freediver wrote on Mar 23
rd, 2024 at 10:15am:
thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22
nd, 2024 at 2:31pm:
freediver wrote on Mar 22
nd, 2024 at 2:26pm:
Quote:No, since my posts are almost exclusively concerned with the concept of "common prosperity" - which your blind "individual rights" ideology renders unattainable because individuals are naturally competitive and self-interested.
Are you saying this is the reason why your posts on this forum are indistinguishable from CCP policy?
Poor FD's low IQ:
No, I'm saying I'm only addressing ONE CCP policy.
Including the fact that the term you use to describe it is straight from CCP propaganda? Just a coincidence?
I'm using the term because it means the same as 'shared prosperity' (which we all profess to want), indeed the same as
'the common welfare', somewhat ironically and controversially written into the preamble of the US constitution - which has created the most unequal extremes of wealth on the planet.
Note: Paine was subject to the same confusion re "rights", in the emerging philosphies at the time of the 'enlightenment', when he wrote:
"The world is my country, all men are my brethren, and to do good is my religionA remarkable statement founded in the concepts of universal morality, justice and fairness, most recently expressed in the UNUDHR.
But his later ideas on government are contradictory, because he has fallen for 'the rights of man' delusion, ie as opposed to the
right of all men to live in liberty, not slavery or poverty.
Quote:What is the one CCP policy you said you were addressing? Is the meaning that you attach to "common prosperity" the same as the CCP's?
Admittedly you are a slow learner - blinded by idoleogy; but don't ask again, since I have now spelled it out for you above - again.
Quote:Are you aware of anything you have posted on this forum that contradicts CCP policy?
Another dumb question...
Yes; eg, the CCP, though committed to UN multi-lateralism as opposed to US global hegemony, apparently supports the UNSC veto ......like you - surprise!
Quote:Can you identify a form of government that works better than democracy?
At last, a sensible question.
Yes, 'benevolent meritocratic authority' may work better than
blind-leading-the-blind democracy.
Certainly worth a try. True democrats would advise the Chinese government how to achieve good governance under that system, instead of trying to destroy it as part of an attempt to self-interestedly maintain hegemony of "the worst form of government".
As it is, attacks arising from the paranoia and delusions of the current crop of 'democats' who are ruling the "free" world only encourages insular thinking in the CCP.
We will see; the statements coming out of the recent 'two sessions' conference of leading economists and politicians in Beijing sound good.
If they are realized, the CCP will survive as the world's most successful political party engendering "common prosperty", while more and more 'democracies' implode under increasing inequality and decreasing social cohesion.