China Has an Invalid Government

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

I believe that a government which rules by force instead of consent is invalid.

The GWB regime must have really chapped your hide.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

So? Brandon has a compelling argument and I am sure the Chinese Government would be open to the logic of it if he were go to Goodwill and get himself a nice suit and go and present himself to the Politbureau. It all would go well and he would end up a Peoples Hero. I am sure of it. I think he should give it a go and stand up for his opinions in a meaningful way. Its my opinion and I'm just saying whats on my mind.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Brandon. When the Soviet government was no longer supported by the majority, it fell in four days with very little bloodshed. In Syria without a tippingpoint, the government is standing knee deep in blood. If the majority of Chinese didn't support the system, it'd fall.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

My entire point is that the people aren't consulted, so why would you think that they want those forms of government?

Exactly to that point I've been responded.

Brandon9000 wrote:

Germany is a representative democratic republic.

(Federal republic)
Exactly. And thus, we aren't consulted about our government but that's done by the lawmakers. (Actually, even the lawmakers only elect the chancellor. The chancellor nominates the ministers of her/his government.)
So people here have nothing to say about the government.

But you're correct: if we wanted it done differently, we could start a revolution. (There aren't any parties which want to change our system ... since that is against the constitution, those parties are/would be illegal.)

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

Walter Hinteler wrote:
I mean, there are different political and parliamentary systems.
If people in those countries want them and not the US-system - why is it that such country's governments absolutely fail? (That would quite a few dozens of all other countries in the world.)

Who says the people in those countries want them? My entire point is that the people aren't consulted, so why would you think that they want those forms of government?

Germany is a representative democratic republic. If the German people decide to change their government, there is a mechanism. In China, there is no indication that the people want that system. If they try to express an opinion contrary to the system, they are arrested or told to shut up. They don't get to vote on the federal laws or have elected representatives do so, so why would you think that they want them? When the people in Tiananmen Square tried to demonstrate for democracy, they were shot at and cleared out of the square by force

One of the mistakes some people make (and that I think you are making here, Brandon) is to suppose that "the people" are averse to governments that appear to us to be totalitarian.,.and undemocratic.

It is almost certain that there are common people in Russia who pine for the days of Stalin...just as it is almost certain there are common people in Iraq who pine for the days of Saddam Hussein. Hell...there may well be common people in Uganda who pine for Idi Amin.

Dictatorships often represent the will of the people more than some of us are willing to acknowledge.

Hitler was not an unpopular figure in Germany during his rule; Napoleon was not an unpopular figure in France during his rule; Stalin was not an unpopular figure in Russia during his rule. The "disgust" expressed by a percentage of the people for any of those guys is not appreciably different from the percentage of people in America who loathe Barack Obama...or our congress.

Monarchies and dictatorships are every bit as valid as governments as one democratically elected...and often are much, much, much more efficient.

Democracy may be a blind alley...no matter how much we treasure it. I suspect there is a good reason why so many science fiction writers show future rule by dictatorships.

1 Reply

Either Walter did not see my post, or chooses to ignore it. So i did my own research. The six-power conference in London called on the Ministerpräsidenten (we would say premiers) of the German states to write a constitution in 1948. They were unwilling to do this, so long as Germany was divided, and that is why they came up with the Basic Law.

However, my point is that the Ministerpräsidenten acted under the authority of the elected state parliaments of Germany. They were not dictating on high. Although it was at one remove, they were using powers democratically vested in them. It is not reasonable to compare this to China. Although i do not share Brandon's confidence in American democracy for several complex reasons, nevertheless, the governments of the United States and of Germany operate under constitutions which were either approved by the state legislatures, or written by the leaders of state legislatures.

Citing the Chinese constitution is an ugly joke. That was a constitution by fiat, it is an authoritarian document. Although people may have to tolerate such a government, usually because they have no choice, i don't ever accept that crap that they like it that way. Essentially, with some disagreements about detail, i agree with Brandon. I wouldn't call the Chinese government invalid, rather i would call it illegitimate.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Sorry, Set! I really missed your post.
Your research is correct.

But that's not the point I was responding to.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
My entire point is that the people aren't consulted, so why would you think that they want those forms of government?

