Is the political system practiced in China from 1949 till now democratic or dictorial or what?

lilithu · Sep 20, 2007

vandervalley said:
Having diplomatic relationships in the past doesn't mean it's part of China.

It was far more than "diplomatic relationships." But admittedly far less than full integration.

vandervalley said:
Ming dynasty never controlled Tibet politically.

It selected govt officials in Tibet that were friendly to it.

vandervalley said:
I was trying to say that country B doesn't necessarily become part of country A just because country A occcupied country B in the past.

Of course. It all depends on whether an occupier has the power to maintain control, doesn't it?

vandervalley · Sep 22, 2007

Of course. It all depends on whether an occupier has the power to maintain control, doesn't it?

indeed :yes:

greatcalgarian · Sep 25, 2007

BUDDY said:
I know enought to realize that it is an oppressive regime that was capable of slaughtering millions since its inseption. That is enough to convince me that it is no good, no matter how it may sound on paper.

Frog lived in the well will say the size of the sky is just about 2 feet diameter.

If you do not try to read more widely, and then differentiate disinformation and propaganda from fact, then your conviction is just a fallacy in your mind and does not reflect the truth. I beg you to go and read more.

lilithu · Sep 26, 2007

kb1118 said:
The Epoch Times | Epoch Times Commentaries on the Communist Party - Part 3

I can't argue with any of that. There are some small ways in which the communist party was better than the Kuomingtang. For instance, they followed a Marxian view of gender equality. But overall, their track record is one of brutality. What good is it for women to be treated more equally if all are equally oppressed?

To be fair, the current communist party is not Mao. I don't think they take pride in bruality, even if they still engage in it. Mao was... a rare kind of person.... hopefully.

vandervalley · Sep 27, 2007

can't argue with any of that. There are some small ways in which the communist party was better than the Kuomingtang. For instance, they followed a Marxian view of gender equality. But overall, their track record is one of brutality. What good is it for women to be treated more equally if all are equally oppressed?

Actually if you look at the Taiwanese politics you will find that there are more women politicians in the Taiwanese Parliament (both at regional and national level)
than China's corrupt parliament.

yossarian22 · Sep 28, 2007

greatcalgarian said:
If you do not try to read more widely, and then differentiate disinformation and propaganda from fact

And what you show is not disinformation and propaganda? it seems that virtually anything against your point of view is disinformation

mcteethinator · Oct 1, 2007

vandervalley said:
Actually if you look at the Taiwanese politics you will find that there are more women politicians in the Taiwanese Parliament (both at regional and national level)
than China's corrupt parliament.

That's because the Kuomintang democratized Taiwan in the past two decades. Please have a historical memory slightly longer then 19 years thanks.

yossarian22 said:
And what you show is not disinformation and propaganda? it seems that virtually anything against your point of view is disinformation

What greatcalagarian does is equivalent to

"You think Jews died in the Holocaust? Let me find this report filed by the Gestapo that proves you wrong"

vandervalley · Oct 3, 2007

That's because the Kuomintang democratized Taiwan in the past two decades. Please have a historical memory slightly longer then 19 years thanks.

yes; which is a lot better than Islam which never democratizied and probably never will.

greatcalgarian · Oct 4, 2007

yossarian22 said:
And what you show is not disinformation and propaganda? it seems that virtually anything against your point of view is disinformation

No. I am not claiming all I posted are disinformation. I do check most of the time to ensure the neutrality of the news etc. I am not saying everything against my view is disinformation. What I am trying to point out is:
A says so and so
you should then go and read B, C, and D, and see what did they says regarding what A has said, first by checking out reliability, credibility, whether A has any interest in the view that he says so etc.

We all know that Bush claim of WMD in Iraq is factually wrong. So before the invasion, during the invasion, and until the Bush ran out of gas to prove his case, all those western MSM are spreading disinformation. So disinformation can be proven in the end.

So for dicussion in this thread, read more, and find out more, and read about truly unbiased reporters reporting on the political situation, and also on trust worthy historians writing the history.

greatcalgarian · Oct 4, 2007

mcteethinator said:
What greatcalagarian does is equivalent to

"You think Jews died in the Holocaust? Let me find this report filed by the Gestapo that proves you wrong"

:bow: Thanks for distorting my view completely.

If, I say, IF, ever I were to deny the Holocaust (I am stepping on thin ice, like Ahmadinejad, as this will bring a whole lot of Zionist supporters (not Jews supporter) started calling me as anti-semetic etc and all types of bad names), I would point out to you that there are academicians who disagreed with the current # and size of the horrible mass slaughtering of the Jews as accepted by the current western MSM. I also like to question why we could not open the case to re-investigate this historical event? Perhaps the number is even larger, so why not do more study?

Now whoever who took up the above stand, will automatically be branded by the other camp as anti-semetic, and similarly putting the extreme arguement such as I am relying on Gestapo report to prove the case.

greatcalgarian · Oct 4, 2007

vandervalley said:
yes; which is a lot better than Islam which never democratizied and probably never will.

I do not want to hijack my own thread. But I still have to say that religion can never be democratized. Religion can only be separated from the politics, like most western countries that has majority population as Christians have actually secular government, but policy leaning towards looking after Christians.

