@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:
China's government has been recognized by every other government on the planet. Any argument that China has an invalid government is specious.
Gaddafi's Libyan government was recognized by almost all governments too, till it was not and he was removed by military force.
@hawkeye10,
Doesn't matter; who ever took over from Gaddafi is their government.
@cicerone imposter,
Apparently you have lost too many brain cells to be able to follow my simple argument.
@hawkeye10,
Not really frost brain; I've challenged you and many things that you never responded to. Nothing wrong with my brain cells, and I don't need the likes of you - mr knownothing - to tell me about my mental abilities.
@hawkeye10,
And at the point he was no longer a valid government.
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:
I've not noticed you express any outrage that such attacks on, predominantly black, protesters happened. You've just said a load of platitudes about peaceful protest being protected. I'm sure those assaulted by the police will take great comfort from those words?
What are you trying to prove, that if you've got a problem with your government then America's a better place to be than China? Well shouldn't it be? Why are you comparing your government to a dictatorship? Why not compare it to a democracy?
You said:
"The protests in Hong Kong happened with very little fall out. In America a TV crew was deliberately targeted by the police."
This implies that Hong Kong, or perhaps the jurisdiction of China, is more free than America. You justify this by comparing a protest that wasn't completely annihilated under China, which routinely prohibits protests and arrests protesters with one protest in which the police acted badly in America, where the right to free speech and assembly is usually respected by the police. It's a specious comparison.
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:China's government has been recognized by every other government on the planet. Any argument that China has an invalid government is specious.
Not if you define valid governments as I do, as governments chosen by the governed and which show some respect for the rights of the governed.
@Brandon9000,
You don't understand the meaning of simple terms.
Quote:gov·ern·ment noun, often attributive \ˈgə-vər(n)-mənt, -və-mənt; ˈgə-bəm-ənt, -vəm-\
: the group of people who control and make decisions for a country, state, etc.
: a particular system used for controlling a country, state, etc.
: the process or manner of controlling a country, state, etc.
Give the list on this URL a try; you might learn something basic about governance.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/List_of_forms_of_government
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:This implies that Hong Kong, or perhaps the jurisdiction of China, is more free than America.
No it doesn't, it points out that despite your propensity to lecture the rest of us about how wonderful your constitution is and how much freer you are than us, film crews are still deliberately targeted by police. And your response is to go on about your bloody constitution.
That would never happen over here, or anywhere else in western Europe, because we're a ******* democracy.
Still not a hint of outrage from you about what happened.
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
You don't understand the meaning of simple terms.
Quote:gov·ern·ment noun, often attributive \ˈgə-vər(n)-mənt, -və-mənt; ˈgə-bəm-ənt, -vəm-\
: the group of people who control and make decisions for a country, state, etc.
: a particular system used for controlling a country, state, etc.
: the process or manner of controlling a country, state, etc.
Give the list on this URL a try; you might learn something basic about governance.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/List_of_forms_of_government
A. That is a definition of government, not a definition of valid government.
B. It's a pity that you think that the right of the people to choose their own laws and representatives is so insignificant. My only point here is that a government which imposes itself by force is not a valid government, and, for some reason, you find this idea worthy of opposition.
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:This implies that Hong Kong, or perhaps the jurisdiction of China, is more free than America.
No it doesn't, it points out that despite your propensity to lecture the rest of us about how wonderful your constitution is and how much freer you are than us, film crews are still deliberately targeted by police. And your response is to go on about your bloody constitution.
That would never happen over here, or anywhere else in western Europe, because we're a ******* democracy.
Still not a hint of outrage from you about what happened.
I am outraged every time that local authorities or an individual policeman or soldier denies Americans (or anyone else) fundamental rights to peaceful assembly and free speech, but I deny that such very occasional violations of the Constitution by local authorities put the US on any sort of par with China. Where is your outrage that the government of China rules a billion people without their consent and brutally suppresses dissent? So far, you've mostly just stuck up for them.
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:
Not if you define valid governments as I do, as governments chosen by the governed and which show some respect for the rights of the governed.
