4 ms·
The National People's Congress in China has more members per capita than the US House or Senate as well as more independents and minority party representation.
by xtian 6y ago
The National People's Congress in China has more members per capita than the US House or Senate as well as more independents and minority party representation.
The NPC has a higher percentage of women than the US Congress (exceeding the world average).
Ethnic minorities make up 8% of China's overall population, but they make up 14.7% of the seats of the NPC. They also make up 7.3% of the more than 90 million members of the Communist Party of China (which also consists of 27.2% women). Ethnic minorities make up 39% of the overall population of the US, but only 25% of the US Congress.
A study by the Harvard Kennedy School found 93.1% satisfaction with the central government in China in 2016. US Congress currently has a 29.3% approval rating, but has been hovering below 20% for most of the last decade.
The two viable US political parties are overwhelmingly funded by billionaires and large corporations. Those two parties decide the criteria for acceptance into the presidential debates which prevents minority parties from gaining national prominence. Billionaires and large corporations also own all the major media outlets and platforms, and they use that power to control narratives and deplatform inconvenient political figures and ideas.
Therefore China is more democratic than the US. See how easy that is?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- bb123 6y agoYou picked on the smallest point that I’d quoted, and then finished the argument with complete conjecture about the US (we were discussing the UK?). Have you actually read the source? Specifically the part about systematic extermination of minorities? I can’t help but feel people like you would have been defending the Nazi party like this in the run up to WWII.
- xtian 6y agoI'm from the US so that's what I'm qualified to speak about. It rates highly on this supposedly authoritative index so that's why I used it as an example. What I mentioned about the US is not conjecture. The funding of US political parties is public record. The Commission on Presidential Debates was created by the Democratic and Republican parties. The ownership of the major US media platforms is also public record, and they just unilaterally deplatflormed Donald Trump and QAnon groups. What's utter nonsense is saying the NPC "plays a minimal role in policymaking and the development of new laws" or that the CPC has a "multifaceted apparatus to control all aspects of religious activity." I guarantee I've looked into the claims of systemic extermination and genocide against China more seriously than you. I wouldn't be speaking positively about the Chinese government if I thought those claims held water.
- bb123 6y agoI notice from your comment history that you are the business of defending the CCP at every turn. I’m not sure that we could take your work for everything being a-okay with minorities in China.
- xtian 6y agoIs that an argument? I notice from your comment history that you defend the UK at every turn. Why is that more legitimate than someone from the middle of the US taking seriously his country’s history of foreign coups and war crimes and trying to find truth outside the bubble of Western propaganda? I want the US to have a government that fosters friendly international relationships of mutual benefit, that takes poverty alleviation seriously, that takes ecological preservation seriously. China is doing a better job than the US on all those fronts right now so for me they’re worth learning about.