8
   

China Has an Invalid Government

Forums: News, China, Government, Freedom
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 12:48 am
@Walter Hinteler,
And since I'm there (at the Basic Law):
Article 63
[Election of the Federal Chancellor]
(1) The Federal Chancellor shall be elected by the Bundestag without debate on the proposal of the Federal President.

Article 64
[Appointment and dismissal of Federal Ministers – Oath of office]

(1) Federal Ministers shall be appointed and dismissed by the Federal President upon the proposal of the Federal Chancellor.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 12:57 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

And since I'm there (at the Basic Law):
Article 63
[Election of the Federal Chancellor]
(1) The Federal Chancellor shall be elected by the Bundestag without debate on the proposal of the Federal President.

Article 64
[Appointment and dismissal of Federal Ministers – Oath of office]

(1) Federal Ministers shall be appointed and dismissed by the Federal President upon the proposal of the Federal Chancellor.

So you elect the guys who elect the guys.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 01:20 am
@Brandon9000,
More the parties than the guys: half of the Members of the Bundestag are elected directly from 299 constituencies (first-past-the-post system), the other half are elected from the parties’ state lists in such a way as to achieve proportional representation for the total Bundestag (if possible).

It works similar with the states' governments, but that varies quite a lot from state to state.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 04:05 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
It most assuredly is not a democracy in the sense we think a democracy operates...

Brandon9000 wrote:
Are you saying that it might be a democracy in some way and that we just can't see it?


Yup.

In what sense is China a democracy?


I did not say it was a democracy. I said it most assuredly is not a democracy in the sense we think a democracy operates.

There is a one party system in China...and the one party selects the candidates for high office. At local levels...the party members elect people who move up the ladder. In order to be a part of the process...a person must first join the party.

Granted, you must be a party member to vote, but unless you are a party member in one of the two major parties here in the US...you really do not get more than a vote between the candidates chosen by the movers and shakers of the major parties.

They may well consider their methods as "democratic" as ours...as representative of the general population as we do.

Quote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:

I thought that democracy meant a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting.


Was the United States a democracy before women gained the right to vote? Were the first "democracies" in Greece...that had very limited suffrage...democracies?

You are arbitrarily limiting things here, Brandon.

I much prefer our ideas of democracy to what others now and in the past have defined as democracies...but I am not willing to limit as much as you.

Under any circumstances, I will not accept the notion that the only "valid" governments are democratic governments.

The United States was a partial democracy before women gained the right to vote. Now it is a full democracy, unless you want to complain about some felons not voting. This is in sharp contrast with China in which the ordinary people do not get to choose their federal office holders at all. Please let me know the sense in which China is a democracy.


I think the contrast is not nearly as "sharp" as you are choosing to see it, Brandon.

They do the moving up the ladder the way they want...we do it differently. Yeah, we all (almost all) are allowed to vote...but we vote from among candidates CHOSEN by party members. We simply have one more major party than China does.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 05:11 am
@Frank Apisa,
Actually, China never claimed to be "democratic".

After the Wukan protests ("Siege of Wukan"), there were local elections in this village, whic appeared to be "free of the Communist Party meddling that typically mars Chinese election results." Source
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 05:19 am
@Walter Hinteler,
My point, however, is that Brandon thinks, democracy meant a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting.

I've been trying hard where this might happen outside the USA - most, if not all countries, have their parliament separated from the government.

Like in the UK ...

Quote:
http://i1334.photobucket.com/albums/w641/Walter_Hinteler/a_zps2aaacb5b.jpg


... in those countries the Executive (Government) is controlled by the Legislative (Parliament).

0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 05:23 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Actually, China never claimed to be "democratic".

After the Wukan protests ("Siege of Wukan"), there were local elections in this village, whic appeared to be "free of the Communist Party meddling that typically mars Chinese election results." Source



I doubt they truly are...and was answering a question about a hypothetical.

Using the reasoning that causes them not to be a democracy, however, probably shows that the US is not a democracy either.

But this is all besides the point, because the claim that China has an invalid government is incorrect.

Whether a democracy or not, China has a government...and it is a valid government, recognized by the United Nations...and individually by just about every other nation on the planet. The Chinese government conducts business with other governments around the world, fundamentally just as our government, your government, and the governments of all the other countries do.

Brandon's assertion that the only valid governments are democratic governments is, in my opinion, incorrect.


Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 05:27 am
@Frank Apisa,
For 100% the claim that China has an invalid government is incorrect.

That's what I tried to explain as well.

And not only Brandon's assertion that the only valid governments are democratic governments is incorrect: his definition of democracy is at least disputable,describing just and only the (current) situation in the USA.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 05:33 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

For 100% the claim that China has an invalid government is incorrect.

That's what I tried to explain as well.

And not only Brandon's assertion that the only valid governments are democratic governments is incorrect: his definition of democracy is at least disputable,describing just and only the (current) situation in the USA.


We agree on this one, Walter. Wink
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 05:50 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
We agree on this one, Walter.
I'm not going to slaughter a Pentecost Ox on this rare occasion, but I will bind the Pentecost Wreath in memory of it. Wink

Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 06:36 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
We agree on this one, Walter.
I'm not going to slaughter a Pentecost Ox on this rare occasion, but I will bind the Pentecost Wreath in memory of it. Wink




Sounds like a plan!!! Wink
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 08:21 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

For 100% the claim that China has an invalid government is incorrect.

That's what I tried to explain as well.

And not only Brandon's assertion that the only valid governments are democratic governments is incorrect: his definition of democracy is at least disputable,describing just and only the (current) situation in the USA.