Brandon9000 wrote: My only point here is that a government which imposes itself by force is not a valid government, and, for some reason, you find this idea worthy of opposition.
Seems as if you have more then your "only point".
The Persian Gulf states, btw, could have invalid governments according to both of your own definitions. (And the Vatican State is a nonpartisan theocracy, while Andorra has two had of states, one elected by foreigners [the French citizens], the other Prince being a Spanish bishop.)
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
Not if you define valid governments as I do, as governments chosen by the governed and which show some respect for the rights of the governed.
Brandon9000 wrote: My only point here is that a government which imposes itself by force is not a valid government, and, for some reason, you find this idea worthy of opposition.
Seems as if you have more then your "only point".
The Persian Gulf states, btw, could have invalid governments according to both of your own definitions. (And the Vatican State is a nonpartisan theocracy, while Andorra has two had of states, one elected by foreigners [the French citizens], the other Prince being a Spanish bishop.)
Yes, many governments would qualify.
Arrests in China for support of Hong Kong democracy
No arrests occur in Hong Kong, but at leastt 50 have been arrested or are missing in mainland China.
HONG KONG, Oct. 13 (UPI) -- Authorities in mainland China have arrested dozens supportive of Hong Kong's pro-democracy demonstrations.
Protesters in the city of Hong Kong have been allowed to rally without arrests, but at least 50 people have been arrested or gone missing on the mainland. Arrests have been made for "picking quarrels and provoking troubles," including the arrest of prominent scholar and activist Guo Yushan.
Ten were arrested in Beijing at a pro-Hong Kong democracy poetry reading....
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2014/10/13/Arrests-in-China-for-support-of-Hong-Kong-democracy/4831413223338/?spt=hts&or=6
@Brandon9000,
China's not my government. I get outraged when my government/police force does something completely beyond the pale. I don't think my government would ever allow a film crew to be shot at by the police.
I've not stuck up for China at all, I'm just sick of your empty headed jingoism.
@izzythepush,
I'm just catching up with this thread, but can confirm that there would be hell to pay if it was even suspected that our Police were in any way intentionally shooting anything towards members of the Press.
Their own Police video, maybe, but that's all the shooting allowed.
That Guardian piece was outrageous.
Here in America we don't see police shooting people as government abuse, but surely the whole tax payer's money is used and wasted against the will of the people. This kind of government abuse is not notorious because our government get loans to cover the waste, but at the same time the nation gets into a deep debt.
In the past, this abuse made by US politicians had no importance, because a debt to China can be paid just by producing more dollars bills and problem solved.
But, the invalid government of China, in conjunction with the tyrant government of Russia, have made contracts between themselves were dollars won't be accepted anymore.
This is to say, that our debt with the invalid government of China can't be paid by producing dollars without funds anymore.
Whoa! this means, that the dollars from the invalid government of China will come back to the US in the next months and years.
Now, we have two problems with our valid US government.
One is to pay the debt with goods and not so with dollars bills anymore.
The another one is to receive dollars without funds from other countries that will cause inflation in the USA.
Our valid government has put us in big trouble, because if no payments are made, this might cause war. You know that. But this war might cause the enemy to attack US soil. Something that we have not experienced for centuries.
But, the invalid government of China has indeed the right to collect from the debt. So, in this case the bad guys will be the USA.
Arghhh... Our valid US government has created a horrible, terrible, no good, very bad situation for us, while the invalid government of China still making their nation to grow up at an outstanding rate.
Ironies of life.
@carloslebaron,
The nation went into deep debt because GW Bush started two wars and gave tax cuts. Those wars were never paid for, and most of those wars and debt were carried over into Obama's terms.
That's called total irresponsibility.
GW Bush was also responsible for the Great Recession that reduced tax revenue - all while government expenses remained high to pay for those wars.
@Brandon9000,
Quote:Not if you define valid governments as I do, as governments chosen by the governed and which show some respect for the rights of the governed.
Ahhhhh..... the petulant child gambit. "Its what I say it is." Its hard to discuss anything with anyone who gets to set all the definition as you do. Look up solipsist.
I'm just plain done with this.
