3 ms·

> Maybe there's a third option aside from continue the state quo or convert fully into a democracy? Maybe the party can evolve into something that's more and mo

> Maybe there's a third option aside from continue the state quo or convert fully into a democracy? Maybe the party can evolve into something that's more and more benevolent to the people it governs? As one raised in a democracy (the UK) and thankful for that, taking a big step back I don't know if democracy is a more stable system than others. Or even better in terms of long-term results. I wonder if our democracy is mainly the result of cheap energy which removed the hardscrabble existence of our ancestors and will go when cheap energy finishes (if we don't pull our socks up). It's a contentious point, I'm not sure it's right, and I'm not punting for china. Just raising a question. NB my father was born and raised in a military country with an oppressive government. Hearing some stories from him is why I know how fortunate I am.

repolfx 7y ago
taking a big step back I don't know if democracy is a more stable system than others. Or even better in terms of long-term results I wonder what sort of education you've had? I can easily and quickly think of dictatorships that killed or enslaved millions of their own citizens - it's practically a requirement to be a really good dictatorship, it seems. It's a struggle to think of any democracies which do that. Perhaps the Israel/Palestine conflict has shades of that, perhaps internment of Japanese in America during WW2 counts a bit, but it ended pretty fast and was due to a war. I'm gonna take a wild guess that your current lack of faith in democracy is caused by Brexit. Am I right?
- tempguy9999 7y ago
  :) Please note the bit about my father. But yours a very good point! So what do I mean? It depends on the word 'better' and 'stable'. 'stable' is easily covered - chinese society has existed in a stable form for thousands of years. There's no evidence that any democracy has, because democracy as I know it is a relatively recent thing. Yeah, greeks and democracy, but they also kept slaves so no. 'better'? Well, what do you mean by that. I suppose on reflection I was equating that with stable, so if you accept that then I've already covered it, and feudalism/totalitarianism/authoritarianism is perhaps 'better'. A stable society at the cost of individual happiness. You define 'better' as equivalent to human rights, which I agree with, however my point is, be clear with your definitions of pivotal words! That's all. And I should have been so as well. To be clear I'm not advocating nor would wish to live under, such regimes. (and the brexit shite is a train wreck, and I am losing some faith in people who voted for brexit based on xenophobia and ignorance. I've met both sorts so I know they exist).
  - repolfx 7y ago
    Well, how do you see that China has been stable? In the 20th century it's been conquered in an invasion, then went through a communist revolution and fought a civil war that split itself in two. The governments have been replaced repeatedly. It has such severe racial and civil unrest in its western regions the PRC built huge concentration camps and 'disappeared' millions of people into them as the only way to keep the peace. That doesn't sound very stable to me! Compare that to Britain which has had continuous revolution-free government for hundreds of years, has not split, has had no civil wars for centuries and doesn't disappear its own citizens. It looks pretty stable in comparison. I think maybe your view of China is coloured by PRC propaganda. They love to claim thousands of years of history, that the PRC is the source of all stability and harmony in China, etc. But a cold reading of history makes it look a bit different. I voted for Brexit, because the best countries are universally the most democratic countries. That's how I guessed your poor view of democracy might be related to it. We can say these views are stereotypes, but I met a lot of Brexit voters who just didn't like the EU institutions or the way they treat the country, and none (so far) that didn't like immigrants. I'm sure such people do exist, they just don't seem to be prevalent in the circles I move in. Unfortunately I have met a lot of Remain voters who seem unfortunately keen on dictatorship - I guess that's why Leave arguments about democracy are only ever met with irrelevant counterarguments like "racism! xenophobia!". The lack of democracy in the EU is one of the things that appeals to them about it!
