Author Topic: China and European Union Relations  (Read 361 times)


  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8710
    • View Profile
Re: China and European Union Relations
« on: June 29, 2022, 02:52:02 am »

"Here is an example of a False Leftist purportedly “defending” China, by citing Xi’s election victory as evidence of the democratic nature of the regime."

The problem is that Singh is only repeating the Xi's own line: Xi himself frequently claims that China is "democratic" (and worse, "more democratic" than Western countries)! Instead of taking pride in China being the last major holdout for autocracy in the whole world, Xi seems to want to redefine the term "democratic" to describe China's system of government! This is extremely buffoonish. Not only does it waste its present chance to vaunt the superiority of autocracy and thus commence the long-awaited counterrevolution against democracy, but it also fails to convince actual democrats (e.g. Hong Kong rightists) and instead merely supplies them with easy ammo with which to accuse the Xi of gaslighting.

"Democratic" is not a synonym for "good". But Xi will never understand this (you can tell this just from his clothes).


"If China is democratized it’s over."

If China starts having popular vote it is definitely over. But even if it does not, the very fact that it feels the need to call itself "democratic" (though without popular vote) is still a sign that it is in rhetorical retreat.

Unlike the False Left which merely follows Xi's rhetoric claiming to be "democratic" (though without popular vote), the True Left approach to positivity towards China should more often involve educating people about pre-modern Chinese rulers (who were autocratic and proud of it).

"I see that Chinese leadership always said China has their own "Chinese" democracy."

This shows how cowardly they are. They should be giving credit to autocracy for China's success, thus inspiring scepticism towards democracy by presenting China as a representative of the alternative. Instead they go with the cowardly claim that China is merely a "different type of democracy". Such a statement implies that they themselves believe that democracy has the moral high ground, but worse, everyone knows the statement itself ("China is democratic") is false, therefore everyone can now accuse China of actually knowing democracy is superior (hence being motivated to claim to be democratic) but still refusing to become democratic in reality, which is the worst position China can put itself in.

This is a perfect example of China's PR incompetence as noted above.

The coward is back:

Chinese President Xi Jinping announced on Sunday that China had conducted a nationwide campaign that gathered public opinion on what the country's senior leadership should look like in the next five years.

He called it an example of a "whole-process people's democracy," which Beijing has touted as being better than the West's model of democracy. This brand of democracy practiced in China appears to include holding local elections and frequent public consultation on issues.

So you've been handed on a plate a ready-made autocratic superpower, and instead of using China to promote the advantages of autocracy, you are going to claim China is a democracy too?

Xi's own definition of "whole-process democracy" isn't completely clear. He has described it as a form of government in which "all major legislative decisions are made in accordance with procedures, through democratic deliberation, and through scientific and democratic decision-making."

When you are trying to define something, using the word you are trying to define as part of the definition turns it into a circular definition. All it shows is how scared you are that others might even momentarily perceive you as non-democratic!

The description implies that the Chinese government actively allows citizens to influence policies and major decisions after the local elections conclude. China's Foreign Ministry has said that this system represents a "true and high-quality democracy that works."

Why can't China simply be described as an autocracy that works? Why does everything have to preliminarily claim to be democratic before claiming to be anything else positive? Most importantly, do you realize that every time you talk like this, you are implying that ancient China (as well as, for that matter, every other non-Western civilization in the world), which never valued democracy of any kind, are all inferior to Western civilization?

"If the people are awakened only to cast a vote but become dormant afterward, that is no true democracy," China's Chargé d'affaires in Australia wrote in December, taking a jab at Western democracy. "If the people are offered great hopes during electoral campaigning but have no say afterward, that is no true democracy."

Even if you can thus get Chinese believing that present-day China is better than present-day Western countries, so what? Since you are saying China is better by Western standards, they will continue to believe China only became better via contact with Western civilization. They will continue to have a low opinion of ancient China (not to mention other non-Western civilizations).