Exactly to that point I've been responded.

Brandon9000 wrote:
Germany is a representative democratic republic.

(Federal republic)
Exactly. And thus, we aren't consulted about our government but that's done by the lawmakers. (Actually, even the lawmakers only elect the chancellor. The chancellor nominates the ministers of her/his government.)
So people here have nothing to say about the government....

Completely false. Don't you elect members of the Bundestag? You have a representative democracy. Can't the German people vote out members who displease them? There is nothing parallel to this in China. They do not elect members of a federal legislature. The government tells the people what the laws will be and punishes them, even up to the point of execution or shooting protesters in the streets, as in Tiananmen Square, if they disobey. They cannot publicly express disagreement with the government without facing arrest. It's ludicrous to say that the people want to have this government since they are never consulted. As I said, I personally believe that governments imposed by force and which deny the people freedom of speech are invalid. If you like them, that's you.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

One of the mistakes some people make (and that I think you are making here, Brandon) is to suppose that "the people" are averse to governments that appear to us to be totalitarian.,.and undemocratic.

It is almost certain that there are common people in Russia who pine for the days of Stalin...just as it is almost certain there are common people in Iraq who pine for the days of Saddam Hussein. Hell...there may well be common people in Uganda who pine for Idi Amin.

Dictatorships often represent the will of the people more than some of us are willing to acknowledge.

Hitler was not an unpopular figure in Germany during his rule; Napoleon was not an unpopular figure in France during his rule; Stalin was not an unpopular figure in Russia during his rule. The "disgust" expressed by a percentage of the people for any of those guys is not appreciably different from the percentage of people in America who loathe Barack Obama...or our congress.

Monarchies and dictatorships are every bit as valid as governments as one democratically elected...and often are much, much, much more efficient.

Democracy may be a blind alley...no matter how much we treasure it. I suspect there is a good reason why so many science fiction writers show future rule by dictatorships.

There may be people in China who, knowing full well what alternative forms of government are possible, prefer a dictatorship that crushes dissent. Whether this is a majority at any given moment, we'll never know, since the people aren't consulted and are punished for expressing a preference for anything other than what they've got.

As to your assertions that "Monarchies and dictatorships are every bit as valid as governments as one democratically elected," I respectfully disagree. As to, "and often are much, much, much more efficient," I have no idea, but even if that's true, they're immoral, since all legitimate governments spring from consent.

As to your assertion that "Democracy may be a blind alley," again, I simply disagree. To me, democracy is good and dictatorship is bad.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

I would argue that the validity of the government depends upon the expectations of those governed. As Set pointed out, the Chinese constitution was not written with the input of the governed or with any consideration what-so-ever for their expectations.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

One of the mistakes some people make (and that I think you are making here, Brandon) is to suppose that "the people" are averse to governments that appear to us to be totalitarian.,.and undemocratic.

It is almost certain that there are common people in Russia who pine for the days of Stalin...just as it is almost certain there are common people in Iraq who pine for the days of Saddam Hussein. Hell...there may well be common people in Uganda who pine for Idi Amin.

Dictatorships often represent the will of the people more than some of us are willing to acknowledge.

Hitler was not an unpopular figure in Germany during his rule; Napoleon was not an unpopular figure in France during his rule; Stalin was not an unpopular figure in Russia during his rule. The "disgust" expressed by a percentage of the people for any of those guys is not appreciably different from the percentage of people in America who loathe Barack Obama...or our congress.

Monarchies and dictatorships are every bit as valid as governments as one democratically elected...and often are much, much, much more efficient.

Democracy may be a blind alley...no matter how much we treasure it. I suspect there is a good reason why so many science fiction writers show future rule by dictatorships.

There may be people in China who, knowing full well what alternative forms of government are possible, prefer a dictatorship that crushes dissent. Whether this is a majority at any given moment, we'll never know, since the people aren't consulted and are punished for expressing a preference for anything other than what they've got.

As to your assertions that "Monarchies and dictatorships are every bit as valid as governments as one democratically elected," I respectfully disagree. As to, "and often are much, much, much more efficient," I have no idea, but even if that's true, they're immoral, since all legitimate governments spring from consent.

