By continuing you agree to eChinacities's Privacy Policy .
Sign up with Google
Sign up with Facebook
Q: Are the Chinese so much less free for not living within the superficial sham of western 'democracy'?
Ok, i'm going to get chewed out on this one, and i'm not a 'west hating commie', i'm actually very ill-informed on matters of politics indeeed; I just don't have much faith in the democratic process, and as much as I enjoy seeing Obama, or whichever political leader it's fashionable to satirize on Saturday Night Live this week, being impersonated by some two-bit comediane in an afro, I really don't see the luxury of such a freedom adding up to much more than some guy in a tin-foil hat carrying a bull-horn, trying to compete with the corporate owned media in terms of having 'a voice'.
Was tempted to post this on another account, but that would be laaame. So here's my butt........chew it out, I welcome the education.
In a lot of ways, the people here are a lot more 'free'. But that is only because of the lack of enforcement of existing laws. And you, as a foreigner, are given much more freedoms than the locals are.
The thing is, that here we have a false veneer of freedom, but that veneer covers a core that is very deep, very corrupt and very dark. And one day, it will all collapse in on itself. When it does, it won't be pretty.
In the west, the veneer of freedom is a bit thicker and it covers a whole lot less corruption.
Basically, what I am trying to say is don't mistake 'freedom' with 'no one really cares'.
stan118:
my chinese mate told me that, ofcorse people care but nobody says anything about the freedom we get, for 1 reason, china wants the westerners to come and ofcorse they dont want the westerners to be scared about going to china, just as long as no stupid AH pushes his luck and has to be used as an example
don't confuse FREEDOM with CHAOS. Because sincerely i think China has some kind of CHAOS/ANARCHY going on. Freedom, maybe it's better but still not there. Having said that, i also agree that in the west it is a sham...
I'm sorry, but just because the US has a broken democracy right now doesn't mean the rest of us do. You are aware that the US isn't the only nation that chooses its government, right?
How about this, if it's so great here, renounce your US citizenship for a Chinese one and stay.
As well, there is a slough of people you elected aside from the president whose choices affect your life even more, city council for one. In China you don`t elect your local leaders and they are the most corrupt ones. In the West they are the ones held most accountable by voters.
mArtiAn:
Ok, city councils, that's a good point. Don't know where you got the idea that I thought China was so much better though, i'm just saying I don't find it so much worse.
lokethebloke:
Who has the real power, the men in suits (bankers et al) who have recently stolen more money from us than the monetary cost of two world wars, or our so called democratically elected puppets who work for them?
nevermind:
Hey, Loke. those bankers are guys who took advantage of the system. You are not prevented from doing the same...just lazy.
I'm so sick of people whinging about these things then expecting OTHER people to put in the work for them to change things. The political infrastructure is there. Now, get to work.
lokethebloke:
Did you read what you've just posted? Are you saying that what those sociopaths did is acceptable?
nevermind:
It is not acceptable by any means. My point is that instead of going "aww shucks" and blaming democracy, you could help try to hold accountable those who have preverted the system. If you did do that you would see the system is not broken, just sick. Luckily the laws of most western democracies pave the way for a cure for the illness, but too many would rather piss and moan about the illness rather than employ the cure.
lokethebloke:
We're supposed to have a legal system to deal with theft. Is that system sick too?
I have voted in every election since I was 18, all I got was Thatcher and Blair. Probably the two worst prime ministers we've ever had. Well maybe not, this current one leaves a lot to be desired, so much for freedom.
nevermind:
Again, this is you complaining about your choices, that doesn't mean the system of democracy is the problem.
I don't agree that they're more free, but I could argue that they are just as free.
Representative democracy throughout the world, but especially in USA and most of Europe, is a sham, a total utter, corrupt sham. You get to pick from two parties, (both in the UK, USA, France, and Germany and several others) who have policies that are remarkably similar. Who selects the candidates and who selects the policies? It certainly isn't the populace, but some behind the scenes uber wealthy people, and quite likely they are just a front for some other hidden people. We, the people are just machines to manufacture money for these 'grey suits', we are no more free than the pistons in the engine of your car are free we are just told we get to push them when in reality they are pushing us.
China is no better, but at least they aren't living under the sham of a false democracy.
P.S. As an example take the UK's membership of the EU, according to official polls some 80 - 95% of the electorate want a referendum on continued membership and some 76% want the UK to leave the EU, but neither of the parties who have a realistic chance of forming a government are willing to offer that referendum and are certainly not willing to leave the EU, the PM even said he wasn't willing to put such a question up for a referendum as it was 'too important'. So much for democracy in the UK then.
nevermind:
cept, unlike China you can start a party if you don't like the choice and legally be elected. But yeah... what a sham!
Hugh.G.Rection:
You just don't get it do you?
You can start 10 million parties if you want but unless you have the backing of those grey suits you have less than ZERO chance of getting into power! THAT isn't democracy and if you cannot see that you are as blinded by pro-USA propaganda as those you accuse of the same who back China.
