athos wrote on May 9^th, 2022 at 5:36pm:


Agreed. Citizens should have the right to vote for their constitutions. In China, the constitution is decided by the Central Committee. No one gets a say in decisions such as appointing Xi president for life.

I don't think only Western style democracy is good either, but it justifies itself by being accepted by its citizens.

For example, our constitution was changed in 1967 to include the Aboriginal population. The Liberal Party didn't come to a decision and change the law, it introduced the policy, citizens became engaged, a national debate occurred and Australians overwhelmingly voted to include Aboriginal people as fellow citizens.

If anyone ever questions this, they can be pointed to the 67 referendum to show the change was supported by the population. We voted. Case closed.

In 1949, the PLA invaded and occupied Tibet. There was no vote, no one got a say. This was Mao's demonstration of power "from the barrel of a gun". China will never be able to justify its occupation of Tibet for this reason.

In Australia, there's a move for Aboriginal sovereignty. Aboriginal groups have suggested the creation of an Aboriginal nation, which could theoretically succeed from Australia at some point. For this to happen, it would need to go to a referendum. The chances of this happening are slim, but the debate is tolerated and encouraged, as are debates for reconciliation, constitutional recognition and a treaty.

The various organs of the Australian government generally encourage people's independence - some more, some less. Few government departments want more work. But a debate of this nature could never occur in China - even a discussion could land you in jail. This means your system is effectively decided at the barrel of a gun. We see this all over China now - in Tibet, sure, but Hong Kong and if we want to include health measures, Shanghai.

We had no say over covid restrictions too, but the government listened, encouraged debate and responded to the population. The covid zero strategy followed by the CCP, with all its restrictions and loss of liberty, could never happen in a democratic country. It can only happen in China because you have no say. Your respective officials, governors and ministers are unelected. They can effectively do what they want and you have to accept it. You can't even publicly question it. And if one of them dislikes you or wants to silence you, they can have you arrested and detained. Your sentence will be decided by the CCP too.

So yes, Athos, we agree. People should have the right to decide on their own citizenship, their own leadership, and up to a point, their own liberty. At the very least, if they're detained, it should be for a good reason. Without any form of popular participation in government - be it through a vote or some other way - China can never have these things.

For this reason, you will never convince anyone of the merits of a Chinese system of government here.

Jovial Monk wrote on May 10^th, 2022 at 2:09pm:


Did you chose your head of state and her House of Lords?

Building all those projects adds to Global warming ... the Chinese ought to ease up and not build so many, the emissions must be at pretty high levels while they are building them ... and the use of that infrastructure also adds to emissions. Look at all the concrete in those projects - heaps

Warming melts ice caps which results in flooded islands from the rise in sea level. The West is trying to figure out how we can live a modern lifestyle without a gross excess of emissions. That's why the West appears to be dying or "giving up" ... but we are just in a transition stage from not giving a damn about Planet Earth, to giving a damn

Karnal wrote on May 10^th, 2022 at 4:17pm:


Constitutions are first written by the powerful, and are extremely difficult to change; the right to vote on  constitutional change is moot because the vote itself is subject to political disagreement, not consensus. 

Quote:


But when the system itself is flawed (policy determined by 50%+1; oppression of the minority),  acceptance of the system will still result in dysfunction.

Quote:


One example unique to Australia.

Quote:


One example unique to China: for centuries  Tibet paid tribute to China.

Quote:


...back to the aboriginal question, as if it's the most important issues facng Australians...

Quote:


...tolerated by some, encouraged by others, when the real issue facing the nation is 'closing the gap'; creation of a separate aboriginal nation is impossible and  won't close the gap.  [Only Job Guarantee will do that: google the you-tube discussion between prof Bill Mitchell and Noel Pearson. But  dysfunctional neoliberal economics is the barrier to a Job Guarantee].

Quote:



Nothing like the "independence" of pensioners forced to stay in bed because they can't afford power bills in winter, or the "independence" of the homeless. 

Quote:


The public service should exist to ensure universal access to above poverty employment, and access to health services and housing.   


Quote:



Nonsense; the CCP is ruffling some feathers in China with its crack-down on the fake Western-style funny-money industries in real estate, education, and social media, but the debate is happening.    

Quote:


Tibet's living standards are higher than they have ever been, while poverty still exists in HK (and John Lee has said he will do something about it, it will be interesting to see if he does).

Quote:


Correct...so? 

Quote:


....seriously? And those (silly) people who disagreed with lock-downs were ostracized or idolized, depending on their particular audience.

Only when it became impossible for government to persist with lock-downs, without causing social disobedience, after it appeared (to most people)  to be relatively safe to lift restrictions.   

Quote:


Indeed the current restrictions in China may be too severe.

Quote:


Ah, the "elected" mantra again; govt.  CCP officials live among the public too, and are obviously aware of the issues: explaining policy is the key.   (cont).

... and of course states and government structures are never self-serving etc, and are never simply an avenue to riches and power for those in them....

Jesus, man....

thegreatdivide wrote on May 11^th, 2022 at 2:36pm:



You're kidding - the state serves the state - the people are just expendable and sometimes irritating extras ... in your scenario the people are disposed and even disposed of at the whim of the state.... wrong way around.

The longest running civil war on earth has been and remains the Eternal Civil War Between State and People over the Divine Right or Otherwise Of Elected Bodies.  Hundreds of years of steady upward social improvement for the many brought down by the Neo-Fascists among us - starting with the feminists in the 1980's, who suffer the delusion that the state has any and every right to command as it chooses without let and to abuse law to break other people's eggs to suit them.

Every other whining group since then has followed in their high heel steps..... same tactics, same never-ending complaints and demands and using every thing handed to them as just a stepping stone to more and more.

Been tellin' yez for years now how that plays into the hands of the delusional politicians who seek total power for themselves.....

Not on my watch... time to say NO!

Democracy in strife:

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/opinion/the-second-american-civil-war-is-already-...

"The US supreme court’s upcoming decision to reverse Roe v Wade (an early draft of which was leaked last week) doesn’t ban abortions; it leaves the issue to the states. As a result, it will put another large brick in the growing wall separating blue and red America.

The second American civil war is already occurring, but it is less of a war than a kind of benign separation analogous to unhappily married people who don’t want to go through the trauma of a formal divorce.
One America is largely urban, racially and ethnically diverse, and young. The other is largely rural or exurban, white and older.

The split is accelerating. Red zip codes are getting redder and blue zip codes, bluer. Of the nation’s total 3,143 counties, the number of super landslide counties – where a presidential candidate won at least 80% of the vote – jumped from 6% in 2004 to 22% in 2020".

Courtesy of blind-leading-the-blind, adversarial 2 party democracy....

thegreatdivide wrote on May 12^th, 2022 at 12:39am:


People deciding for themselves?   No good??

Leaves remote central office commies out of the loop? Tewwible??