As to your assertion that "Democracy may be a blind alley," again, I simply disagree. To me, democracy is good and dictatorship is bad.

We will continue to disagree, Brandon.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Brandon, I believe you are a US citizen. I am very comfortable with our form of government, even though the voters have been systematically sending nitwits to Congress. However, it doesn't matter what you or I as Americans prefer, other country's governments differ. Some seem great, some are horrific by Western standards. If you feel strongly that you need to label other country's govts., as valid or invalid.....by all means, so label. For me, it simply is. I'm happy to live where I live, I'm more concerned about America and our Allies than I am about China. As long as DOD is keeping track, we don't need to worry about an invasion from China. However, as a computer type, perhaps you can volunteer your talents to protect the Internet from Chinese piracy.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

I would argue that the validity of the government depends upon the expectations of those governed.

We've in our state a minority government = the majority of lawmakers is from opposition parties = the vast majority voted for different persons. (On the state level, we have election very similar as on federal level, voting for party-list proportional representation. The Prime Minister is elected by the parliament, she/he nominates the ministers of the government.)

0 Replies

@glitterbag,

glitterbag wrote:

...If you feel strongly that you need to label other country's govts., as valid or invalid.....by all means, so label...

When I see the citizens of a country brutally suppressed, beaten, murdered for disagreeing with their government, when they have no say as to their laws which are imposed on them by force, when they have to keep silent for fear of government retribution.....yup, I'll say that that isn't a valid government.

3 Replies

@Brandon9000,

glitterbag wrote:

...If you feel strongly that you need to label other country's govts.,
as valid or invalid.....by all means, so label...

Brandon9000 wrote:

When I see the citizens of a country brutally suppressed, beaten,
murdered for disagreeing with their government, when they have no say
as to their laws which are imposed on them by force, when they have
to keep silent for fear of government retribution.....yup, I'll say that
that isn't a valid government.

There is a psychological dichotomy expressed in an ideological schism
with supporters of authoritarianism and collectivism on one side
and
with lovers of personal liberty and Individualism on the other side.

This distinction is visible between u and Glitterbag.
Most of the posters in this forum favor the first category.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

See how easy that was, in this country we actually get to say what we think? Are you old enough to remember the iron curtain? Do you know anyone who survived those regimes, or did you ever travel to a country where your very survival depended on having a diplomatic passport? I'm guessing you simply don't know how oppressive some governments are, you may think you do, but you need to be there to understand what other nations have to endure.

Count your blessings that you live in a democracy. And be patient regarding the citizens who live in nightmarish places. People want their children and families to stay safe, you should study up on dissidents in China and how they have been treated. It may help you understand how huge of an impediment the Chinese Government is, as well as Putin's Russia. But I can't think of anything you can do except label it as illegitimate, but perhaps you have a wiz-bang solution that would restore freedom to the oppressed. If you do, make it your mission. But make sure to do extensive research before you implement your wiz-bang solution.

One more thing to think about, many members know a great deal about these issues, it's up close and personal for some of us. So please remember that this is not an all-night philosophy party for under-grads, and as long as you are thinking out-loud, that's fine. One other thing, if you believe you can state it and make it true, well that's fine also.

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

glitterbag wrote:
...If you feel strongly that you need to label other country's govts.,
as valid or invalid.....by all means, so label...

Brandon9000 wrote:
When I see the citizens of a country brutally suppressed, beaten,
murdered for disagreeing with their government, when they have no say
as to their laws which are imposed on them by force, when they have
to keep silent for fear of government retribution.....yup, I'll say that
that isn't a valid government.
There is a psychological dichotomy expressed in an ideological schism
with supporters of authoritarianism and collectivism on one side
and
with lovers of personal liberty and Individualism on the other sid

This distinction is visible between u and Glitterbag.
Most of the posters in this forum favor the first category.

I really don't know what you are trying to say David. I enjoy the freedoms of the US, and I believe in the individual and in personal liberty. I am a law abiding citizen, with a strong belief in a robust defense system. But, I also realize it's futile to explain myself to You. David and I are seldom on the same wave length. We reach agreement occasionally, but most of the time I'm clueless regarding David's point of view.

My point I suppose is, I draw on my first hand experience and my education. I do remember those all-nighters where we would venture possibilities until we wore ourselves out. Lots of fun when your in school, then you are launched into the real world.