Both systems are equally unaccountable, and neither can claim any kind of superiority, that is my point.
nevermind:
No, YOU just don't get it. There are plenty of democracies in the world in which under represented people have successfully started their own parties and made a presence in government. Your incredibly unoriginal idea that government is somehow control by a bunch of guys in suitsand untouchable by anyone who isn't one of them is ludicrous.
Again, it starts at your city council and goes up. All these people are accountable. You sound like a whiner who simply doesn't like the fact their personal views aren't reflected in government. Grow up.
If you don't like government work to change it. You legally can. Also, I am Canadian, not American. You must be as evidenced by your supposition the state of the US democratic system is the state of all of ours
Hugh.G.Rection:
Ok name one country in Europe or N. America (as if you read my post those are the areas I mentioned) where that has happened in the last 20 years?
Go on? What's that I'm about to hear? Silence or BS?
nevermind:
Canada. Just last election the extreme left wing party made massive gains and is now the political opposition whilst the more centrist Liberal party that has ruled Canada for most of its history is the third option and the government is the right wing con party.
Before the Con majority government Canada went through years of a minority government meaning the three opposition parties combined outweigh the ruling party's voting power, so at any time they can join forces and topple the government.
The minority government originally came in when the Liberals (who had a minority government of their own at the time) were caught in a massive scandal, so the opposition parties overthrew them and an election was called.
Let's see that happen in China. Enjoy your dictatorship.
lokethebloke:
China will change, hopefully slowly, and let's hope that they don't copy the mistakes that we've made in the so called western democracies.
Like allowing the secret bankers to control everythingnevermind:
If you don't want banker to control everything all you need to do is get involved. Don't blame an entire system because you're too lazy to use it.
crimochina:
hughG account said name a country where that happened.
nevermind gave a canada specific example no response from the hughG but he uses the loke account to change the subject.
loke account also stated that he voted since he was 18 and all he got was thatcher and blair (2 of the 3 well known uk prime minsters in china) and then he says this current one is not too good (you don't know your prime ministers name is david cameron? i guess you didn't take the time to google it) many chinese do not know who the current uk prime minister is. but a brit should know.
mattyyyyyya i must hand it to you this new re-incarnation was well thought out
mArtiAn:
You know what Crimo. you've been at it so long with this wumao conspiracy that I think you've even gotten ME convinced. Do you know, last week I actually had to ask one of my students who the British Prime Minister is. Honestly. It would have been embarrassing if I cared.
Hugh.G.Rection:
Coc, for once try reading the post, the whole post and not cherry picking small parts that you think may support your position, that shows very poor debating skills. The reason I didn't respond to Nevermind's reply was that it was such a poor example as to support MY position NOT his, therefore by not responding I was merely underlining how poor his position was / is.
Nevermind said 'change government' I challenged him to give a single example of this in Europe or N. America over the last 20 years. His reply was that a small left wing party had increased it's vote share and so one of the major parties had changed their policies a little. That is NOT changing government, that is being subsumed by the corporate grey suits. Changing government would be getting into power in their own righti.e. a majority. Because all that happened in Canada was the main parties SAID they would change even amended a few small parts of their manifesto, and they carried on as normal. Net result? No change to government. That is as good an example anyone could give as to how democracy in N America or Europe doesn't change a single thing, UNLESS that change is backed by the mega corporations that actually rule these 'democracies'.
Now, why is it you and Nevermind always 100% agree, heck you both even appear to have the same prejudices and hatreds, to say nothing of a remarkably similar posting style. You know, if I was as paranoid as you I would make some outrageous suggestions, but I'm not, and I don't care how many 'characters' you've got because, you're just not that important racists and bigots never are.
Now, mArtiAn never said China was equal or as good as or anything like that, he just said words to the effect that the Chinese people are just as screwed as the 'western democracies' in that we are both totally unrepresented. A position I understand and to a degree support.
Oh and btw, to the poster who claimed a degree in political science, a degree in anything means nothing unless you put those skills into effect, just saying you have it isn't impressive, using those skills and insights in the discussion could be.
What a croc. Free is relative and situational.
You have drank the Chinese Kool-Aid for far too long.
I may be a liberal in my ideology (at least by western standards) but there is a 1000% difference between the wild west corruption in China and the west.
I have a degree in political science and international relations from a western US University even though I am Canadian.
I have a love/hate relationship with the US but.................there is no freakin comparison with REAL freedom in the west and the make believe freedom in China.
nevermind:
These "wah democracy is broken" types are often the least informed.
mArtiAn:
Haha, it's not a croc, it's a question. I'm just not convinced that western democracy as we know it is so much more advantageous than whatever the hell it is they have here. I don't see the voice of the people making a whole lot of difference in either. For example before war broke out in Iraq there was anti-war marching in London and various polls showed that a staggering 80% of the population were against having any involvement in the war. But what difference did it make? Hugh makes a similar point about the UK's membership of the EU. In truth he might as well have been speaking in Greek for all I understood of it, but the point comes across about how little power there is in the voice of the people.