    - tempguy9999 7y ago
      > Well, how do you see that China has been stable? Hard to say. China's society has been around since after the unification, 221BC (post-waring-states, the qin dynasty). It may have gone back further, to the shang dynasty (~1500 BC) but that was probably a period of conflict throughout. But does conflict in itself negate continuity of society? But a) my knowledge of chinese history is minimal, and b) most important, how do you measure a society. The UK of now is different from the UK of 1980, how does one measure the continuation of a society? By culture? The Shang dynasty oracle bones have script that may be the precursor of chinese writing. Han period statuary is very reminiscent of modern chinese stuff. Britain was likely pre-literate before the romans arrived (50BC IIRC) and the art was very different then, such as it was. I don't know, how should we measure this? I mention art and writing as a proxy for culture as a proxy for society, but what should it be? We can't debate without agreeing basic terms. > In the 20th century it's been conquered in an invasion I think you mean the opium wars. I mention this in another post here. But they survived as a culture (arguably). "went through a communist revolution" - ditto survived (I might argue). > PRC built huge concentration camps and 'disappeared' millions of people into them as Yesss, I mention this in another post here. That is one way to have stability albeit an horrific one. Compared to this, the UK was invaded repeatedly within the last 1000 years, the language was changed, the genetics were changed, the art changed... but what is a culture/society? These things? Other? Tell me. > I think maybe your view of China is coloured by PRC propaganda No. Please my other posts here. And stability and harmony are a matter of definition. I am sure my and your vision of it is something far nicer than china's crushing 'pacification' but unless we define things, we're spinning our wheels. Also this thread is not about brexit and in this context I'm not willing to discuss it. I don't know why you're bringing it up.
vorpalhex 7y ago
Democracy will never be as stable as a regime or dictator, but it can also survive a lot more chaos and instability while still protecting the rights of its people. A stable system does not mean a robust one. A tea cup on a counter is stable, but easily broken. A spinning top is not very stable but can survive most falls.
- halter73 7y ago
  > Democracy will never be as stable as a regime or dictator Why never? While I'm not arguing that democracies are inherently super stable (that's empirically false), I don't think that democracies are inherently less stable than dictatorships. I would think an system that peacefully transitions power with the consent of the governed on a regular basis would typically be more stable than a system where the transition of power is generally a once in a lifetime event dependent on whomever holds the most power in government during the transition. I can understand the argument that transitioning power is less stable than maintaining existing power structures, but transitioning power is inevitable even if it's to an heir.
- whatshisface 7y ago
  Dictatorships aren't stable, dictatorship is stable. Dictatorships involve bloody power strugges that ruin the country and kill people. Dictatorship usually remains, though, because the replacement government is usually another dictatorship - ensuring that when it in turn falls, even more people will die.

