There are an interesting thread about this survey in Twitter here.
deleted by creator
Ultimately, democracy means that the government represents the interests of the majority. There are many different implementations of this concept. The west uses parliamentary democracy while China implements democratic centralism. What matters is whether people feel that they are being represented and that the government is working in their interest or not.
Ultimately, democracy means that the people can elect either their representatives or directly influence legislation. Democracy from demos (people) and kratos (rule). What matters is that people can chose who they are being represented by or how legislation will be themselves.
You could definitely argue that a democracy could elect a government that works against their interest. Like the US as an example.
No, that’s not what democracy means at all. This is a shitty implementation of the concept used in the west called parliamentary democracy. This model has shown itself to not work in practice time and again.
What relevance does it have if it works or not? This is the actual meaning of democracy, from ancient Greek? You can tell them they got it wrong if you want but I hardly think they care.
The actual meaning of democracy is the rule of the majority. Calling something a democracy when it does not faithfully implement the concept is meaningless. What part of that are you having trouble understanding?
In that case you could say that North Korea is a democracy since almost 100% of the voters vote for Kim Jong-Un. I’m sure that you agree that that is rubbish.
Anyway, this obviously proves that the meaning of democracy is debated and not true for all, making the first comment true.^^
I’ll explain this to you one final time. A functioning democracy is a government that represents the will of the majority.
The usa has been at war with korea for 70 years. They have spread lots of lies about their enemies. Most of those lies are extremely easy to identify as lies with a single objective look at them.
Democracy is when the people rule. Look up some korean documents. Do the people rule there?
Edit: how many political parties do they have?
Ancient greece did not have democracy, as only a small fraction of people ruled. Real democracies must be ruled by all the people.
I’ve been scratching my head over this for a while as I’ve been reading up on the structure of China’s government. It sounds like only the Central Committee operates on democratic centralism. But that seems to have little to do with the a democratic mandate stemming from the people, since the Central Committee is largely chosen in private.
I guess if you define democracy extremely loosely as “I feel represented” this works. It’s just not a very systematic way to provide representation. It’s also extremely susceptible to manipulation in a very locked down media environment, which describes China pretty well.
I’m not sure what you’ve been reading, but that’s not how the system actually works in China.
This page explains how grassroots democracy and public participation works in China. This is a good overview of how the party is structured, and how people participate in the governing process. This is fundamentally different from how electoral parties work in western countries. The party is predominantly composed of working class people as opposed to a ruling political class as seen in the west.
This thread is a good explanation of how elections work, and it’s important to note that the democratic process isn’t restricted strictly to governance either, here’s how democracy works in the workplace in China.
I’m defining democracy as a system where people have direct participation in the government and see the government work in their interest. That’s how Chinese system works.
Okay, I’m in the middle of reading over the material. So far, I noticed that the structure nominally puts the grassroots as the supreme power via the National People’s Congress. However, that body has been characterized as a rubber stamp parliament, with the party leadership able to manipulate elections at all levels of the congressional election system. To use the nervous system analogy, while commoners are technically the source of power, the leadership can apply anesthesia whenever and wherever it wants.
However, that body has been characterized as a rubber stamp parliament, with the party leadership able to manipulate elections at all levels of the congressional election system.
By whom, please show actual evidence for this fantastical claim.
To use the nervous system analogy, while commoners are technically the source of power, the leadership can apply anesthesia whenever and wherever it wants.
By whom, please show actual evidence for this fantastical claim.
The source was a book that I don’t have access to. I’m trying to find an authoritative source that explains the exact practices. So far I found this article that I’m loath to pay for:
I also found this article from 2008: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20192237
My impression is that especially under Xi, the NPC has turned even more ceremonial. Note how the vote to allow Xi another term, a break with a tradition that lasted since Mao, had only two dissenting votes in a body of thousands of people. There’s no way that less than 0.1% of people in China would have preferred to stick with tradition. I can fully believe that he’s popular, but he’s not that popular.
In practice, political elites set the agenda and the NPC is there only to give it the appearance of legitimacy. It’s no mystery why as part of China breaking the back of Hong Kong’s democracy movement, one of their first moves was disqualifying any candidates who might not toe the line.
Your links do not support your assertions. While you claim that the party has become more ceremonial, the reality is that it’s becoming more results driven. The article you linked explains how the party is weeding out unqualified candidates, hardly seems like a negative thing. And results speak for themselves as anti corruption drive under Xi has clearly translated into tangible results for people of China.
The paper also fails to support your assertions:
There’s no way that less than 0.1% of people in China would have preferred to stick with tradition. I can fully believe that he’s popular, but he’s not that popular.
Xi is clearly very popular and I’m not sure why it is such a shock to you that the party nearly unanimously voted to keep a proven and successful leader when the world is entering a turbulent time. The fact that Chinese system is able to evolve and change directly contradicts your claims as well. In practice, it’s the western system that’s ossified and unable to adapt to changing conditions while Chinese system shows itself to be flexible and adaptable. Back in the 80s China was able to apply Deng reforms that incorporated aspects of capitalism into the system. Meanwhile, it’s simply inconceivable to imagine any western government incorporating aspects of Marxism into their system. The west lives and dies by dogma.
In practice, political elites set the agenda and the NPC is there only to give it the appearance of legitimacy. I
Right, China is populated by utter imbeciles who can’t see that they’re being manipulated, while some white American, who happens to have tenuous grasp on the system he lives under, understands their system better than they do. The amount of chauvinism required to believe that is absolutely stunning.
It’s no mystery why as part of China breaking the back of Hong Kong’s democracy movement, one of their first moves was disqualifying any candidates who might not toe the line.
Yeah, no mystery that China broke western interference in its internal affairs. Just imagine how US would react if China set up a violent separatist movement in Texas. US would never tolerate anything of the sort in a million years. You people absolutely lost your shit when Russians bought a few facebook ads, and liberals managed to create a whole Russiagate conspiracy out of it.
Ultimately, the tangible results of the two systems speak for themselves. Quality of life in China continues to improve every single year, China builds massive amounts of public infrastructure, invests in public services, housing, healthcare, and education. Lifespan in China now exceeds lifespan in the US. China produces more scientists and engineers than the US. And productive power of China is directed towards improving the lives of its people. That’s what democracy looks like in action. On the other hand, quality of life in US continues to decline, public infrastructure is decrepit, and results in constant human disasters such as the one we just saw in Ohio. Education in US is abysmal, healthcare unaffordable, and US is falling behind technologically. That’s what a ceremonial system rooted in dogma gets you.
This is just blatant misinformation
You’re a blatant liar
- https://www.newsweek.com/most-china-call-their-nation-democracy-most-us-say-america-isnt-1711176
- https://web.archive.org/web/20230511041927/https://6389062.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/6389062/Canva images/Democracy Perception Index 2023.pdf
- https://www.tbsnews.net/world/china-more-democratic-america-say-people-98686
- https://en.news-front.info/2020/06/27/studies-have-shown-that-china-is-more-democratic-than-the-united-states-russia-is-nearby-and-ukraine-is-at-the-bottom/
I’m sorry I didn’t read the title right. It’s the perceived democracy by each nation. That makes it pretty much irrelevant since it doesn’t adhere to any international standard. What are you trying to say with that statistic?
Either way, the link to dislike ratio tells you how little people care for your Chinese propaganda you expell all over Lemmy.
China is a one party dictatorship that pretends to be democratic. If you as a Chinese were to criticize that, you’d be prosecuted by the state.
It’s pretty clear what the statistic says. It clearly shows that people in China see democracy actually work in their country while people in US do not.
The like to dislike ratio tells me that a bunch of redditors who guzzle western propaganda are unhappy when they’re faced with reality of the world. Repeating nonsense such as China being a dictatorship just demonstrates ignorance on your part. The number of parties a country has is completely tangential to how democratic it is. You appear to confuse western procedural implementation of democracy with the greater concept of democracy which is a government that works in the interest of the majority and is held accountable by the majority. What China practices is called democratic centralism which is an alternative approach that demonstrably works better. It’s also false that China doesn’t have political parties other than CPC.
Except for the time when the king/prime minister/party leader/god passes away and then the cultural thing to do is war or kill all x group of people or other removed things like that. Also if you live there and the government is not actually made up of people you trust or voted for. Tomorrow they may build a highway over your house and that’s okay because you don’t matter.
Hello there visitor from an alternate reality.
Are you living in feudalism?
I would love to see this charted against approval numbers, though I suppose that is difficult to compare between countries. Also, note that the US is pretty middle of the road here, despite Trump’s bullshit about rigged elections. Venezuela also gets dead last.
Chinese people adore their long tradition and experience of democracy, I totally get it.
