China mocks India's democratic system

[ladder]

Well..they are not 100% incorrect...china's sys is still far better than ours...in tamilnadu pepoles voted for free jucier grinder....UP & BIHAR votes on caste bases...most indisipline people

At-least they voted and got free mixer grinders, not many countries you can do that.

 

[shekhar]

At-least they voted and got free mixer grinders, not many countries you can do that.

So we opted democracy for juciergrinders...hmmm...then i prefer china's system...so that we can change ourselves into a displine people...coz disipline is a key of sucess

 

[ladder]

So we opted democracy for juciergrinders...hmmm...then i prefer china's system...so that we can change ourselves into a displine people...coz disipline is a key of sucess

We also did opt for democracy to vote for whether to pull back forces from Vietnam, where in the first place the debate should have been, whether to send them in the first place. But, USA because of democracy did half of it, while some countries didn't bother to ask their citizenry.

 

[shekhar]

We also did opt for democracy to vote for whether to pull back forces from Vietnam, where in the first place the debate should have been, whether to send them in the first place. But, USA because of democracy did half of it, while some countries didn't bother to ask their citizenry.

How can a normal decide about that...experts must take decisons on such matters...if centres seems it prefect to send troops...then centre should do it

 

[ladder]

How can a normal decide about that...experts must take decisons on such matters...if centres seems it prefect to send troops...then centre should do it

But, a normal voter can decide which expert to choose who then would decide, but then if only he/she has voting rights.

 

[pmaitra]

You can talk whatever nonsense you want. I answered his point in the first sentence on mine - nothing could have stopped China from becoming another NoKo. My rest of the post is on the notion that democracy is better than dictatorship. But you would continue to argue on nonsense, so I will leave you to it

In other words, you could not counter the points, so you erected a strawman. Your strawman got called out, so you erected another strawman. Even that got called out, and now you are calling the other person's argument "nonsense."

Actually, the reason I posted that point is because the discussion was about Democracy vs Dictatorship - not "just" the effect of dictatorship on economy. The NoKo example was just an example on how the dictatorship could have gone as easily as their current success. There is no correlation to Democracy=bad for growth and Dictatorship = good for business. Reason is, Democracy =/= Bad economic growth, just as Dictatorship =/= Good economic growth

And Stop being a hypocrite to complain about democracy when living in USA/India

Who said I am complaining about democracy? I am very much aware all systems have good and bad sides.

You dont understand how debt works. You "think" those countries are underdeveloped than China. Best combination ever.

Actually they are, regardless of whether you agree or not. Just like you refuse to agree PRC is far more developed and you find comfort in staring at North Korea instead. Similarly, whoever that person was, brought up Argentina, and other countries, did. Don't like it? Well, then stick to India and PRC.

When the Chinese mocked Indian democracy, they did not say North Korea is better, did they? You cannot argue without your strawmen.

I am very much interested in how debt works, and I am quite a sincere student of mathematics. If you are given thousands of posts to write, I doubt you will be able to refute my points. If you could, you would have done it already in the appropriate thread, and I don't want to discuss that in this thread.

BTW Why dont you try and explain why PRC is not as remotely developed as Singapore, So Ko, USA, Japan etc?

Not interested. PRC mocked India, so compare PRC and India.

Reason is, Democracy =/= Bad economic growth, just as Dictatorship =/= Good economic growth. Economic growth is related to economic policies and not form of government. Sure the the of govt can sometimes help, but it is mroe related to type of economic policies than with the type of government

Democracy and socialism go hand in hand. Socialism is the mandatory and inevitable consequence of democracy. You are the one who constantly whines and complains about socialism.

• Democracy is the cause.
• Socialism is the consequence.

You are one of those who loves the cause, but hates the consequence.

You sound like a child who loves to stick his finger into a burning candle, but hates it when he gets burnt.

Still their decision to make, not that of the bureaucrats or you. The key thing being "who" is making the decision.

Sure, let the decision be made by the people. I am not arguing whether the people should be allowed to make the decision or not. I am arguing democracy will lead to socialism. I have given ample proof already.

Thats people's decision to make and not yours.

Again, let the decision be made by the people. I am not arguing whether the people should be allowed to make the decision or not. I am arguing democracy will lead to socialism. I have given ample proof already.

Again, its people's decision to make, not yours

Yet again, let the decision be made by the people. I am not arguing whether the people should be allowed to make the decision or not. I am arguing democracy will lead to socialism. I have given ample proof already.

