Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think it's possible to throw off the yoke of imperialism without then promptly dipping right into totalitarianism.




Far more Chinese think that their country is a democracy and the government serves the people than in the US.

Whether this is objectively true is another question, but from their perspective, that's what it is.


>Far more Chinese think that their country is a democracy and the government serves the people than in the US.

>Whether this is objectively true is another question, but from their perspective, that's what it is.

Correct, as a general rule, slaves think more highly of their slave owners, compared to people about their politicians/leaders who were elected by them.

( what happens behind the scenes is this: the slaves/dissidents who are rebellious are killed off by the dictator - only the most ardent supporters survive)


The average chinese netizen is approximately 100x more aware of their position in society and the propaganda being broadcast in their direction than the average american

Can buy that.

I see this so much with regard to Chinese/Russians and increasingly Americans (I know people in each camp). The point of the propaganda is just that, to make them distrust all information and fall in line by default. It makes it impossible to argue against the main narrative being broadcast because "who's to say what's true?" And frankly I'm getting real sick of it. It's not the same thing as being media literate.

This is the kind of opinion that could only issue from one of the last societies to own literal slaves.

I can hear the argument that the Chinese government serves their people better than the US gov. Not necessarily agree with it but it's worth discussing.

However I don't know by what definition of democracy a country with a unique party, with so little freedom of press, can be considered as one.


A 1 party system can still be democratic in a way. Just participation in the policymaking works differently. In China this is feedback from the public and local committees.

Also that freedom of speech is very limited is correct, and there is extensive online censorship. But that doesn't mean the government ignores what people think. Almost all domestic government policies are broadly supported by the population. And when public opposition is strong then the government is known to delay implementation or change course.

Notable examples are Covid Zero, the K Visa, and the reclassification of drug use offenses.


'Look, democratic centralism has the word democratic right there in it. How can it NOT be democratic?'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_centralism


In China the participatory model works and citizens overwhelmingly approve of the outcomes (when it comes to domestic policy).

In US, which is a liberal democracy, you have outcomes like 20% satisfaction with Congress, yet >90% incumbent reelection rates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_stagnation_in_th...

I'm not saying everything is good and democratic in China and bad in the US, but the answer is a bit more nuanced than some people here like to think.


>I can hear the argument that the Chinese government serves their people better than the US gov. Not necessarily agree with it but it's worth discussing.

Correct, as a general rule (true) slaves think more highly of their slave owners, compared to people about their politicians/leaders who were elected by them.

(what happens behind the scenes is this: the slaves/dissidents who are rebellious are killed off by the dictator - only the most ardent supporters survive)


Oh so like, what trump is attempting to do now by cutting programs to blue states and putting brown shirts on the streets to shoot anyone who disagrees in the face?

Good governance (stability, competence, responsiveness) is independent of democratic rule, and is generally what ordinary people care most about.

I don’t think so. I haven’t seen a successful example of that, not in a country are large as China.

Even the US - after independence one imperialism was replaced by another - a committee of the wealthy. It was a slow march to the democracy and universal suffrage that exists today.


Yeah, at least in China noone can vote out The Party.

> The United States is also a one-party state but, with typical American extravagance, they have two of them.

~ Julius Nyerere


China spent a century being invaded and oppressed by the outside world, culminating in a massive war against a much smaller country that killed maybe 20 million of their people and which was only won due to a huge amount of outside help.

Today, China is the first or second richest and most powerful country in the world.

That trajectory changed when Mao came into power. Maybe it could have been done better, but he's the one who did it.


The Great Chinese Famine alone, which was largely Mao's fault, killed at least that many people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine

That's not how it happened so talking about alternatives is conjecture and a fantasy. It's not productive here.

Unfortunately the rest of the world has no real example of that. Which is more of an issue with imperialism itself than the people trying to escape it.

This is very lightly said. You probably should have said, "without killing 70 millions".

And the USA did just that.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: