3 ms·

OK I wanted to pass for valuing both of our time until I read the links... [1] What a blog of pseudo social/political science is that, I've never heard of 'Rul

OK I wanted to pass for valuing both of our time until I read the links... [1] What a blog of pseudo social/political science is that, I've never heard of 'Rule by law' and very much doubt it's genuine valid research. For reference there's always the common complaint of injustice in China attributing to 'Rule by man' [https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/45293/ https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/45293/] instead of rule of law. The legalist (法家) school of thoughts have nothing to do with it (well it was the school to make small weak country in terms of man power to be more efficient in agriculture and economy among other warring states but still doesn't fit). If you read the actual constitution it mandates the democratic dictation against the enemy of the 'proletariat' (i.e public). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_democratic_dictatorship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_democratic_dictator...] So it is unbelievably consistently 'lawful'. I wouldn't want anyone in the world to read chinese law but please bring logical and well researched papers I'll be very interested to read. The list of wrongly accused is from 2013 but majority is from 2019-now. There are 374 resulted in jail sentence (with some suspended). No one is doubting it is bad and my uncle had been jailed in the 90s wrongly over his superiors corruption so you can tell the prevalence back then. Another big factor is that in recent years due to quick response to reports, more cases are being reported to authorities [https://www.12377.cn/ https://www.12377.cn/]. How updated is that list I can't know. Is the equivalent incident rate 1000 times lower in the US, or even zero? I haven't checked. Party member numbers: I meant anyone with at least 3rd tier city level HuKou (which is the insanely backward ancient land-born-based rights for local resources). Use my hometown as an example, while the whole population is 3,4 million (4 counties in one city). The 'urban' HuKou is only 540,000 Using googled stats https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_22126669 https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_22126669 https://www.statista.com/statistics/270163/age-distribution-in-china/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/270163/age-distribution-... there are fewer people if you account for people aged between 20 and 60 (usually you would need to go through the previous prep youth group stage). The membership is as easy as joining a local gym. All my older family members are in party despite that they do nothing related to the government. Basically I'm saying party and population in 3rd city level HuKou holder are one. Lastly I apologies if my commenting in English is so terrible that what I meant by 'bias' is confusing you. These might all be true but funneling one-sided or eye-catching stories only is the definition of biased reporting for me. Yes we don't have US/UK style press but it doesn't mean they don't get covered.

T-A 3y ago
> What a blog of pseudo social/political science is that That would be the UK chapter of Amnesty International. Not familiar? > I've never heard of 'Rule by law' and very much doubt it's genuine valid research Is Stanford good enough for you? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rule-of-law/#RuleLawRuleLaw https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rule-of-law/#RuleLawRuleL... Or Harvard? https://hls.harvard.edu/bibliography/rule-by-law-or-rule-of-law/ https://hls.harvard.edu/bibliography/rule-by-law-or-rule-of-... Maybe Cambridge? https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/rule-by-law/64D05AB3BEAFEE4C86E01883B9A143DC https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/rule-by-law/64D05AB3BEA... Or just google it, it's a well known concept. > If you read the actual constitution it mandates Lots of nice things, sure. So did the Soviet Union's constitution (I still have a copy of that one somewhere). But then there is the little detail of whether the words are actually applied in practice. Here's what happened when a Chinese law professor had the audacity to suggest that the Party should actually abide by the constitution: https://www.npr.org/2013/09/18/219671719/chinas-debate-must-the-party-follow-the-constitution https://www.npr.org/2013/09/18/219671719/chinas-debate-must-... Old article, you say? Well then, here's what somebody else had to say about in 2019: https://thediplomat.com/2019/02/xi-china-must-never-adopt-constitutionalism-separation-of-powers-or-judicial-independence/ https://thediplomat.com/2019/02/xi-china-must-never-adopt-co... You may want to take note, he really doesn't like loose talk about constitutionalism in China. > The list of wrongly accused is from 2013 but majority is from 2019-now It's a live spreadsheet started in 2013. New cases are added as they occur. I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. I agree that faster reporting and the spreadsheet itself becoming more widely known over time could have contributed to the rising trend.
- dumb1224 3y ago
  I have to apologies it must be my commenting that you keep missing my point. I was referring to the writting in that blog on Amnesty International website. I don't what's it to do with Amnesty Inter but my point being it is a stretch to conceptualise '法家' relating the so called 'Rule by law'. Obviously I didn't study law or philosophy but unless you're an expert in the area I doubt that it is an established main stream theory. Just because it's published by Harvard or Cambridge press isn't necessarily a guarantee of high quality research or unbiased reporting. I can easily find this book from Oxford which I consider garbage what typically we find in party education courses. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/law-and-economics-with-chinese-characteristics-9780199698547 https://global.oup.com/academic/product/law-and-economics-wi... >It's a live spreadsheet started in 2013. I mean if you regard it a lawless society in China then it's actually rather impressive, extrapolate by a factor of 1000 (if you want to estimate the 'iceberg') will give you 300,000 cases (assuming all true positives) out 1.4 billion over the course of 10 years. Again please don't twist my meaning.

T-A 3y ago

> What a blog of pseudo social/political science is that That would be the UK chapter of Amnesty International. Not familiar? > I've never heard of 'Rule by law' and very much doubt it's genuine valid research Is Stanford good enough for you? https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rule-of-law/#RuleLawRuleLaw https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rule-of-law/#RuleLawRuleL... Or Harvard? https://hls.harvard.edu/bibliography/rule-by-law-or-rule-of-law/ https://hls.harvard.edu/bibliography/rule-by-law-or-rule-of-... Maybe Cambridge? https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/rule-by-law/64D05AB3BEAFEE4C86E01883B9A143DC https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/rule-by-law/64D05AB3BEA... Or just google it, it's a well known concept. > If you read the actual constitution it mandates Lots of nice things, sure. So did the Soviet Union's constitution (I still have a copy of that one somewhere). But then there is the little detail of whether the words are actually applied in practice. Here's what happened when a Chinese law professor had the audacity to suggest that the Party should actually abide by the constitution: https://www.npr.org/2013/09/18/219671719/chinas-debate-must-the-party-follow-the-constitution https://www.npr.org/2013/09/18/219671719/chinas-debate-must-... Old article, you say? Well then, here's what somebody else had to say about in 2019: https://thediplomat.com/2019/02/xi-china-must-never-adopt-constitutionalism-separation-of-powers-or-judicial-independence/ https://thediplomat.com/2019/02/xi-china-must-never-adopt-co... You may want to take note, he really doesn't like loose talk about constitutionalism in China. > The list of wrongly accused is from 2013 but majority is from 2019-now It's a live spreadsheet started in 2013. New cases are added as they occur. I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. I agree that faster reporting and the spreadsheet itself becoming more widely known over time could have contributed to the rising trend.

dumb1224 3y ago
I have to apologies it must be my commenting that you keep missing my point. I was referring to the writting in that blog on Amnesty International website. I don't what's it to do with Amnesty Inter but my point being it is a stretch to conceptualise '法家' relating the so called 'Rule by law'. Obviously I didn't study law or philosophy but unless you're an expert in the area I doubt that it is an established main stream theory. Just because it's published by Harvard or Cambridge press isn't necessarily a guarantee of high quality research or unbiased reporting. I can easily find this book from Oxford which I consider garbage what typically we find in party education courses. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/law-and-economics-with-chinese-characteristics-9780199698547 https://global.oup.com/academic/product/law-and-economics-wi... >It's a live spreadsheet started in 2013. I mean if you regard it a lawless society in China then it's actually rather impressive, extrapolate by a factor of 1000 (if you want to estimate the 'iceberg') will give you 300,000 cases (assuming all true positives) out 1.4 billion over the course of 10 years. Again please don't twist my meaning.