Again, its people's decision to make, not yours on which is better - hunger or freedom. People of India could have chose Shit anytime they wanted in the election over freedom, .ie they could have voted in Communist party into power. But they dint., because they know it was shit

For the final time, again, let the decision be made by the people. I am not arguing whether the people should be allowed to make the decision or not. I am arguing democracy will lead to socialism. I have given ample proof already.

 

[Kay]

@pmaitra
Socialism as a consequence of democracy is an optimistic view. It happened in Europe, but not in US. Democracy can well turn out to be a plutocracy, especially in a representative democracy without adequate checks. The wealth gap, indeed has been rising throughout the world, to the point of being ridiculous.
The 85 Richest People In The World Have As Much Wealth As The 3.5 Billion Poorest - Forbes
Richest 1% of people own nearly half of global wealth, says report | Business | The Guardian
https://thenextrecession.wordpress....n-48-10-own-87-and-bottom-50-own-less-than-1/

 

[pmaitra]

@pmaitra
Socialism as a consequence of democracy is an optimistic view. It happened in Europe, but not in US. Democracy can well turn out to be a plutocracy, especially in a representational democracy without adequate checks. The wealth gap, indeed has been rising throughout the world, to the point of being ridiculous.
The 85 Richest People In The World Have As Much Wealth As The 3.5 Billion Poorest - Forbes
Richest 1% of people own nearly half of global wealth, says report | Business | The Guardian
https://thenextrecession.wordpress....n-48-10-own-87-and-bottom-50-own-less-than-1/

It happened in the US too.

• Progressive Tax
• Food Stamps
• Unemployment Benefits
• Obama-Care
• Bailing out the Detroit-3 (automobiles)
• Amtrak

This is the reality of The US, for decades.

The rest of the links you presented, and your claims of plutocracy, are valid, and I am not denying those.

 

[Kay]

People can invent enough cons to distort democracy - like the marriage of capitalism and religion to hold onto power. This was the con played by Republicans and overtime has been successful in creating a strong enough identity to thwart social welfare.

 

[Kay]

Europe never had this marriage of religion and capitalism and followed a separate path. But this is now a proven formula and is relevant to India.
The discussion here is democracy vs dictatorship.
Dictatorship has no accountability - benevolent dictatorships bring good results and bad dictatorships bring ruin - faster than democracy. Democracy provides checks and balances and slows down both good and bad - it is essentially a control of the pace, rate and degree but is never guaranteed to give good results. It is not a fail-safe system.
Democracy wins hands- down over dictatorship in fairness and that is why is the best system available. But the only way to guarantee results is the awareness, participation and vigilance of the electorate.
A perfect system does not exist - or has not been invented yet.

 

[debasree]

Oghhh I m tired of monkey business

 

[sorcerer]

Un registered children- The side effect of Chinese Dic Tatorship-DIc tatorship mocked in China!!



China's Hidden Children
The country's one-child policy has created an astonishing number of unregistered children


It might seem impossible that 13 million children could escape the notice of the central Chinese government, but this is exactly what was revealed in the 2010 census. A population the size of a small country has been denied birth registration and the corresponding proof of identity known as the hukou (household registration) by local Chinese governments. This document is usually necessary for children to access education.

Most of these children were born to parents that had broken the "one-child policy," a policy enforcing birthing restriction for all Chinese citizens. Defiance of the policy, in itself, will not necessary lead to a child being undocumented. Usually, children denied birth registrations are those whose parents have yet pay a "social compensation fee" – a fine for having their child without permission. Although this is an illegal action by local police bureaus, not only is denial of birth registration prevalent, many state officials see it as a key component of enforcing restrictions on reproduction.

The fines parents receive depend on the disposition of their local officers and the parent's income. Localities show considerable variations in how its calculate fines. Some charge fines parents are unable to afford. Parents unable to pay their fines may face the risk of repeated short-term detention, while others are taken to court or have their assets seized.

Demorcacy....Democracy...Democracy]

Parents report daily harassment by local thugs or local government officials. In other locations, parents might receive sympathy from their local cadre, or pull in favours to reduce their fines. Luck, connections and money effectively play a part in determining when a child can become recognized.

Only when the 2010 census was conducted did the scale of the problem emerge. The central Chinese government makes it a priority to collect accurate demographic data, so around the time of the census parents are encouraged to admit if their children were undocumented. Parents were promised that the information would not be shared with the local police bureau or the population and family planning department. Consequently, it was revealed that 13 million children were undocumented.



Of course, not all parents would have confessed the existence of their illicit children. Assurances notwithstanding, some would have worried that it would lead to demands for money from their local government. In previous censuses similar promises to parents of anonymity were broken. So the true population of hidden children could be significantly larger.



Five years on from that 2010 census and things are slowly changing. The one-child policy was significantly modified in 2013, and couples now can have two children if one parent is an only child. So, in theory, the number of undocumented children should decline as more parents than ever before can legally have two children.

But the political landscape of childbirth is not as transformed as one might imagine. By law, prior to 2013 rural citizens were already able to have a second child if their first was a girl; so most rural couples are under the same regulations as before. Besides, restrictions on childbirth are still in place for third children and beyond, and single women are still not permitted to have a child outside of wedlock.

Moreover, the relaxation allowing second children is rarely retrospectively applied by local governments, so parents who breached the policy prior to 2013 still face fines. The result has been that many parents who should be allowed second children under current law are still fighting to register their child's birth.

Being an undocumented child implies facing daily difficulties. Take Ms. Li*, for example, a Beijing resident interviewed last September. Her son is already 8 years old, and has no birth registration and thus no legal documentation. He has been denied the hukou because not only is he a second child born without permission; he was also born outside wedlock. Consequently Li has been fined particularly harshly – $50,300. Until this is paid, her son will continue to live without documentation.
:fishing: China mocks India's democratic system


Given that Li earns $300 a month she has little hope of her ever paying the fine. For now, her child attends an illegal private school, but there are no secondary schools he can attend without legal documentation.

Li is not alone: Countless other parents are in similar circumstances, while stories continue to surface in the media. Last year, the story of a father of four from Guizhou province, Mr. Wang made it into Western media. Wang committed suicide when his children were denied the hukou and education until he paid a fine of $3,500. As an improvised farmer he could not afford the amount. Only upon his death did the local government register the births of his children, and now they can have an education.

Given that the hukou is vital for a child's survival, parents of unregistered children must quickly find the money to ensure their children can gain an identity. Most try to ensure they can do so before the child's sixth birthday, the age at which children enter school. Some parents take out loans from loan sharks or borrow from family and friends. Others sell off assets to raise cash.

Those who cannot pay their fine can attempt to fight back. Li, for example, tried to sue her local government several times. With the help of a grassroots NGO she found legal representation. But in a state with no independent judiciary, her case was dismissed.

The case of China's missing children says something revealing about the Chinese state. It seems counterintuitive for so many children to be denied legal documentation: China's civil documentation system – the hukou system – is a cornerstone of Chinese governance. When a birth is registered, a child is put onto a family or work unit's hukou booklet and onto a digital database. This registration gives a person access to an ID card, which is necessary for all facets of modern life, such as employment, travel, marriage, and state welfare. The hukou is also needed for children to access state education. Within the hukou system a person's life is documented. So all citizens should be – and indeed, want to be – registered in the system because they need civil documentation.

The hukou system has also allowed the Chinese government to control migration; because citizens are allowed only to work and access education and welfare in the location they are registered. The documents citizens hold dictate their citizenship rights. In some circumstances citizens can temporarily register their residence in another location, or even move their registration to another city. But the central and provincial governments attempt to control that process. Of course, there is some illegal migration, but this does not allow citizens any rights in the cities they reside. Consequently, the central government places great emphasize on maintaining the hukou system.

So denial of the hukou, despite its importance for central government, points to deeper cracks within the Chinese state. Local governments hold children's identity documents to ransom until the fines are paid for the parent's transgression, even though that undermines the central government's system of migratory control.


Local governments do this because they continue to benefit from the revenue gained from the childbirth policies, and they have no need to declare how this revenue is allocated. The central government can do little but turn a blind eye to this if they want their policies enforced. But in the long run, the central government knows that a complete civil documentation system is essential to becoming a developed country, as is a system of governance whereby local, provincial and the central government work in unison.

Stephanie Gordon is a social researcher across the Chinese legal, political and anthropological fields, with a focus on human rights.

*Her name has been changed to protect her identity.


China's Hidden Children | The Diplomat
=========


Meaning... Chinese Who mocked Indian Democracy themselves are in Deep :bs: because of their :ka: dic tatorshittish rule.

 

[shiphone]

the original article...Xinhua net ,10 Mar.

China Voice: What if China had taken a different path? - Xinhua | English.news.cn

China Voice: What if China had taken a different path?

BEIJING, March 10 (Xinhua) -- A discussion on how historical events may have developed differently will not rewrite history. It does, however, offer an opportunity to consider -- and better understand -- the present, and how to forge a better future.

The ongoing annual session of the National People's Congress (NPC) provides a suitable backdrop to reflect upon the country's 61-year-old fundamental political system, and to examine how this unique model of governance has transformed the ancient middle kingdom into the world's second largest economy.

Had the world's most populous nation been governed by a bipartisan system, what would have happened?

Hindsight shows us that the Western political system, which is not inherently problematic and was designed to encourage "freedom", would have been incompatible to a country where efficiency has driven remarkable economic growth and social development.

Seemingly endless political bickering, inherent in the Western model, would have led to political dysfunction, which in turn would have brought catastrophic repercussions on a nation four times as big as the United States.

Political lobbying would dilute the unique strength and success of socialist China's "concentrating resources to do big things".

Should China have adopted a system that facilitated lobbying among interest groups, policies on domestic infrastructure to bills that had worldwide implication would be caught in a self perpetuating cycle of limitless debates.

China is the world's leading emitter of C02, however, had financial oligarchies been allowed to run the nation like a profit-seeking conglomerate, a carbon emission deal -- such as the climate accord reached between Beijing and Washington during the 2014 APEC meeting -- would have been out of the question.

Even in comparison with the Republicans in the United States, filibusters in Chinese Congress would have made any health care or poverty reduction bill extremely difficult to pass.

Further, China's feat of becoming the first developing country to halve its population living in poverty would have never been accomplished.

Half of the 1.3-billion population may have been recipients of foreign aid, making it a huge burden on the world.

At best, China would have been another India, the world's biggest democracy by Western standards, where around 20 percent of the world's poorest live and whose democracy focuses on how power is divided.

In 2014, India registered a per capital gross domestic product (GDP) equal to a mere quarter of China's GDP.

Or, China could have become certain African democratic country that has struggled with civil wars, military junta, coup d'etats and the "curse of resources" for decades following the end of Western colonial rule in the 1960s.

Should China's mainstream political parties have been fiscally irresponsible and pursued interventionist policies globally, like in the United States, the People's Liberation Army would have received an inflated military budget -- at the expense of development projects.

This situation would have fed nationalist sentiment, and wars would be imminent. This would have only been good news for opportunists and arms dealers, who would have rushed to cash in on the unrest.

A system that allows plurality is fertile ground for election rigging, vote buying and the silencing of minorities. In a country as ethnically and geographically diverse as China, the fires of opposition would have been stoked and the nation divided

That is why in his article "Why Socialism?", Albert Einstein said that in a capitalist society: "Legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists. So the representatives of the people do not [...] protect the interests of the underprivileged."

 

[Sameet Pattnaik]

What about Phillipine, why its not rich after 30 years of democracy?
What about Chili?
What about Argentina?
What about Mexico?
And what about India?

okay so is china a communist state or capitalist ?

 

[Sameet Pattnaik]

That is even laughable:
Democratic countries don't put their magic on the DEMOCRATIC India but a Communism country?

Yes indeed the state which china have business with are democratic but the democracy is not tool of business but tool of government to govern a country !

 

[Ray]

That is even laughable:
Democratic countries don't put their magic on the DEMOCRATIC India but a Communism country?

Prior to the initiation of economic reforms and trade liberalization 35 years ago, China maintained policies that kept the economy very poor, stagnant, centrally controlled, vastly inefficient, and relatively isolated from the global economy.

It is only when China opened up to foreign trade and foreign investment and implementing free market reforms in 1979 that China's economy grew.

Hence, it was democratic countries which bankrolled, so to say, China's growth.

India has moved away from the last vestiges of socialism i.e. centralised control and so watch the space.

okay so is china a communist state or capitalist ?

Neither here nor there.

A half way hope.

In a Trishanku type hanging in space of sorts.

 

[no smoking]

okay so is china a communist state or capitalist ?

Does it matter?

Chinese proves that a communist government can also implement capitalist economic system while Indian proves that a democratic government can run a semi-socialist economy.

 

[no smoking]

Yes indeed the state which china have business with are democratic but the democracy is not tool of business but tool of government to govern a country !

The question is: how come a democratic India can't pull out an economic plan as attractive as China?

 

[Ray]

The question is: how come a democratic India can't pull out an economic plan as attractive as China?

The answer is simple.

In China, when Xi orders, everyone falls in line and obeys without question.

In India, when the Govt wants to implement anything, it has opposition as in any other democracy and so Xi like diktats cannot be replicated in India.

 

[no smoking]

The answer is simple.

In China, when Xi orders, everyone falls in line and obeys without question.

In India, when the Govt wants to implement anything, it has opposition as in any other democracy and so Xi like diktats cannot be replicated in India.

Wow, it seems that Xi is not the only one that India democracy can't beat.
In 60 years, the "great" Indian democracy can't beat any of Chinese "dictators".
So, basically, the democracy in India doesn't work.