What Chinese People Think of Trump

[The Donald]

There are a number of good people on my short list for veep.

[Bricktop]

As the Washington Post reported this week, with Donald Trump faring well in the GOP presidential race, China has brand new evidence to bolster their anti-democratic pitch.

Mussolini and Hitler came to power through elections, China's Global Times reminded readers Monday. Now an "abusively racist and extremist" candidate is on the rise in the United States, it says. Maybe democracy isn't such a good idea after all.

Ouch.



They make a good point.



But they fail to state that communism is hardly the answer.



No democratic government in modern times has run its citizens over with tanks, and shot unarmed civilians, nor imprisoned people who disagreed with the government.

[Anonymous]

As the Washington Post reported this week, with Donald Trump faring well in the GOP presidential race, China has brand new evidence to bolster their anti-democratic pitch.

Mussolini and Hitler came to power through elections, China's Global Times reminded readers Monday. Now an "abusively racist and extremist" candidate is on the rise in the United States, it says. Maybe democracy isn't such a good idea after all.

Ouch.



They make a good point.



But they fail to state that communism is hardly the answer.



No democratic government in modern times has run its citizens over with tanks, and shot unarmed civilians, nor imprisoned people who disagreed with the government.

My parents when the KMT in Taiwan used to say our island would descend into chaos if the KMT allowed opposition parties and lifted martial law.

[Anonymous]

Korea was basically a military dictatorship during the cold war. They resisted civil liberties and human rights too.

[Bricktop]

The form of government that works best is one that is an extension of the culture of a nation.



This much. we've surely learned from western attempts to "democratise" other nations. It simply does not work.



Democracy is not the panacea of a countries ills in all cases. It requires a degree of stability, social and economic conditions that enable a certain level of trust and faith in the legal system.



When that faith breaks down, as we are witnessing in the US, democracy becomes a hindrance.

[Anonymous]

The form of government that works best is one that is an extension of the culture of a nation.



This much. we've surely learned from western attempts to "democratise" other nations. It simply does not work.



Democracy is not the panacea of a countries ills in all cases. It requires a degree of stability, social and economic conditions that enable a certain level of trust and faith in the legal system.



When that faith breaks down, as we are witnessing in the US, democracy becomes a hindrance.

I fully agree MC. What works in Denmark cannot be reproduced in LA let alone in Africa or Asia.

[Anonymous]

The form of government that works best is one that is an extension of the culture of a nation.



This much. we've surely learned from western attempts to "democratise" other nations. It simply does not work.



Democracy is not the panacea of a countries ills in all cases. It requires a degree of stability, social and economic conditions that enable a certain level of trust and faith in the legal system.



When that faith breaks down, as we are witnessing in the US, democracy becomes a hindrance.

I fully agree MC. What works in Denmark cannot be reproduced in LA let alone in Africa or Asia.

Tell that to Bernie Sanders.

[Anonymous]

China is using Trump's rise to show how dangerous democracy is.



http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/china-uses-trump-make-case-against-democracy">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show ... -democracy">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/china-uses-trump-make-case-against-democracy

China uses Trump to make case against democracy



The Chinese government does its best to limit the free exchange of ideas in its country, but there's no doubt that the Chinese people are aware of democracy's existence. Officials occasionally like to remind China, however, that the rival form of government is far more trouble than it's worth.

 

And occasionally, Republicans in the United States offer convenient fodder that makes China's job easier. When GOP members of Congress shut down the federal government a few years ago, for example, state-owned Chinese media ran reports that said, in effect, "See? Democracy leads to chaos and instability." When Republicans launched their debt-ceiling hostage crisis in 2011, and threatened to crash the economy on purpose, China once again was only too pleased to tell its people about the tumult democracy brings.

 

As the Washington Post reported this week, with Donald Trump faring well in the GOP presidential race, China has brand new evidence to bolster their anti-democratic pitch.

