4 ms·

> With your point wrt Taiwan you seem to be saying that if anti-war protests are suppressed then that is evidence that the country is a dictatorship. But the pr

> With your point wrt Taiwan you seem to be saying that if anti-war protests are suppressed then that is evidence that the country is a dictatorship. But the problem is that many countries — even western ones — suppresses dissent once they enter a war. Heck Germany is not even officially at war but anyone voicing public support for Russia can be legally reprimanded. I bring up Russia because it's the authoritarian government I'm most familiar with. An authoritarian government doesn't "reprimand" people when it needs consent for a given policy: it imprisons them or worse. You can see this happening in Russia today with anti-war protests, where dissenters are thrown into prison for years or even sent to the front. I believe similar things were happening to the protesters in HK when China took over. Are you saying people won't be imprisoned for protesting military action in Taiwan? I find that unlikely. If I lived in Germany, no part of me would fear imprisonment if I voiced support for Russia. (Though it's likely somebody would kick my ass.) > I really don't know why everybody obsesses about Xi's term limits as if that's some sinister sign. Why did he do it if not to consolidate power? > Observe the fact that the late Qing dynasty and the Republic of China were extremely weak, and look where that got us — poor, exploited. Authoritarian policies also got you the Great Chinese Famine, leading to tens of millions of lives pointlessly thrown away. Was anyone held accountable? The answer is no, because an authoritarian government's "strength" is also its weakness when fault lies with the strongman at the helm. (As an aside, Yang Jisheng is the author of perhaps the most comprehensive account of the famine, "Tombstone." Are there any universities in China teaching his work? Are his books even allowed to be published?)

FooBarWidget 4y ago
I understand you are familiar with Russia. But China is not Russia. You don't know China. By your reasoning ("Russia was X so China must also be X"), WW2 Germany (a democracy) was fascist therefore all other democracies must be fascist too. --- In Germany, displaying the letter "Z" in a way that is meant to show support for Russia can lead to up to 3 years in prison: https://www.rnd.de/politik/z-symbol-strafbar-bis-zu-drei-jahre-haft-fuer-billigung-des-russischen-angriffskriegs-moeglich-FM55B5UQS34T6FDEI5JE2OUVOM.html https://www.rnd.de/politik/z-symbol-strafbar-bis-zu-drei-jah... "Mehrere Bundesländer haben bereits angekündigt, das öffentliche Zeigen des Symbols zu ahnden. Grundlage ist der Paragraf 140 im Strafgesetzbuch zur „Billigung von Straftaten“. Demnach kann dies mit bis zu drei Jahren Haft oder einer Geldstrafe bestraft werden" --- The famine was a result of inexperienced governance in peace time, not "authoritarian policies". Just like the Irish potato famine was not a result of "democratic policies". The Cultural Revolution was not a display of authoritarian power. Instead, it was mob rule fueled by revolutionary zeal. During the Cultural Revolution, the state was largely non-functional. Many people joined Mao's campaigns willingly, as opposed to Mao sending his army to force people at gunpoint to do things. The Cultural Revolution was an attempt to fix a broken country, by leaders who had little experience with peacetime operations. Today, Mao's mistakes are officially recognized. Both good and bad came out of the Cultural Revolution: there was a famine, but life expectancy also rose by more than a decade. One also has to keep in mind that famines were a regular thing in China during previous rulers, so with this context one can say that that famine was the last one China ever had. Given all this, to then describe the Cultural Revolution and the famine as "authoritarian rule" is hugely reductionist and misleading. The sort of reductionist rhetoric you employ can just as easily be applied to democracies. Nobody was accountable for when the British Empire put China on drugs. Nobody was accountable for the Iraq war. By your own reasoning, "democratic policies" lead to imperialism — a wrong conclusion due to reductionism.

FooBarWidget 4y ago

I understand you are familiar with Russia. But China is not Russia. You don't know China. By your reasoning ("Russia was X so China must also be X"), WW2 Germany (a democracy) was fascist therefore all other democracies must be fascist too. --- In Germany, displaying the letter "Z" in a way that is meant to show support for Russia can lead to up to 3 years in prison: https://www.rnd.de/politik/z-symbol-strafbar-bis-zu-drei-jahre-haft-fuer-billigung-des-russischen-angriffskriegs-moeglich-FM55B5UQS34T6FDEI5JE2OUVOM.html https://www.rnd.de/politik/z-symbol-strafbar-bis-zu-drei-jah... "Mehrere Bundesländer haben bereits angekündigt, das öffentliche Zeigen des Symbols zu ahnden. Grundlage ist der Paragraf 140 im Strafgesetzbuch zur „Billigung von Straftaten“. Demnach kann dies mit bis zu drei Jahren Haft oder einer Geldstrafe bestraft werden" --- The famine was a result of inexperienced governance in peace time, not "authoritarian policies". Just like the Irish potato famine was not a result of "democratic policies". The Cultural Revolution was not a display of authoritarian power. Instead, it was mob rule fueled by revolutionary zeal. During the Cultural Revolution, the state was largely non-functional. Many people joined Mao's campaigns willingly, as opposed to Mao sending his army to force people at gunpoint to do things. The Cultural Revolution was an attempt to fix a broken country, by leaders who had little experience with peacetime operations. Today, Mao's mistakes are officially recognized. Both good and bad came out of the Cultural Revolution: there was a famine, but life expectancy also rose by more than a decade. One also has to keep in mind that famines were a regular thing in China during previous rulers, so with this context one can say that that famine was the last one China ever had. Given all this, to then describe the Cultural Revolution and the famine as "authoritarian rule" is hugely reductionist and misleading. The sort of reductionist rhetoric you employ can just as easily be applied to democracies. Nobody was accountable for when the British Empire put China on drugs. Nobody was accountable for the Iraq war. By your own reasoning, "democratic policies" lead to imperialism — a wrong conclusion due to reductionism.