In the case of Islam, unfortunately as a nature of the formation of this religion, it is never separated from the politics or government. There may be some countries that have moved the extreme Islamic law outside the constitution, but they have problem running the country with that structure whenever religious fanatics utilized this weakpoint to sabbotage the government and to grab power. Example is shown in Pakistan, Indonesia, and Malaysia. On the other hand, secular government like Sadam Hussein, that rule with iron hand may not have problem with the religious fanatic, but see how Iraq has degernerated into lawlessness once US went in to impose the puppet government which is neither here nor there.

yossarian22 · Oct 5, 2007

greatcalgarian said:
No. I am not claiming all I posted are disinformation.

It seems that baseless attack is a fall back argument.

There is no reason to believe that your information is less biased than mine

greatcalgarian · Oct 6, 2007

yossarian22 said:
It seems that baseless attack is a fall back argument.

There is no reason to believe that your information is less biased than mine

Let other readers be the judge.

I always suggest that when in doubt, add yours and mine together and mixed them thoroughly and then wallah, we have the correct picture.:yes:

greatcalgarian · Oct 6, 2007

However, since I read both English and Chinese, and in matter discussed in this thread, I believe I have read more on China than you, and hence unless I purposely select and censored and edit the information, I do not believe I am spreading any disinformation.

vandervalley · Oct 6, 2007

However, since I read both English and Chinese, and in matter discussed in this thread, I believe I have read more on China than you, and hence unless I purposely select and censored and edit the information, I do not believe I am spreading any disinformation.

well; I can read both Chinese and English as well. I'd say ur sources from the corrupt chinese governemnt websites are pretty biased.

mcteethinator · Oct 6, 2007

vandervalley said:
yes; which is a lot better than Islam which never democratizied and probably never will.

LOL. Wow, I guess since I've utterly decimated your views towards Tibet and the Kuomintang you have to resort to insults on my religion? I'm wondering how a Buddhist of all people could be such a bigot. You're deliberately ignoring the Muslim-majority countries are democracies. Lebanon, Turkey, Albania, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc. Theocracy will never democratize. It doesn't matter if it's Muslim (Saudi Arabia, Iran) or Buddhism (Bhutan, Tibet). Theocracy, not Islam, is opposed to democracy.

greatcalgarian said:
:bow: Thanks for distorting my view completely.

If, I say, IF, ever I were to deny the Holocaust (I am stepping on thin ice, like Ahmadinejad, as this will bring a whole lot of Zionist supporters (not Jews supporter) started calling me as anti-semetic etc and all types of bad names), I would point out to you that there are academicians who disagreed with the current # and size of the horrible mass slaughtering of the Jews as accepted by the current western MSM. I also like to question why we could not open the case to re-investigate this historical event? Perhaps the number is even larger, so why not do more study?

Now whoever who took up the above stand, will automatically be branded by the other camp as anti-semetic, and similarly putting the extreme arguement such as I am relying on Gestapo report to prove the case.

You miss my point. I'm not saying you're anti-semitic, I'm saying you're using biased sources to prove your point that China is democratic and then labelling everything you disagree with as being disinformation.

LongGe123 · Oct 6, 2007

china's current state is a necessary one - many chinese will acknowledge that the system is far from perfect, but it is serving the country very well actually. Western media just love to pounce on anything bad that happens and turn into a reflection of the entire nation - it's such nonsense. People bang on about China's human rights record over the past 50 or so years and say how bad it has been, comparing it with our lovely ever-improving western record - well, if we stretch that window a bit to say the past 200 years, us westerners aren't looking in too good shape there are we? I mean, americans driving the natives off their land, keeping slaves, Britain trading in slaves, colonising anyone we wanted to, killing protesters and the like...sound familiar? China needs time to change, we can't force them to, and for now it is a necessary state. a population of 1.3 billion people (officially, in fact it is probably nearer 1.5/1.6) requires an absolutely solid system of government - China would descend into anarchy without the current system - very bad!

vandervalley · Oct 8, 2007

LOL. Wow, I guess since I've utterly decimated your views towards Tibet and the Kuomintang you have to resort to insults on my religion?

In what ways did u decimate my views on Tibet and KMT with ur islamic thinking?

I'm wondering how a Buddhist of all people could be such a bigot.

Well it's not wrong for me as a person to compare 2 political movements right? One being the KMT and the other Islam's sharia laws;.

Just to remind you that some people claim islam's notorius sharia laws are a legitimate way to govern thus making it a political movement.

mcteethinator · Oct 8, 2007

vandervalley said:
In what ways did u decimate my views on Tibet and KMT with ur islamic thinking?

How is praising a communist government for getting rid of theocracy and slavery and fuedalism "Islamic thinking"? Ad hominem.

vandervalley said:
Well it's not wrong for me as a person to compare 2 political movements right? One being the KMT and the other Islam's sharia laws;.

Just to remind you that some people claim islam's notorius sharia laws are a legitimate way to govern thus making it a political movement.

What are you getting at? I don't believe in sharia being enforced, secular government for the win. It's almost like saying you support Buddhist theocracy because you're a Bu--oh wait.

greatcalgarian · Oct 8, 2007

vandervalley said:
well; I can read both Chinese and English as well. I'd say ur sources from the corrupt chinese governemnt websites are pretty biased.

Corrupt KMT Chinese government or corrupt Communist Chinese government?

Could you show evidence that which govnerment is considered to be corrupted? Did the US accuse Communist or the KMT government as a corrupt government?

Is the political system practiced in China from 1949 till now democratic or dictorial or what?

The Devil's Advocate

Active Member

Well-Known Member

The Devil's Advocate

Active Member

Resident Schizophrenic

Idiosyncratic Muslim

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Resident Schizophrenic

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Idiosyncratic Muslim

Active Member

Active Member

Idiosyncratic Muslim

Well-Known Member