were far more isolated and xenophobic than China. Both became democracies, again due to western (American) pressures
5. Chinese government is bad, but all governments all bad.
No. All governments do NOT restrict free movement and practice modern day serfdom (Hukou!), all governments do not spend more on domestic control than the military, only a half dozen countries block facebook and youtube, as well as dozens of news sites, only a handful of countries have no relations with the vatican, and I could go on.
6 The problem is the people not the government
Since the government educates the people, this is a cart-before-the-horse, the government is directly to blame for the quality of the Chinese people.
gouxiong:
I liked the end of your point 4.:
'You do not like it? We will force you to like it!'
Great approach! Certainly with long lasting effect and totally free of any negative emotions ...
Good luck with such an attitude pal!
ScotsAlan:
Panda huggers. Ha ha.
My political agenda is simple. It is my opinion that everyone is conditioned by propaganda. Everyone. And the more "free" you are, the more conditioned you actually are.
You don't listen to what I say, you listen to what you think I say. Your mind has been conditioned.
For example, you say I say there is too many people in China? Rubbish. I have never subscribed to this. I have always often stated this is a propaganda myth.
There is one particular point I want to pick up on, and I quote:
" 6 The problem is the people not the government"
I stand by this. Your point is very valid, that the people are the result of Government policy and education. I agree. The majority of citizens are the product of their education system.
But wait. Is this actually true?
Lets consider crime. There are criminals everywhere. The criminals in the UK had the same education as me, so why are they criminals and I am not? America has the best education system in the world, the best health care, the best everything. It also has the biggest prison population.
How can this be? If the populace is a result of Government policy, why is it almost 1% of Americans are in jail at any given time?
Why are these well educated, well fed and free (sic) citizens in jail? They have had the best of everything, but they still break the law.
But hey, of course China is different. A criminal in China is a criminal because of Government policy.
As I have said before, my opinion on things are based on personal evidence. If you look at my original post on this thread you will see I say that corruption in China is largely a result of the system, and that it is not the fault of the people.
Last night I changed my mind. Why? Because of evidence.
Last night was an expensive night for me. My daughter is due to go to kindergarten. All her documents are in order, the Government run Kindergarten is a few hundred yards from our apartment, her houko is in this village, but I still had to pay out a lot of money. And it might be money for nothing. Her place is not secured. I heard some parents are paying up to 40k to get their kids in.
Is that down to Government or people?
As I say, I work on evidence. And my evidence at the moment points to Chinese people being corrupt because of the culture, not because of Government.
Panda hugger? Me? Yeah right.
Hulk:
We have the best education in the world? Aww hell naw, you didn't just go there.
rasklnik:
Yes. I am aware that Mr ScotsAlan has never played the population card. I have simply decided to deal with all the common excuses for the CCP that I have heard or read in my five years here. My post is not a critique of your viewpoint (which is rather correct in this case, SHOCK!) but I singled you out as the leader of the PandaLovers. You see you are not a wu mao, nor an idiot, but you are not critical enough and always claiming a false equivalency, to wit, that since I think western democracy is superior to CCP rule, by intrinsic nature, I have been conditioned. I suppose you'd think Plato was brainwashed too.
-To point out flaws in a society is not difficult. Rather in China we live in a society where pointing out flaws can get you a prison sentence. I may not agree with a news source, but how many American journalists get arrested per year?
Shining_brow:
"But I do not think that in any country in the world people are in average noticeably worse or better than in any other country."
This is sarcasm - right???
Btw, yes, Plato was indoctrinated... look at his attitude towards women.
ScotsAlan:
I recall from somewhere that Plato also had sex with young boys.
gouxiong:
ScotsAlan, In ancient Greece homosexuality was common and in certain sense even encouraged. For instance in falangas - they believed that the lovers, protecting each other, fight the best. Therefore later own male homosexuality was sometimes referred as Greek love. Just different culture, different values. Whoever tries to apply current 'modern' Western criteria is simply wrong.