Haha, and I haven't been drinking Chinese kool-aid either, thank you, i'm not sold on China in any way, shape or form. I've said it before and i'll say it again, I have no trust for any government, anywhere. Just asking a question, simple as that.
nevermind:
What difference did it make? Blair lost power. The people were not happy with his decision to go to Iraq and the Labour party was outsed. There' s democracy for you.
lokethebloke:
Blair didn't loose power, he handed it over to a less than adequate fellow manipulator, very democratic, who then lost the next election.
thedude:
mArtiAn...people may not like the decisions their elected governments make but at least they can openly display their opposition to those decisions. In democratic countries you vote for the party or person who you believe will act or vote in your interests. If people are too stupid and vote for Bush or Blair then they have to live with the consequences of their decision and endure the fallout if it turns out very bad (like Bush). At least they had the choice to vote for whom ever they wanted.
mArtiAn:
Did they have the choice though? The candidates generally seem to be so similar they could be related. I remember when Tony Blair got in someone pointed out his name was an anagram of Tory Plan B. As for Bush, I don't see the hand of democracy in all those years of power being shared by two members of the same family, ending in what was popularly considered to be a rigged election, I see corruption in the system.
Anyway, I knew I was going to get chewed on this, I was just getting bored with asking people what Chinese meal best went with Liquan.
thedude:
Yes but let me finish by quoting Al Gore during his concession speach in 2000 after the Supreme Court ruling handing W. the presidency. "I strongly disagree with the decision....but I accept it." The voters decided the court ruling by electing Reagan and Bush Sr....stupid is as stupid does...but at least they had the choice.
mArtiAn:
Sure, but a choice between cat shit and dog shit is no choice at all.
What 'sham'?
People are amazingly free in the west, and also aware of our countries' problems. Our opportunities back home are great.
I think most Chinese people don't even realize how much freedom we can enjoy in the west, it is hard for them to truly and completely fathom. Many of them are still happy with the freedoms that they have, so we should be thankful everyday.
What a load of crap.
I've said it before. I would NEVER change my Aussie citizenship for Chinese citizenship. I don't think any sane person would (I'm not convinced everyone on the board is sane, though).
haha, I think just the fact that I have to think twice about exactly what I post should tell you the answer.
As XPat said, you are confusing freedom with lack of enforcement for petty crimes. China is a great place if you like ignoring red lights and copyright laws.
I think the best way to judge freedom would be to judge the way information is distributed to the public. I'll say that no country is perfect, but you tell me, which country has a better informed populace?
mArtiAn:
I agree with you wholeheartedly on your first point, freedom of speech as we know it in the west may be worthless but at least we don't have to fear exercising it.
I wouldn't say i'm confusing China's relative lawlessness with freedom, that wasn't my point at all. My point is about the power that people have to make change. I don't see it amounting to a hill of beans in the west, any more than it does here.
As for people in the west being better informed, I know they get more access to the truth about the world around them but again, what good is it? Ultimately the truth is bought and sold on the evening news. That's how it seems to me.
What exactly do you want here? For people to list the benefits of they western theory of government? How about stability, for starters. Tin pot dictatorships rise and fall with the waxing and waning of the moon, but western democracies very rarely backslide into anarchy or authoritarianism. The western system can even tolerate negative economic growth without fear of its civil infrastructure crumbling into dust. Compare that to a country that must maintain economic growth that exceeds 8% or risk widespread civil disorder. Or what about a functioning court system and rule of law? In the west, prosecutors watch police, judges watch prosecutors, and a tiered court systems monitors itself. Here, and in many other authoritarian countries, those matters are handled by a central committee and misconduct is dealt with rarely. Or an independent press that understands that it has a responsibility to inform rather than simply push an agenda. I mean it. Compare a set of articles written by the AP to a group written in China. The ones written by the Associated Press have a clear line between news and opinion while ones written for China Daily do not.
mArtiAn:
Yeh, i'm not convinced about a free press, in the west, as i'm sure it is in the east, it's all owned by a small group of people, right? As for tin-pot leaders, I don't think you can describe the leaders of China in such a way. I don't understand economics but if you've got money in your back pocket does it really matter what your rule of governence is? The law system seems to be a strong argument.
nevermind:
I have worked for 3 major medi outlets and never once was told to report or not to report a story because of some mythical order from the top. That's a fairy tale hippies tell ech other.
lokethebloke:
So from what you say Nevermind it seems that dear Mr Murdoch has no say whatsoever about what is spewed by his responsible and tolerant media empire. Which has the freedom to say whatever it likes because it can afford to be sued.
mattsm84:
About the free press, it depends on your definition of small. If small is several thousand majority share holders and several million minority share holders spread out over hundreds of companies across Europe, Oceania, and the Americas then yes, its a small group of people. But if by small you mean the one guy who chairs the Central Propaganda Department (and yes that is its name, they put it on their letter head) then I'm not sure that we're talking about the same thing. For a one thing that one guy has a much easier time suppressing stories that make him and his peers on the central committee look bad than those majority and minority share holders because the companies that they own a share of are all in competition with each other for viewers and readers. Let me give you a practical example, if a mine were to collapse in a western country and a particular media outlet were to decide not to cover the story, say its parent company owned the mine, then that paper or news network would lose readers to media outlets that were covering the story. Since both that media company and its parent company have a responsibility to their share holders to turn the largest profit possible, all media outlets are all but assured to cover the story, However, if their is a monopoly on media, and its mandate is to maintain stability rather than inform then the odds that that story will go unreported are much higher. To say that the western system and the Chinese system are the same is a false equivalency.