Mussolini and Hitler came to power through elections, China's Global Times reminded readers Monday. Now an "abusively racist and extremist" candidate is on the rise in the United States, it says. Maybe democracy isn't such a good idea after all.

 

In an editorial Monday, China's state-owned Global Times newspaper used Donald Trump's rise to gloat about the fault lines in U.S. society and to argue that democracy was both a waste of time – and downright scary.

 

From the rise of a "narcissistic and inflammatory candidate" to the violence that surrounded his planned rally in Chicago, the paper said it was shocking this could happen in a country that "boasts one of the most developed and mature democratic election systems" in the world.

The point wasn't subtle: Trump's rise is powerful proof, the argument goes, that democratic systems aren't all they're cracked up to be. The Global Times' report added that Trump may yet lose, but the fact that he's already done so well has "left a dent" in the American political process.

 

In case this isn't obvious, the Chinese newspaper's perspective is self-serving and incomplete, and the idea that democracy is flawed because buffoons sometimes win primaries is hard to take seriously. Yes, when free people are allowed to choose their leaders in free elections, sometimes the process is messy, but that's hardly an argument in support of one-party rule and an abandonment of civil liberties.

Western style liberal democracy is bullshit. We are seeing the failures of it in Europe that won't even admit that the problem is Islam is incompatible with European values.

[Anonymous]

^^I wrote in another thread that democracy has become a little stale. It needs some modernizing tweaks. I am not sure what they are. But, it needs to be more respective of the wishes of taxpayers.

[Anonymous]

^^I wrote in another thread that democracy has become a little stale. It needs some modernizing tweaks. I am not sure what they are. But, it needs to be more respective of the wishes of taxpayers.

Get rid of universal suffrage completely. Voting should NOT be a birth right.

[ELPHUPPHY]

^^I wrote in another thread that democracy has become a little stale. It needs some modernizing tweaks. I am not sure what they are. But, it needs to be more respective of the wishes of taxpayers.

Get rid of universal suffrage completely. Voting should NOT be a birth right.

Interesting. What should the qualifications for the priviledge of voating be comprised of, in your opinion?

[Anonymous]

Interesting. What should the qualifications for the priviledge of voating be comprised of, in your opinion?

If you do not have or ever had skin in the game you have not earned the right to decide how money is spent. In this country, only paid members of political parties can vote in leadership campaigns. Same fucking thing should apply in elections.

[ELPHUPPHY]

Interesting. What should the qualifications for the priviledge of voating be comprised of, in your opinion?

If you do not have or ever had skin in the game you have not earned the right to decide how money is spent. In this country, only paid members of political parties can vote in leadership campaigns. Same fucking thing should apply in elections.

I disagree 100%. Voating here in America is a right of all citizens, minus those convicted of felonies and a few other exceptions. Paid politcal hacks are the last people who should be allowed to voated, but even they are. I would sooner see everyone in the nation voate instead of limiting it to those you name.

[Anonymous]

Interesting. What should the qualifications for the priviledge of voating be comprised of, in your opinion?

If you do not have or ever had skin in the game you have not earned the right to decide how money is spent. In this country, only paid members of political parties can vote in leadership campaigns. Same fucking thing should apply in elections.

I disagree 100%. Voating here in America is a right of all citizens, minus those convicted of felonies and a few other exceptions. Paid politcal hacks are the last people who should be allowed to voated, but even they are. I would sooner see everyone in the nation voate instead of limiting it to those you name.

That's good you disagree because I never said it was the system in Canada. I said it should be. We elect people to spend our money, but people who don't contribute ever are allowed a say? You don't pay, you should not get a say. The West sets the bar waaaaay too low and leftist politicians want it even lower.



People who don't have skin in the game don't care how much shit costs because they don't pay anyway. Voting should be earned like it is in any organization including political parties themselves.

[Anonymous]

I can understand the rationale for restricting voting to past and present contributing members of society. Universal suffrage is the cornerstone of our democracy but maybe it's an ideal that could be tweaked.