32 ms·

Yes. I was in particular refering to how these countries were ruled during their "growth period". The Chinese communist obviously don't have a democratic manda

by chvid 9y ago

Yes. I was in particular refering to how these countries were ruled during their "growth period". The Chinese communist obviously don't have a democratic mandate. But I think it would be a mistake to think that they don't have widespread popular support.

seanmcdirmid 9y ago
I don't think Mao's time could be considered very equivalent to today. There were a lot of dictators around after WW2, but many gave way to stable democracies, and those that didn't weren't prosperous. The problem with the CCP is that there is no real feedback loop. Their support is very fragile, and it would just take one recession to break it (they have no "lets throw the turkey's out" pressure valve).
- chvid 9y ago
  I think it is quite relevant. China is undergoing today what Japan went thru at Mao's time. My guess is that CCP is going to be popular and safe at the realm as long as growth is strong (so maybe we agree there).
  - seanmcdirmid 9y ago
    Growth isn't going to always be strong. Economic cycles are inevitable, even if they manage to kick the can of a correction down the road today, it will just come back worse in the future. People in China can only express their discontent by rioting (which happens in China, a lot). They have no other real way of communicating with officials, they can't even make sneaky jokes on the internet anymore to express their dissatisfaction. That alone is a very dangerous situation.
simonh 9y ago
I don’t think it’s really about individuals though. For every country with a long period of continuous successful rule, I can point you to a country with a long period of failed rule, such as Zimbabwe. The point is, no matter how great Hu is as an individual the danger is that granting him perpetual unquestioned power creates a precedent for a future monster to gain a similar lock on power. In a democracy, the voters can depose a monster peacefully. In the cureent Chinese system a monster would only get 2 terms. So the question is, are you prepared to accept Hu getting power to life, at the risk of a future person to get it being a Mugabe, or Gaddafi, or Amin? In a system with very few constraints on absolute power, is it really prudent in the long term to remove all of the remaining ones? Finally, how much can you trust the judgement of someone willing to impose that risk on his country for his own benefit?

by chvid 9y ago

seanmcdirmid 9y ago

I don't think Mao's time could be considered very equivalent to today. There were a lot of dictators around after WW2, but many gave way to stable democracies, and those that didn't weren't prosperous. The problem with the CCP is that there is no real feedback loop. Their support is very fragile, and it would just take one recession to break it (they have no "lets throw the turkey's out" pressure valve).

chvid 9y ago
I think it is quite relevant. China is undergoing today what Japan went thru at Mao's time. My guess is that CCP is going to be popular and safe at the realm as long as growth is strong (so maybe we agree there).
- seanmcdirmid 9y ago
  Growth isn't going to always be strong. Economic cycles are inevitable, even if they manage to kick the can of a correction down the road today, it will just come back worse in the future. People in China can only express their discontent by rioting (which happens in China, a lot). They have no other real way of communicating with officials, they can't even make sneaky jokes on the internet anymore to express their dissatisfaction. That alone is a very dangerous situation.

simonh 9y ago

I don’t think it’s really about individuals though. For every country with a long period of continuous successful rule, I can point you to a country with a long period of failed rule, such as Zimbabwe. The point is, no matter how great Hu is as an individual the danger is that granting him perpetual unquestioned power creates a precedent for a future monster to gain a similar lock on power. In a democracy, the voters can depose a monster peacefully. In the cureent Chinese system a monster would only get 2 terms. So the question is, are you prepared to accept Hu getting power to life, at the risk of a future person to get it being a Mugabe, or Gaddafi, or Amin? In a system with very few constraints on absolute power, is it really prudent in the long term to remove all of the remaining ones? Finally, how much can you trust the judgement of someone willing to impose that risk on his country for his own benefit?