About economics, I'd encourage you to read up on the subject before making blanket declarations. Western countries often make economic choices that don't benefit the wealthiest class of people. In fact, its hardwired into any country that practices Keynesian economics. Look at the US. When its housing bubble burst and its banking industry collapsed, the US government succumbed to public pressure to print more currency and use inflation to combat unemployment even as it put a cap on interest rates. This worked against the interests of the very wealthy as it made the money they had worth less than it was before. The people, and government by extension, put those wealthy individuals in a situation where they had to either take on a great deal risk by making investments in a bear market, or sit idly by and watch their wealth became devalued.
Also, tin pot dictators is an apt descriptor for China's leaders. That they happen to be bureaucrats rather than members of a military junta or religious organization doesn't change the fact that operate without a public mandate or institutional checks on their power.
mattsm84:
Okay, then let me try to put it in terms that are a little bit more simple. First, on economics, the jist of my post was that a country, even the US, can't really be said to be run by a class of wealthy elites because it often makes choices that work against the interests of those wealthy elites. I pointed out that when the US's housing market crashed and banks failed in 2008 the US government began to increase the amount of money in circulation by giving a great deal of it directly to people that didn't make a lot of money, like police officers and construction workers, in the form of jobs. This meant that each individual dollar was worth a little bit less. Obviously, if you had a lot of money, this policy was going to hurt you because you could lose a great deal of wealth. At the same time, the government also put a limit on how much interest banks could charge when lending money. That cut into the banker's profits because it cost less to get a loan. If the US government had been owned lock stock and barrel by group of wealthy individuals, then the it would never have enacted those policies. That public pressure, and the result of the 2008 election, caused the government to enact those policies in response to an economic recession shows that elections and politicians can impact every day people's lives in a positive way.
On the free press.I pointed out that its run by a much larger group of people, whom are often working against each other rather than with each other, than the media here in China, which is run by the chairman of the Central Propaganda Department, which is a part of the Chinese government. To that end, a company that's in the west can't afford to not report a story that makes it look bad because they'd loose to much money, while the Central Propaganda Department is free to suppress stories that it make it or the government look bad because they have a monopoly and there is no other news source that will pick up its market shares.
It's money that determines what type of editorials that a news source runs. When Fox or Sky air a TV show or print an editorial that makes an argument for a specific point of view it does so because its trying to appeal to a certain group of people that make up the bulk of its audience, not because Rubert Murdoch also happens to hold that point of view. And the same is true of his competitors. Which is why when taken as a whole western media can, and does, provide an opportunity for any political point of view under the sun to have to a publication so long as it has enough readers to keep it in business.
mArtiAn:
Ok, well your argument about wealthy elites having to make decisions that harmed them as proof that it's the voice of the people every day, hip hip hooray, just doesn't work for me. Any government that wishes to survive more than a few years has to bend to the will of the people at times or break. It doesn't matter where you are, if the people get pissed off enough, they'll show who's boss. The rest is a balancing act.
As for the media truly being free in the west, i'd like to believe you're right. Still not sure I do, but i'd like to.
mattsm84:
What you said is true. But democratic elections assure that it happens far more often far less violently.
mArtiAn:
Well in that case, I guess it's officially official (for what it's worth); having the vote has (still) got my vote.
free to have a second child : 7 month preg woman forcibly aborted (and free to make your story known to the world: the family was ran out of town)
free to critic your govt: talk about the corruption of the construction of schools which led to the deaths of many children, jailed for "tax evasion"
free to sue anyone for anything based on 0 proof and win: china has that down
free to be informed of what is going on in the world: the great fire wall
free to walk past a dieing child on the street: china wins this one if i walked past a dieing child on the street the dumb govt would arrest me
free to chose your own major: nope the school (govt) does that for you
free to have a childood: nope because of an efficient school system students must study long hours in school , study many nights with private tutors, pay to study at training centers.