If this helps, I'd rather take poison than become a cog in the People's Republic of China. We both remember vividly the demonstration in Tiananmen Square, we heard first at work, listened to WETA all the way home in the car, immediately turned on the TV and watched Dan Rather argue with the Chinese Military who arrived to shut down the broadcast, it was most vivid crackdown on freedoms I had ever seen, hands down. The Chinese Military finally scribbled a note revoking the US broadcast by Dan Rather and blip, it disappeared. Dan Rather fought it tooth and nail, but as an American he was there by the good graces of the Chinese govt. and only as long as they allow you to stay.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

glitterbag wrote:

So please remember that this is not an all-night philosophy party

With all respect, I disagree.
I see this forum as being a lot like that, but 24/7.

David

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

glitterbag wrote:
...If you feel strongly that you need to label other country's govts.,
as valid or invalid.....by all means, so label...

Brandon9000 wrote:
When I see the citizens of a country brutally suppressed, beaten,
murdered for disagreeing with their government, when they have no say
as to their laws which are imposed on them by force, when they have
to keep silent for fear of government retribution.....yup, I'll say that
that isn't a valid government.
There is a psychological dichotomy expressed in an ideological schism
with supporters of authoritarianism and collectivism on one side
and
with lovers of personal liberty and Individualism on the other sid

This distinction is visible between u and Glitterbag.
Most of the posters in this forum favor the first category.

glitterbag wrote:

I really don't know what you are trying to say David.
I enjoy the freedoms of the US, and I believe in the individual
and in personal liberty. I am a law abiding citizen, with a strong
belief in a robust defense system. But, I also realize it's futile to
explain myself to You. David and I are seldom on the same wave length.

That is rooted in the psychological dichotomy
that I mentioned, possibly more deeply rooted in biology; I dunno.

glitterbag wrote:

We reach agreement occasionally, but most of the time
I'm clueless regarding David's point of view.

Most of the time, I argue from an anti-authoritarian perspective,
to exalt Individual freedom, at the expense of jurisdiction of government.

glitterbag wrote:

My point I suppose is, I draw on my first hand experience and my education.
I do remember those all-nighters where we would venture possibilities
until we wore ourselves out. Lots of fun when your in school, then
you are launched into the real world.

If this helps, I'd rather take poison than become a cog in the People's
Republic of China.

I join in the sentiment.

glitterbag wrote:

We both remember vividly the demonstration
in Tiananmen Square,

Yes. I was in Hong Kong at the time.

glitterbag wrote:

we heard first at work, listened to WETA all the way home in the car,
immediately turned on the TV and watched Dan Rather argue with
the Chinese Military who arrived to shut down the broadcast, it was
most vivid crackdown on freedoms I had ever seen, hands down.
The Chinese Military finally scribbled a note revoking the US broadcast
by Dan Rather and blip, it disappeared. Dan Rather fought it tooth
and nail, but as an American he was there by the good graces of
the Chinese govt. and only as long as they allow you to stay.

We appear to agree on foreign policy,
but not necessarily on domestic policy.
I believe that I favor more personal freedom than u do,
and we vote accordingly.

0 Replies

I am not in favor of the current Chinese regime, either.

But, China has never had a representative government. they went from warlords to emperors to communism. The majority of people there have no real concept of democracy, therefore they accept what they have.

I think most people in China are like most people everywhere in that they don't really care about the government, they just want to be left alone to live their lives in peace. And the majority have that, since they don't interact with the government they simply don't care. With the internet and the increasing international trade I think that is changing. We can hope so.

As for democracy, the United States is a representative democracy only as long as our government allows it. Our constitution says we are a Republic. The people of the U.S. do not elect the U.S. President or Vice President, the electoral college does, and the members of the electoral college are chosen by the legislatures of the States they are supposed to represent -- not the people of those States. There is also no requirement for the members of the electoral college to vote as the people they are supposed to represent want them to. If I remember correctly, at least one President was elected by the electoral college contradictory to who would have been elected if they all voted in accordance with their States' wishes.

Oh, I forgot about GWB, that makes two.

1 Reply

China Has an Invalid Government

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know