repolfx 7y ago

taking a big step back I don't know if democracy is a more stable system than others. Or even better in terms of long-term results I wonder what sort of education you've had? I can easily and quickly think of dictatorships that killed or enslaved millions of their own citizens - it's practically a requirement to be a really good dictatorship, it seems. It's a struggle to think of any democracies which do that. Perhaps the Israel/Palestine conflict has shades of that, perhaps internment of Japanese in America during WW2 counts a bit, but it ended pretty fast and was due to a war. I'm gonna take a wild guess that your current lack of faith in democracy is caused by Brexit. Am I right?

tempguy9999 7y ago
:) Please note the bit about my father. But yours a very good point! So what do I mean? It depends on the word 'better' and 'stable'. 'stable' is easily covered - chinese society has existed in a stable form for thousands of years. There's no evidence that any democracy has, because democracy as I know it is a relatively recent thing. Yeah, greeks and democracy, but they also kept slaves so no. 'better'? Well, what do you mean by that. I suppose on reflection I was equating that with stable, so if you accept that then I've already covered it, and feudalism/totalitarianism/authoritarianism is perhaps 'better'. A stable society at the cost of individual happiness. You define 'better' as equivalent to human rights, which I agree with, however my point is, be clear with your definitions of pivotal words! That's all. And I should have been so as well. To be clear I'm not advocating nor would wish to live under, such regimes. (and the brexit shite is a train wreck, and I am losing some faith in people who voted for brexit based on xenophobia and ignorance. I've met both sorts so I know they exist).
- repolfx 7y ago
  Well, how do you see that China has been stable? In the 20th century it's been conquered in an invasion, then went through a communist revolution and fought a civil war that split itself in two. The governments have been replaced repeatedly. It has such severe racial and civil unrest in its western regions the PRC built huge concentration camps and 'disappeared' millions of people into them as the only way to keep the peace. That doesn't sound very stable to me! Compare that to Britain which has had continuous revolution-free government for hundreds of years, has not split, has had no civil wars for centuries and doesn't disappear its own citizens. It looks pretty stable in comparison. I think maybe your view of China is coloured by PRC propaganda. They love to claim thousands of years of history, that the PRC is the source of all stability and harmony in China, etc. But a cold reading of history makes it look a bit different. I voted for Brexit, because the best countries are universally the most democratic countries. That's how I guessed your poor view of democracy might be related to it. We can say these views are stereotypes, but I met a lot of Brexit voters who just didn't like the EU institutions or the way they treat the country, and none (so far) that didn't like immigrants. I'm sure such people do exist, they just don't seem to be prevalent in the circles I move in. Unfortunately I have met a lot of Remain voters who seem unfortunately keen on dictatorship - I guess that's why Leave arguments about democracy are only ever met with irrelevant counterarguments like "racism! xenophobia!". The lack of democracy in the EU is one of the things that appeals to them about it!
  - tempguy9999 7y ago
    > Well, how do you see that China has been stable? Hard to say. China's society has been around since after the unification, 221BC (post-waring-states, the qin dynasty). It may have gone back further, to the shang dynasty (~1500 BC) but that was probably a period of conflict throughout. But does conflict in itself negate continuity of society? But a) my knowledge of chinese history is minimal, and b) most important, how do you measure a society. The UK of now is different from the UK of 1980, how does one measure the continuation of a society? By culture? The Shang dynasty oracle bones have script that may be the precursor of chinese writing. Han period statuary is very reminiscent of modern chinese stuff. Britain was likely pre-literate before the romans arrived (50BC IIRC) and the art was very different then, such as it was. I don't know, how should we measure this? I mention art and writing as a proxy for culture as a proxy for society, but what should it be? We can't debate without agreeing basic terms. > In the 20th century it's been conquered in an invasion I think you mean the opium wars. I mention this in another post here. But they survived as a culture (arguably). "went through a communist revolution" - ditto survived (I might argue). > PRC built huge concentration camps and 'disappeared' millions of people into them as Yesss, I mention this in another post here. That is one way to have stability albeit an horrific one. Compared to this, the UK was invaded repeatedly within the last 1000 years, the language was changed, the genetics were changed, the art changed... but what is a culture/society? These things? Other? Tell me. > I think maybe your view of China is coloured by PRC propaganda No. Please my other posts here. And stability and harmony are a matter of definition. I am sure my and your vision of it is something far nicer than china's crushing 'pacification' but unless we define things, we're spinning our wheels. Also this thread is not about brexit and in this context I'm not willing to discuss it. I don't know why you're bringing it up.

vorpalhex 7y ago

Democracy will never be as stable as a regime or dictator, but it can also survive a lot more chaos and instability while still protecting the rights of its people. A stable system does not mean a robust one. A tea cup on a counter is stable, but easily broken. A spinning top is not very stable but can survive most falls.

halter73 7y ago
> Democracy will never be as stable as a regime or dictator Why never? While I'm not arguing that democracies are inherently super stable (that's empirically false), I don't think that democracies are inherently less stable than dictatorships. I would think an system that peacefully transitions power with the consent of the governed on a regular basis would typically be more stable than a system where the transition of power is generally a once in a lifetime event dependent on whomever holds the most power in government during the transition. I can understand the argument that transitioning power is less stable than maintaining existing power structures, but transitioning power is inevitable even if it's to an heir.
whatshisface 7y ago
Dictatorships aren't stable, dictatorship is stable. Dictatorships involve bloody power strugges that ruin the country and kill people. Dictatorship usually remains, though, because the replacement government is usually another dictatorship - ensuring that when it in turn falls, even more people will die.