free to pollute the hell out of the environment: china wns again
free to get sick from the pollution and be denied medical treatment because you don't exist
free to get hit by a car and die in the street because the people around you are giggling and taking photos on their iphones (china is free from the materialism of the west)
but the one freedom that few chinese truly get to enjoy is to get the hell out of china
oh and by the way you keep claiming to be a brit but your references come from usa (saturday night live) much of british tv is not known outside of brit only to the people who actually lived in brit
mArtiAn:
China's enforcement of a one child policy has probably saved them from massive harm. A child being aborted at seven months is abominable. I don't know the particular story you're referencing about schools and tax evasion, but this is a sign of economic hardship as far as I can see. People cut corners in such situations. It's ugly, it causes problems, but it happens. Being able to complain to or critic your government is a good thing, I just don't see dramatic or meaningful change as a result of this freedom in the west. The child who was dying in the street was ignored because people are children and put themselves first, always. There are people capable of using such a situation for a financial advantage, and people, being stupid children, are afraid of this. This is a situation born of economic inequality, not a country's governence. I have no idea about student's inability to choose their own major. If this is chosen by the schools I would agree with you that this is an injustice. Also the current study system is harsh; I do not intend to have my son have to go through it, but it is a country in a global system of competitiion. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. Pollution is a major problem in China. Is this about governence or economic competition? Either way i'm against it but I still don't feel it settles the argument. As for Chinese wishing to leave China, I have no idea. Maybe they don't want everyone to leave. Maybe people don't want them to come. I don't know. I still prefer western democracy to whatever it is China is stuck with, but I also think that either side of the fence, we're stuck with something that smells of fish.
And yeh, i'm Chinese. My name is BIGLONGWANG:)
lokethebloke:
Can you think of any other countries where these sort of freedoms occur?
All above made good points, but would like to add the difficulties they have to move around. Both in changing their residency to other towns and how its almost impossible to travel abroad without a boatload of available funds
Okay. Hmmmm. I think I notice a little bit of ass left to chew on over there in the corner.
Now, back to your original point. I would have to concede the point to the west, however illusionary it may seem, and the reason is, the wheels of change turn slowly, but they do turn. As people take to the streets, write op-ed pieces, talk to their neighbors and politicians (and as Nevermind pointed out) on the local level, there is change taking place. Most of the time, it is in the form of a new traffic light or stop sign at a busy intersection crossing, but it can and does happen on a national level regarding perceived injustices and the correction of social issues. The mechanics are in place to affect change, and people who are knowledgeable about those processes can use them to change things, as the old maxim "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" comes into play.
My wife told me yesterday about a bridge which collapsed around the Harbin area, and upon examination, it was found that substandard building material (some type of plastic) was used as "filler," but...lo and behold, the government has lost the records of which company did what on the bridge. In the U.S. at least, the government wouldn't have to supply the records, because some reporter or private "watchdog" group would find out and bring the whole thing out into the open. Is the western press "free?" Maybe not totally, but it is a far cry over state controlled media.
Now, just for the fact that I can speak out against the government has to be taken into account. Will they listen? Probably not, but I do have the option to make myself a peaceable nescience by forming together with like minded individuals to affect change in product safety, consumer advocacy, and a host of other issues, at the very least raising public awareness about things. And it does happen.
Age of country really has nothing to do with it. What the government allows ultimately decides. Change is forbidden in China unless it comes from the government. In the west, government usually will not change unless people demand it.
No system is perfect, but being a realistic optimist, if I needed change in something, I'd rather voice my opinion in the west than in China.
mArtiAn:
Jeez, I was expecting to get my arse kicked with this, but for the most part all i've got is 'stop signs' and 'parking metres'. So is that it? Local government is party to the people in a democratic system, and we can say a bunch of shit without getting fucked up? Ok, it's good enough for me, but really, is that it?
One fella offered the argument that our law system is far better. That sounded inviting and worthy of a vote. Didn't help much after 9/11 though.
lokethebloke:
Democracy and freedom are alive and well, and living in your heart, everywhere else they exist as just propaganda. Far too much and far too many to blame for it's demise. I must say that the so called war on terror doesn't help.
If China changes slowly and picks wisely then perhaps there is hope for us all. If not, corporations and governments will restrict all our freedoms even more.
ps We do have one freedom in the UK that some consider to be important - we do not have compulsory identity cards.
MissA:
"our law system ... after 9-11 though"... aren't you meant to be English? You ought to be quoting the London terrorist attacks, not the New York ones.
mArtiAn:
Sure Missa, 9/11, 7/7, 7/11, all good examples of the law system failing the people. The first two because neither received a thorough investigation. The last one because their sandwiches are crap and they just get away with it AGAIN and AGAIN..
I'm not into politics, but I know that at least here at home, on a local level, change is totally possible. There are county and township meetings where you can go to voice your opinion. I've seen that mentioned on the news. A lot of normal people put all the blame on the president, but it's not like he makes the decisions alone. Occupy Wall Street was stupid. However, it's a sign of how unhappy people are on a national level. If only they'd had a purpose, a specific thing they wanted to change, maybe they would have succeeded. Instead, they were aimless, and didn't really change anything. The point is, would that have been allowed in China? Considering what happened the last time people in China tried to actively protest, I would think not.
