freediver wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2021 at 5:46pm:


You have enough evidence, you don't need mine.

Stop quibbling. If you're trying to pretend China is on some steady path of liberal reform, you're more of a spineless apologist than I thought.

Sticking up for the Saudis is bad enough (for someone so loathsome of Islam). But promoting the reversal of the one-child policy as an example of Freeeeedom?

Come come, dear, you've had better days. Your reference to Athos shows you have a pretty good idea what trajectory China's on.

Quote:


I wouldn't say steady.

Quote:


The growth you see is a result of rapid economic liberalisation. Population is only part of it. You complain about them destroying a company, but not long ago they sent up to 55 million people to the grave to show their dedication to communism.

60% of their GDP comes from private enterprise, which did not exist in China until recently.

freediver wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2021 at 6:12pm:

Neither would I.

The word: retrogressive, comes to mind.

Deng would (do a half) turn in his urn.

Mao would do a cartwheel.

freediver wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2021 at 6:12pm:


Sorry, what does GDP have to do with human rights?

I'd hazard the Saudis have a larger private sector and still behead their political opponents with surgical bone saws in broad daylight. 

You'd probably have a better case if you wanted to present capitalism as a force for liberalism with the Saudis, but then you'd be stuck trying to defend their human rights record too.

But do you know? We wouldn't be having this debate if you didn't try to make out the Taliban was responsible for Sept 11 during one of your more absolutist pronouncements.

Most of us are happy to accept that things are complicated. You prefer to see the West as a beacon of shining light, shadowed only by the backward forces of Islam, socialism and tintedness.

The last five years of US politics, at the very least, should show you just how impossible this vision is. Not only have the shadows come from white supremacism, authoritarianism and the religious right within, Islamist outfits like the Taliban have gone almost unnoticed.

Now, we'll be watching them join forces with Russia and China, testing the West where it's most sensitive. As China quietly builds up its strength, as Putin quietly sows the seeds of resentment, and as the white supremacists on this board and elsewhere drum up a cacophony of fear and loathing to drown out any semblance of reason or rational informed debate, we'll all see that quaint, post-Cold War vision of American-led capitalism saving the world fade into a distant memory.

freediver wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2021 at 6:12pm:

It's steady, they reformed Hong Kong into true patriotism. The liberal part is almost unrecognisably loyal and so Xi, the resemblance is unstoppable.

Karnal wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2021 at 6:53pm:


China can't rely on oil reserves to lift the starving peasants out of poverty. Instead they have to rely on economic liberalism.

GDP has a lot to do with human rights. Why do you think human rights are so strongly correlated with high GDP? Yes, this is a test of your ability to see the wood, despite all the trees in the way. Open your eyes.

Karnal wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2021 at 9:15pm:

You are gagging for a banana.

freediver wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2021 at 9:15pm:


The only thing you're missing is the Ministry of Propaganda's signature at the bottom of your post. 

No one denies you can't have human rights without economic development. China is currently developing economically, and has no intention whatsoever of allowing individual human rights. Its government holds this up as its political model: collective economic development at the expense of individual liberty.

On the measure of GDP growth, China is currently surpassing the US. The contrasting covid responses of the two countries gives us some insight into how the two political systems operate when it comes to individual liberty and economic growth.

Ask the old boy for a banana. He's keen to give you one.

Will you take it?