Do you understand what I am asking you?

Speaking of US elections.

To blind "freedom values" ideologues:

Do you really prefer the "freedom" to participate in stupid 'democratic' elections like the current outrageous blind leading the blind  US circus, rather than participating in the steady development of *common prosperity* under abenevolent authority?

"Get a life"....

freediver wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 12:14pm:


No that's NOT what I mean: are you an English speaker?

This is what  I mean:



Stop showing all the signs of a Pavlov dog.....

Quote:


I think you'll find the Chinese people today, who are rapidly overtaking the US in life expectancy, would dismiss the mental incompetency shown in that remark.

(google)

"The social development level of some provinces in China is similar to that of high-income countries, and the life expectancy has recently exceeded that of South Korea and the USA".

And regardless of whether the CCP  is a "benevolent authority" ( I didn't say it is),  the "foundations" of our democracies are shaky (always have been), and breaking down under the strain of competing with China, hence the appearance of Trump with his MAGA and America First.

Meanwhile the Libs are voting against "made in Australia": the fools, where will Oz wealth come from, certainly not the greed-based 'invisible hand' free market.   

freediver wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 3:20pm:


Ah..  FD's double catastrophe resulting from a crippled, delusional, "freedom values",  Conservative brain.

1. Hence FD's  Pavlov dog response, preventing him from  discussing  "benevolent authority" as a system of government.  eg, Kishore Mahubani (google) describes Xi as a benevolent authority (he worries about what happens when Xi leaves the top job).

2. Thinks referencing history will trump (!) what's happening in today's world - a typical Conservative malady.   

Re 'deny reaity' ....this from the guy who claims 'shared subjective beliefs' are reality.

He forgot about the people who DON'T share those beliefs...

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 4:06pm:


I am discussing it. This is what real discussion looks like. By "benevolent authority", do you mean the party that starved 50 million of it's own citizens to death by trying to feed them all equally? And killed about another 50 million in a variety of ways?

Like I already said, if that is what you mean, then yes, we prefer democracy. You asked. I answered.

Also, if the Chinese people preferred to live under the "benevolent authority" you describe, the CCP would have nothing to fear from democracy. The CCP fears democracy precisely because they govern by denying the Chinese people an informed choice.

If the Australian people, or the American, preferred your style of benevolent authority, there is nothing to stop them voting for it and winding up their democracy. In fact it would be pretty much inevitable. Democracy cannot survive where a majority of the population rejects it.

freediver wrote on Nov 28^th, 2024 at 9:49pm:


No you aren't. Let me assist you.

(btw, I realize I am not addressing the title of this thread; but sometimes one needs to point to the errors in the assumptions in the OP, as they apply in the current world, not half a century ago.) 

See the previous post to bobby, you are both blind to alternative systems of government, to achieve common prosperity (not "equality of outcome"). 

eg, an alternative system to  greed-based  adversarial democracy  might be benevolent authority.

Quote:


Yes, that's what I want to discuss  - see above.

Quote:


I have already answered that question in a previous post, are you dementing?

Now, re common prosperity and benevolent authority, concepts which Kishore Mabuhbani (a former Singaporean diplomat) IS happy to discuss...   

Quote:


And like I said, I answered your question the first time, and explained my answer Including the sentence in blue which you omitted (fraudulently?); must I conclude you are dementing, or completely  blinded by "freedom values" ideology as to prevent you engaging in honest debate re the meaning of terms, owing to your 'Pavlov dog' reaction to those terms.

Or is it merely the simple-minded Conservative self-interest of men like Musk an Bezos who have no concern at all for their fellow countrymen, (Bezos won't even pay to air condition his warehouses as his workers wanted, what a drop kick... )

Your reply (if you dare) will illustrate which of those maladies is afflicting you, and preventing you from engaging an honest debate re common prosperity and benevolent authorty, as opposed to the form of government Bezos and Musk (and you....) are happy to support, blind to the egregious effects of systemic poverty, in self-interested, adversarial democratic governments. 

Quote:


2 errors:

1. While the CCP has posited common prosperity as a goal of the Chinese government, it doesn't actually mention benevolent authority as the method of government.  Nevertheless, Xi has proved by his actions he is a benevolent authority, aiming for common prosperity for the Chinese people, and sustainable development for the nation.

At this stage, the project is a work in progress, nevertheless the achievements of the last 4 decades are impressive ("the Chinese miracle", acccording to the World Bank).

2. Chinese people already have a form of grassroots consensus democracy, as opposed to adversarial party democracy.   

Quote:


Addressed above; true, the CCP deosn't want China - a vast developing country - to devolve into the chaos of a comparable nation like "democratic" India with its adversarial politics.

As for "informed choices" ...you mean - as infomed by 'The Australian'? Heaven help us.... and India....

Quote:


Sorry, I though you would be able to discuss the concept of benevolent authority, cf. adversarial democracy without referring to the CCP - which admittedly is struggling at the moment to maintain "the Chinese miracle"; we will soon see if the CCP can achieve the current modest "c. 5% growth" in 2024.   

Quote:


Well......given that democracy IS being questioned by a sizeable proportion of citizens in the democracies (though not yet a majority) with desertion to political extremes and emergence of governing  L-R coalitions which invariably collapse..."fragile" democracy may well not survive, after all it is "the worst form of government"- Churchill (!); I'm positing better.

freediver wrote on Nov 30^th, 2024 at 4:36pm:


1. Civil wars are costly, the US civil war was fought over slavery - as a necessity for the economy to function (!) according to the Confederacy - and cost close to 1 million lives.

2.  Indeed the failed collectivisation of agriculture cost many lives, but it wasn't deliberate murder in war; whereas your extreme neoliberal 'small government' free market ideology IS complict in the current c-o-l and housing crisis, and soon to be climate crisis.

Quote:


Addressed above, your interpretation is wrong. We both agreed benevolent authority (to establish the well-being of ALL citizens) wasn't a consideration at the time, rather implemetation of policies according to an interpretation of Marxism which had nothing to do with Marx (who didn't address subsistence agricuture).

Quote:


Again we already both agreed they didn't mention it:  I did.

Quote:


Your errors addressed above. And you continue to blindly ignore policy changes after "starving 50 million to death", which have since  resulted in the "Chinese miracle" , according to the World Bank. 

Quote:


No; I am pointing to the state of democracy ..."the worst form of government"....Churchill thought he was being facetious, but in fact he was inadvertently correctly pointing to the difficulty in creating effective good government to achieve common prosperity, as opposed to  "free"  liberal democracies which achieve the most degrading, vicious and soaring inequality even in rich countries TODAY.

Quote:


Examples?

And can you give an an example of "CCP propaganda" which the CCP is spouting today?