Vote for the Monster Raving Looney Party, they keep politics honest !!!! And they encourage real change. They've been a legitimate political party in the UK since the 70s.
lokethebloke:
Not a joke, way back in the 70s they advocated the compulsory use of seat belts in cars. They've also had quite a few other ideas that have now become law. They have always been seen as a joke but in reality they're just taking the piss out of the system but they are very serious about their manifesto/ Oh the bit about keeping politics honest - sorry about that, I misspoke.
is anyone still fooled by these wumaos? they are not self hating expats becoz they only know usa as the west. they know nothing about the uk except general info . everything they say is laced with ccp propaganda "all countries have the same problems as china"
lokethebloke:
Still can't get used to the fact that there are a number of us Brits who are happy to question your rather bigoted, paranoid, hostile bullying. Believe me, we DO exist and we will continue to question your motives.
mArtiAn:
When did I claim to be a self-hating Brit? I love Britain; its fish and chips, its Benny Hill, its Eiffel Tower:)
lokethebloke:
mArtiAn, Are you getting confused in your old age, last time I looked the Eiffel Tower was in France. Are you confusing it with Blackpool tower? What about Monty Python?
mArtiAn:
Just playing, I was kind of hoping Crimo would jump on that.
You always know when Coc has lost the argument or is incapable of putting forward a cogent point, his paranoia screams of WUMAO come out.
mattsm84:
But they didn't lose the argument. They successfully pointed out a handful of false equivalencies, and then pointed out that that is what they had done. And, honestly, it is a little odd to have somebody claim to be British then bitch about a preceived lack or reduction of person liberty in the US as if it was something that he himself had experienced. It's sort of a thirteenth bell.
Fred Armisen is far from a 'two-bit comedian in an afro-wig' and might be one of the best SNL players in decades.
Very easy to be cynical and scoff at your democracy. If you were to lose it you would likely be the very first outraged, bitter and willing to fight and maybe die to get it back.
As for corporate-owned media. They just get 1 vote each. Same as you or I get 1 vote each.
Now, if too many people are so stupid they vote according to what 'MSNBC' advocates or what CBS pundits gush about Obama or for that matter because sparkly 10-million dollar donations from Hollywood millionaires goes to Obama (or anyone else) then guess what?
Actually democracy will work. It will work perfectly and the people, ultimately, will get exactly the government they deserve. They WILL get exactly what they asked for and the benefits/consequences. For example: governments made up of slick car attractive salesman who bend to Hollywood donors/Bill Gates/Environmental Groups/Pharmacy Tycoons or whatever else.
You get the dumb government that will reflect too many dumb people who do what 'television says'. Or corporations said.
And of course there is this question to anyone who scoffs at democracy: Did you vote in your federal election? Did you vote in your state/provincial elections? Did you attend your local council meetings (or just stay up to date),
and,
Here is maybe the best question: Did you go take your ideas, complaints and criticisms, rally supporters, represent people and participate, run for office or volunteer for any government positions?
If the answers were no, no, no and no then guess who is to blame for 'corporate control' and phony slick TV candidates? YOU ARE. YOU ARE THE ONE TO BLAME AND SHAME! It really IS your fault.
lokethebloke:
" Actually democracy will work. It will work perfectly and the people, ultimately, will get exactly the government they deserve. They WILL get exactly what they asked for and the benefits/consequences. For example: governments made up of slick car attractive salesman who bend to Hollywood donors/Bill Gates/Environmental Groups/Pharmacy Tycoons or whatever else. You get the dumb government that will reflect too many dumb people who do what 'television says'. Or corporations said" .
I couldn't agree with you more. There is a majority of stupid people who are easily manipulated and placated by the 'powers that be' and obviously that will result in a government controlled by the 'powers that be'. Democracy then becomes a sham, the same as Communism is a sham, both being controlled by an unelected bunch of dictators who are only in it for themselves,
triplets (matty) i like how you glance over the main points. in democratic govt the govt reflects the choices of the people. if the people vote based on their religious beliefs, abortion, fear of homosexuality etc. you will have the problems what we have in america (why can't you give specific details about the uk) If you have an intelligent open minded voting public then you have a good functioning democracy (norway, sweden, swiss, germany etc)
ccp propaganda 101: use the usa's problems as examples of flawed democracy. and china is the exact same as other countries but in different ways. (sham democracy vs sham commie )
in a democracy the people can change the govt without resorting to a bloody revolution. in china the people can not even discuss what the govt is doing wrong so therefore you can't even begin to change it.
democracy: govt is a reflection of the people (good and bad) usa has a broken govt because we have a moronic voting public. democracy is actually working.
you 3 claim to be brits. do you feel more free in china now that you have to pay for your own healthcare? (especially since you 3 claim to be older gentlemen)
and when you talked about snl spoofs of the president you goofed, because that right does not exist in all democracies. can you guess which country(
does not allow spoofing of their political leaders?
lokethebloke:
Hello Crimo,
Unlike you, I have read carefully what you have written here and I agree with most of what you say. Some of what you say I don't understand, I put that down to the difference between my language and yours. For example, spoofing. Can I suggest that you go to the beginning of this particular answer and read carefully and slowly what I and my fellow countrymen have written. I'm sure that some of our banter is beyond you, you only need to ask and I'll do my best to explain.
You'll be pleased to know that I'm able bring all my free medication with me, and I'm sure that as China progresses they will establish a similar health care system as ours. China is in the fortunate position of development by being able to 'cherry pick' what suits their needs. Let's hope they make the right choices and take their time. Evolution, not revolution.
