China has lashed out at Germany after its foreign minister called Xi Jinping a “dictator” and summoned Berlin’s ambassador for a dressing down, in the latest flaring of tensions with a western democratic power over how the Chinese leader is described overseas.
I was not aware that term length was the method by which a dictatorship was determined. (Hint : It is not) In a democratic country, keep the people happy, stay in power. Is that how China works?
I could speak more on this but I will match your low effort and pause there.
The survey team found that compared to public opinion patterns in the U.S., in China there was very high satisfaction with the central government. In 2016, the last year the survey was conducted, 95.5 percent of respondents were either “relatively satisfied” or “highly satisfied” with Beijing. In contrast to these findings, Gallup reported in January of this year that their latest polling on U.S. citizen satisfaction with the American federal government revealed only 38 percent of respondents were satisfied with the federal government.
I could speak more on this but I will match your low effort and pause there.
I’d rather not read any more stupid comments from smug and uninformed liberals like you in my inbox, thanks for the favor.
Did you keep reading to the part about low level satisfaction with local government. And some thoughts on why. It’s more complicated than you summarise.
Did you keep reading to the part about low level satisfaction with local government.
I did, did you? Or are you just skimming the introductory article for something “negative” to comment on?
You’re painting a pretty disingenuous picture, the satisfaction levels for local government are lower than for the central government but they’re still pretty good:
Do you believe that 75% or more of Americans believe their local representatives are “Knowledgeable”, “Kind” or that they feel “Satisfied with [the] Eventual Outcome” of their decisions?
It’s more complicated than you summarise.
I didn’t summarize anything, I pasted a direct quote from the article you seem to not have read:
Let’s first recall the initial assertion, readers please keep it in mind, (Image asserting dictatorship among western politicians)
Let’s see what conversational traps the troll uses.
“Proves” China is happy. Let’s assume their proof is valid to save time. Pause, revisit initial point, is it related? Doesn’t seem to be. Alright let’s continue.
Asserts I am liberal? Odd, seems related to nothing. None of the topics seems attached to this assertion. Let’s continue.
End of post, so let’s revisit, has the responder provided anything of value on the topic (recalling that this is a topic that they initialized). Well, no.
2/10 troll. Mildly entertaining though. I’m glad they posted, its a good education for people to see common tactics used by time vampires. Have a nice day troll or trollbot.
The irony of calling me a troll while at the same time dismissing a study you haven’t read to attack my character. Please keep your word and stick to just one low effort reply here, I don’t think anyone needs to read you embarrass yourself any further.
You were called a liberal because of your support of liberal governments, making it related to the topic. The holier-than-thou tone of your response highlights your lack of education on the relevant topics. Seeing as you think no one else provided any value to the discussion and you knowingly chose to contribute nothing of your own (is coat-tail time vampire an established term?) Let’s try to salvage something out of this thread. Beyond the derisive tone of this first paragraph, everything beyond is provided as a measure toward engaging in a good-faith conversation.
Why were you called a liberal and why would a communist see this as a fault? To add some clarity before the quote, communists usually apply the term “liberal” to what people in the US refer to as “conservatives” and “liberals.” They are lumped together due to their mutual support of liberalism and neoliberalism. The following quote is from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Section 2.4. It does not fully answer the above question, but it will begin to give some context. Any additional clarification can be gained by reading further into Marxist theory.
My comments are simple, direct. I inject nothing and ask questions about statements. If this is offensive, it is inferred without being implied.
Let’s address your assertions and questions one-by-one without all the fluff.
A subjectively-observed attitude indicates lack of education.
What does time vampire mean.
You acknowledge an aggressive tone and suggest the next paragraph will contain a shift.
You provide a contextual quote.
My responses.
Disregard, I draw no connection between attitude and education so choose not to engage, defend, or otherwise.
I’ll admit, this is close to a joke/slang term. Colloquially, time vampire is someone who takes your time as a hobby. Related to “bullshit asymmetry” aka, the amount of effort required to debunk bullshit is always greater than the initial bullshit. Giving the bullshitter infinite ammo to destroy the time of a good faith responder. A vampire takes blood, a time vampire would take time. I am sure you can draw the connection from the above info.
No response required. Clear.