False. I have never claimed once that my criterion was voting directly for the president/prime minister, etc. Electing a federal parliament who elect a president or prime minister is within my definition. All I care about is that:

(a) The citizens vote for their government. Electing the guy who elect the guy is absolutely within my definition.
(b) People have the right to criticize the government publicly without being arrested, beaten, or killed.

Countries in which people cannot choose their leadership and where they are punished for expressing opinions the state doesn't like are actually not as good as ours. The idea that only the US meets this standard is nonsense.
izzythepush
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 08:26 am
@Brandon9000,
That's reassuring. Why should we accept your definition, as opposed to say, a dictionary definition?
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 08:33 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:
False. I have never claimed once that my criterion was voting directly for the president/prime minister, etc. Electing a federal parliament who elect a president or prime minister is within my definition.



You are now, in the above quoted post, mixing the legislature and the executive.

Just to remember the original post all of my responses were related to and where you explicitly only named the executive:
Brandon9000 in Post: # 5,684,200 wrote:
[...]I thought that democracy meant a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 08:34 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

That's reassuring. Why should we accept your definition, as opposed to say, a dictionary definition?

Here is my original definition of democracy from page 3 of this thread:


"I thought that democracy meant a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting."


Here is the primary definition from Merriam Webster:


: a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting

: a country ruled by democracy

: an organization or situation in which everyone is treated equally and has equal rights

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy


My defnitition is a dictionary definition.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 08:43 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:


...Using the reasoning that causes them not to be a democracy, however, probably shows that the US is not a democracy either.

Really? How is the US not a democracy? We vote for our leaders, which is a valid definition of democracy.


Frank Apisa wrote:
But this is all besides the point, because the claim that China has an invalid government is incorrect.

Whether a democracy or not, China has a government...and it is a valid government, recognized by the United Nations...and individually by just about every other nation on the planet. The Chinese government conducts business with other governments around the world...

Being recognized by the UN and conducting business around the world doesn't make a government valid. It means that the government exists and is of a certain size. The main principle here is that the average person in China has no say in his laws or in choosing federal office holders (not even the guy who elects the guy) and does not possess the right to express opinions the government doesn't like. People who try it are often arrested, beaten, or even killed. This is what you're defending, and no, actually it isn't as good as democracy and free speech.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 08:44 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
False. I have never claimed once that my criterion was voting directly for the president/prime minister, etc. Electing a federal parliament who elect a president or prime minister is within my definition.



You are now, in the above quoted post, mixing the legislature and the executive.

Just to remember the original post all of my responses were related to and where you explicitly only named the executive:
Brandon9000 in Post: # 5,684,200 wrote:
[...]I thought that democracy meant a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting.


I didn't name only the executive. Parliament/congress is within my idea of leaders. Also, electing the guy who elects the guy is perfectly acceptable.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 08:50 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:


...Using the reasoning that causes them not to be a democracy, however, probably shows that the US is not a democracy either.

Really? How is the US not a democracy? We vote for our leaders, which is a valid definition of democracy.


The political party of China chooses who will be leaders.

Here in the US...our political parties choose who we will be able to vote for to be leaders.

Same thing...but one more party...one more step in the process.

But in both cases, it is the political parties (mostly their power brokers) that are really in charge...not the people.





Quote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
But this is all besides the point, because the claim that China has an invalid government is incorrect.

Whether a democracy or not, China has a government...and it is a valid government, recognized by the United Nations...and individually by just about every other nation on the planet. The Chinese government conducts business with other governments around the world...

Being recognized by the UN and conducting business around the world doesn't make a government valid. It means that the government exists and is of a certain size. The main principle here is that the average person in China has no say in his laws or in choosing federal office holders (not even the guy who elects the guy) and does not possess the right to express opinions the government doesn't like. People who try it are often arrested, beaten, or even killed. This is what you're defending, and no, actually it isn't as good as democracy and free speech.


Brandon...the government of China is a valid government.

You are not going to accept that.

Fine...don't accept it.

The rest of the world will continue to operate as though there is a valid government in control of China.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 08:51 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
False. I have never claimed once that my criterion was voting directly for the president/prime minister, etc. Electing a federal parliament who elect a president or prime minister is within my definition.



You are now, in the above quoted post, mixing the legislature and the executive.

Just to remember the original post all of my responses were related to and where you explicitly only named the executive:
Brandon9000 in Post: # 5,684,200 wrote:
[...]I thought that democracy meant a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting.


I didn't name only the executive. Parliament/congress is within my idea of leaders. Also, electing the guy who elects the guy is perfectly acceptable.


In a sense, China does that.

The Party has meetings...at which votes are taken for who will lead what.

0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2014 08:51 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

I didn't name only the executive.

You did. You wrote "government"
Brandon9000 wrote:
Parliament/congress is within my idea of leaders. Also, electing the guy who elects the guy is perfectly acceptable.
Fine. That's the legislative.

We define 'democracy' deferently here, notonly in Germany but in all Europe ... because, we've the trias politica principle, aka seperation of power.
 

Related Topics

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn - Discussion by tsarstepan
T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
RIP Professor Snape - Alan Rickman Passes at 69 - Discussion by engineer
Fergusonj shooting, autopsy in, all shots from front - Discussion by gungasnake
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Berry's desperate 911 call to police - Discussion by smithy988
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
  1. Forums
  2. » China Has an Invalid Government
  3. » Page 5
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/27/2024 at 09:41:45
▲ ▼