Some, not many, aspects of sham Communism work as do some in a sham democracy. I just hope that in time clever people will devise a system that takes into account the needs of all the people, not just the few.
lokethebloke:
Dude, you seem to be confused. I certainly am. I'm always happy to acknowledge a decent argument that is not full of hostility and hate. I'm sure that my fellow countrymen feel the same way.
mArtiAn:
The Dude
Jesus man, I over-estimated you, you're just as daft as this bloke Crimo or Dimbo or whatever his name is. You actually think 'these personalities' crossing (whatever that means) means we're one person, don't you? And coming from two people who are happy to believe a billion people (the Chinese) share one personality (though you yourself are not quite so guilty of this ignorance), i'd have thought the idea that three Brits might share a few ideas themselves wouldn't be such a stretch. You're fucking embarrassing yourself climbing on board that train, Dude.
mArtiAn:
You've got issues? I'd be wary of that paranoia train then, old Crimo's been on it a while I think, and that boy has REALLLY got issues. Next stop Arkham. ALL ABOARD!
Is it just me, or has Martian now changed the text of this question, so as to change the meaning.
MissA:
It originally read (if I recall) "aren't the Chinese so much freer' instead of the current wording. It changes the meaning substantially. The when you add in his 'I expect to be chewed out" comments over what is now a much less sh!t-stirring question, this whole question has my bullsh!t meter ticking over.
mArtiAn:
You are absolutely my dear, I adore you, and I assure you I made no such changes. Firstly I would never dream of saying the Chinese are much freer under their current system of government, it would be preposterous. I certainly lean strongly towards a democratic system, I was just asking whether we in the west are truly represented in the democratic process of government, or as I believe, are given the vote as an empty gesture to pacify us in the face of a system that is rigged.
I put in the words about getting my 'arse chewed' right at the beginning as well, the reason being that I am actually quite the illiterate in my understanding of politics, and an easy target for anyone truly in the know. And my arse is still pretty raw from the experience. Still got the right to ask though, right?
Got no problem with you Missa. No insult is meant in calling you dear. Just me being cheeky. Also my skeptical views about western democracy don't reach as far as your shores. You're Australian, right? As someone rightly pointed out, my negative views are mainly born from my observations of America. Not too impressed with things back home in England either. Bottom line though, i'm just trying to stir up some interesting conversation. We're none of us changing the world on this site.
Peace:)
mattsm84:
No, it did change. Read the first few comments. Most of them say out right, as if answering a direct question, that no, Chinese people are not freer than those in the west. You can't realistically expect people not to question your motives when you act the way that you've been behaving.
mArtiAn:
Haha, i've calmed down now. I don't like being called a liar.
I mentioned Sparky, my imaginary rabbit, because I literally had no answer for you. You can talk me round in circles, sir. Your points on the free press and economics were just beyond me. Like miles, and I don't mind admitting it. I like to believe that the free press is just that, but i'm skeptical. Very skeptical. Economics I know 'nothing' about but I do believe the monetary system to be the problem of all problems in this world.
Anyway, hope future discussion with you can be conducted in a more civil manner, I don't like lowering myself to base insult and aggression. Much prefer a shared respect and a friendly conversation. Not going to apologize for insulting you just yet though, you did after all call me a liar.
Peace.
mArtiAn:
And Missa; 'Mod Cat, any in-put?' Are you serious? Why don't you stand up and shout, "Miss, mArtiAn was using the f-word?"
I take it all back, I do NOT adore you, you are NOT my 'dear', and I am NOT sharing my chocolate milk with you anymore, you smell like big-jobs.
MissA:
Dear God. This is an internet breakdown worthy of number guy, or your idea of humour? English humour is usually dry and somewhat witty....
I don't care who swears or even who swears at me; I swear like an Australian so there's no judgement. The 'mod-cat... input' was in reference to my original question right up at the top of this thread.
The rest of the stuff here, I'll deal with when I have time, tomorrow.
mArtiAn:
Ohhhh, I see. Well that's far preferable to being a tattle-tail. I wish the cat in the tie would clear up such disputes, I hate to be thought of a liar. Well in that case, I take it back, I no longer think you smell of big-jobs. You are bathed in the elegant aroma of lavender and roses.........dear. 
crimochina:
yes the question was changed. at first i thought sth was wrong with me. which is why martian (gaohao, loke, hughg mattya) reacted the way he did. busted!
mArtiAn:
OK, I'M GOING TO TRY AND SETTLE THIS BY CALLING ON THE FIRST PERSON WHO POSTED: EXPATJOHN. I AM CONFIDENT HE WILL REMEMBER CORRECTLY AND PUT PAID TO YOUR MORONIC ACCUSATIONS. JOHN, PLEASE, IN YOUR OWN WORDS, HAS THIS POST BEEN CHANGED SINCE YOU ADDED THE FIRST ANSWER? DID IT ORIGINALLY SAY: AREN'T THE CHINESE SO MUCH FREER FOR NOT LIVING WITHIN THE SUPERFICIAL SHAM OF WESTERN 'DEMOCRACY'? OR HAS IT ALWAYS SAID ' ARE THE CHINESE SO MUCH LESS FREE.....?' TO MY ACCUSERS, PLEASE WATCH THIS SPACE. (ALSO JOHN, IF YOU CAN REMEMBER WHETHER THE LINE ABOUT ME EXPECTING TO GET MY ARSE CHEWED WAS THERE OR NOT ORIGINALLY IT WOULD BE APPRECIATED, BUT IT'S NOT SO IMPORTANT). ONCE AGAIN, WATCH THIS SPACE. THANK YOU.