This is where the assumptions go wrong, I do not support neoliberalism. I support clarity of discussion. I responded because I found the initial comment to be misleading, unclear, and poorly framed. On liberalism I have no stance due to lack of education on this topic. Your quote is interesting, I’ll have to read more on this.
Most dictators haven’t gone by that term, preferring instead some other executive role like chairman, supreme leader, or president. If Xi doesn’t want to be called a dictator, maybe China should start holding open elections, see how popular the CCP really is.
Yeah, our elections suck. They should be more open and should be ranked choice. Likewise, the Electoral College is complete bullshit. Even still, Xi is a dictator and China is not a democracy. Multiple things can be true.
China is a democracy, the USA isn’t. Xi is the democratically elected leader of his country and enjoys massive popular support. Your past two presidents are hated by the peasantry. You have no understanding of the world because you live in what you think North Korea is like.
Your press is censored, your internet is censored, you have a one party state with no democracy and people die from preventable diseases daily. Homelessness and poverty are rampant. Child slavery and child poverty have skyrocketed under the current regime. America is a shithole, circling the drain and your pathetic racist shit in this thread just exemplifies how little you have to come back with.
No idea. I couldn’t even tell you that about my own country or the USA, you know that place that’s totally a democracy where they don’t count all the votes and keep the black people from voting with dirty tricks.
The general population does not vote for the presidency in China, the electors chosen by the CCP do. That is significantly less democratic than the US which is also not a very democratic country when it comes to the presidency.
Hate to break it to you but China is a dictatorship. They don't even pretend otherwise, the primacy of the Communist Party is literally part of their constitution.
Most forced elections haven’t gone by that term, preferring instead some other description like people’s elections, free elections, or secured elections. Made up words but you get the idea.
The CCP has higher approval rates than western governments and the vast majority of Chinese believe they are living in a democracy. This is confirmed by western studies; latest one I’ve seen was from Harvard.
If 95% of ford owners were satisfied with their black cars, vs 40% for another manufacturer that provides cars in multiple colors, then ford would be the better manufacturer.
Enough for them to believe that they live in a democracy, it seems (and I don’t say that sarcastically).
It’s not like people in liberal democracies have more influence. We can’t choose who runs, and each individual’s vote is negligible. I don’t know the specifics of China’s government, but I suspect they value being able to influence local policy and higher official elections via the Communist Party more than a direct vote on its leader – I would too, honestly.
don’t make conflations with the USA and other liberal democracies. There are plenty of transparent, effective democracies where popular votes matter massively, and saying because the USA is electorally broken that everywhere is only serves the narrative that true liberal democracy “isn’t possible” i.e., exactly what China and Russia suggest.
A fair bit, actually. China’s political system is basically a popularity system from bottom to top. At the lowest level, politicians only stay in power if their population is happy. This trickles up to the provincial level, where politicians again only stay in power if their population is happy. At a national level, the national leaders stay in power by building, essentially, large cabinets out of different provincial and regional leaders - thus, their entire position relies on keeping the provinces happy.
It’s not the perfect system, but Chinese citizens can fairly easily impact local and even provincial policy and, by extension, influence national policy (recently, by repealing the COVID lockdowns with mass protests).
The CCP isn’t an absolute monarchy or something. At the end of the day, it serves it’s people. The power of the Chinese economy is in its industrial capacity, after all, not in its wealth: the needs of the people need to be addressed to keep the country stable.
The SPD is known for being not left. He himself started out as stamocap, pretty much as far left as you could be in the SPD (now that’s Die Like territory), but that was his youth. Now he’s considered to belong to the right wing of the party but without clear association to any of the particular wings (there’s at least two large left and two large right ones in total). Or let me put it this way: At least he’s not a Seeheimer, the people who oversaw the turn of the SPD into New Labouresque bullshit and the dismantling of the welfare state, introduced a gigantic low-wage sector, etc. The left wing also doesn’t actively oppose him, though with the SPD you never know whether it’s the left wing simply lacking balls, again.
The only empire is the US empire and the way they talk about themselves as an empire, they’re proud of it too. Yell one-word feel-good slogans at them like “CHANGE”, “FREEDOM”, or “DEMOCRACY” and all the citizens shout and cheer because that’s what they’ve always been told to do.
Try sitting during the pledge, the singing of the national anthem, or insulting the military. The US empire will have none of that. Truly the land of the free.
Add comment