34 ms·

> That's just how it is. Each country gets to choose its policies. I mean, that's the fundamental point of being a country, isn't it? Yes, but that’s not what’

> That's just how it is. Each country gets to choose its policies. I mean, that's the fundamental point of being a country, isn't it? Yes, but that’s not what’s happening in China. The fundamental point of being a country is to serve the common good, and to protect the life and liberty of your citizens. In China the ruling party doesn’t care about any of those things. A policy such as this would be a lot less horrible if ‘the country’ actually chose their own rules and rulers instead of a small handful of permanent party appointees. 1.3(?) billion people who have no say in these policies or in those who make them should be a tragedy no matter how cynical you are.

mirimir 9y ago
That's a rather simplistic characterization of the Chinese political situation. Or at least, it seems so to me, to the extent that I know enough to have an opinion.
FooHentai 9y ago
>The fundamental point of being a country is to serve the common good, and to protect the life and liberty of your citizens. Important to recognize that this is your worldview, and one I agree with, but it is not the only view available! There are other motivations for government to maintain the existence of the state which they govern. For example, for some governments the motivation is to maintain the current lifestyle of them and those around them, at the expense of the populace.
skummetmaelk 9y ago
> The fundamental point of being a country is to serve the common good, and to protect the life and liberty of your citizens. China values the first more than the other two and so if it has to choose those will be compromised on. America used to value liberty over the common good, but that is slowly turning.
averagewall 9y ago
They did. China's communist party was chosen by popular support mid last century. The people wanted it, they fought for it, they got it. Why not respect their wishes? Do you also think it's a tragedy that most of the world can't vote for the US government? They're affected by it but have no say in it. Especially countries that get invaded - which never stops happening.
timthelion 9y ago
In China, there are elections and anyone can vote. The only restriction is that only party nominees are on the ballot. Is this really so different from the US, where in many states the only people on the ballot are party nominees?
- mirimir 9y ago
  Right. People used to criticize the former Soviet Union in the same way. And it's true that there are two major political parties in the US. However, in many states, candidates must declare for one or the other to get on ballots. Even candidates of long-established "third parties". Also, in living memory, no third-party candidate has won the Presidency. Or indeed, ever received substantial funding from monied interests. There are some third-party members in the House and Senate, but not very many. So yes, the distinction between China and the US is fuzzier than typically claimed. And in both, the asserted justification is limiting the field to candidates who are competent and experienced.

mirimir 9y ago

That's a rather simplistic characterization of the Chinese political situation. Or at least, it seems so to me, to the extent that I know enough to have an opinion.

FooHentai 9y ago

>The fundamental point of being a country is to serve the common good, and to protect the life and liberty of your citizens. Important to recognize that this is your worldview, and one I agree with, but it is not the only view available! There are other motivations for government to maintain the existence of the state which they govern. For example, for some governments the motivation is to maintain the current lifestyle of them and those around them, at the expense of the populace.

skummetmaelk 9y ago

> The fundamental point of being a country is to serve the common good, and to protect the life and liberty of your citizens. China values the first more than the other two and so if it has to choose those will be compromised on. America used to value liberty over the common good, but that is slowly turning.

averagewall 9y ago

They did. China's communist party was chosen by popular support mid last century. The people wanted it, they fought for it, they got it. Why not respect their wishes? Do you also think it's a tragedy that most of the world can't vote for the US government? They're affected by it but have no say in it. Especially countries that get invaded - which never stops happening.

timthelion 9y ago

In China, there are elections and anyone can vote. The only restriction is that only party nominees are on the ballot. Is this really so different from the US, where in many states the only people on the ballot are party nominees?

mirimir 9y ago
Right. People used to criticize the former Soviet Union in the same way. And it's true that there are two major political parties in the US. However, in many states, candidates must declare for one or the other to get on ballots. Even candidates of long-established "third parties". Also, in living memory, no third-party candidate has won the Presidency. Or indeed, ever received substantial funding from monied interests. There are some third-party members in the House and Senate, but not very many. So yes, the distinction between China and the US is fuzzier than typically claimed. And in both, the asserted justification is limiting the field to candidates who are competent and experienced.