Xpat.John:
Seriously? You want ME to remember the exact words of the original post? I can't remember what I had for breakfast, and I am eating that right now.
In any case, from reading the version of the question that IS and the version that may/may not have changed, they seem almost identical. Except MissA's version does more aggressive. But the overall meaning is the same.
I DO (by some small miracle) remember that the text under the question is the same. At least as far as I can recall.
And in all honesty, this isn't a one-in-three/three-in-one (for those of you who don't get the reference, google 'church schism') type of deal. Now if you all don't mind I am going back to whatever it is I am having for breakfast.
mArtiAn:
Well that surprises me, i'd have thought XpatJohn would have seen how much different those two questions were and pointed out clearly how different his answer would have been had it originally been Missa's version. Aren't the Chinese 'much freer' would have been a stupid question to ask. It would have been an impossibly stupid question to ask. But if you want to believe that was my original question, you are free to. It is a testament to the level of paranoia that seems to exist on this site that four of you actually do. Utter insanity. So much easier just to learn to read well.
ignorance is bliss, but with more and more students traveling abroad and coming back to tell their stories, ignorance of the government want be so bliss. lets hope its gradual an not an avalanch
Well, this thread certainly has been entertaining. As I've little else to do, I just read the whole thing from top to bottom!
Here's the deal: Pick where ya wanna live, and then live there. If you feel more free in China, have at it. If you want a western country, go for it. Superficial or not, at least, coming from a western country, I have a choice (one, which, btw, I made and am currently experiencing). The Chinese people are not so privileged, because they gave all their choices over to the government in 1949, believing that this entity would watch over them. Even though this is not the reality anymore in many parts of China, it still is the "law of the land."
Here is an interesting exercise, one with I did when I first arrived in China. If you want to explore the issue more, read these three documents:
The American Bill of Rights: http://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/bill-of-rights/
American Constitution: http://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/constitution/
PRC Constitution: http://english.people.com.cn/constitution/constitution.html
At the foundational level, these documents seek to define the human condition, and then to address what type of society is best for that condition. You can say that western democracy has turned into a "superficial sham" if you want, but it still works. In the American version, it works every four years. And yes, I have a voice, in the form of a ballot. You can argue about perception and stupidity and bad choices, and who "really" is pulling the strings, but all that is mere smoke and mirrors to detract from the main issue, and that is the chance to have a say in the overall workings of the system. How much I want to get involved is up to me. I have a choice to throw those bum politicians outta office if I want. The Chinese people have no choice. I have a choice to convince my fellow voters about what I think is important. The Chinese people have no choice. I have a choice to raise my voice in protest, whether in song, or a work of art, or a story, or handing out leaflets on the street corner about something that bothers me. The Chinese people have no choice.
Don't mistake liberty for economic expediency. Liberty demands responsibility, and responsibility demands sacrifice. China's current political system only demands allegiance, nothing more. There is no other option.
A representative republic a sham? I don't think so. It is the best system available to address "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." If someone doesn't want to believe that it works, that is their business, but that doesn't mean the system is broken.
Liberty isn't for everyone. Some prefer to be spoon fed. All one has to do is see how many people are sucking on the American governmental teat to realize that. Those folks would be better off in China.
mArtiAn:
I've lost interest in the original thread. Somewhat exhausted by it in fact. Whether I believe in one's right to free speech is almost self evident by the very nature of my question. My challenge was to the west, not to China. As tmestep8 suggested, the latter is potentially hazardous to one's health. Maybe i'm just mischievous.
I haven't lost faith in the democratic process of government, it is a worthy ideal, just lost confidence that 'the people' really have a voice that matters and creates meaningful change ANYWHERE anymore. Certainly support the right of the artist to say as much though; if my record collection was dependent on China's musical out-put to keep my mind twinkling, i'd have slit my wrists the first year I got here.
Gotta go change the bandages on my shredded buttocks now.
Peace.
giadrosich:
Well, see, M., I understand, in that you were addressing result instead of cause (I think), but ultimately, you have to take the cause to task, in that, if each country was populated by people who understood and utilized the process, the west would be a much better place, and China would have had their 2nd revolution years ago.
Here's the defining phrase, for me, from the American Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
Unalienable Rights. In other words, rights that come from outside of man that are mine just because of my birth. That, my friend, is freedom. What government doesn't grant, it cannot take away.
Peace to you, too. I'm off to Starbucks (gotta support the hometown boys and girls)! 
