A Manifesto on Freedom

[GZBILL]

Unfortunately, as a form of government there is no such thing as" "a one party dictatorship"

 

...part of why this is such a BS article to be flying under the AP banner.

 

The defining political characteristic of a dictator is one person rule---not one party---an autocracy.

 

The way dictators rule is to politically or physically eliminate those who challenge their power. plenty of clear examples last century---Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and yes, even Mao from about the early 1950's, up to and including most of the Cultural Revolution.

 

After the Cultural Revolution, when Deng was installed, the government of China clearly turned its back on Strong Man rule.

 

It would have be accurate to call China's government an oligarchy at that time, but since then, continues to broaden its base. the 17th. Party Congress was the most inclusive, and standing committees from that continue to exercise substantial advisory power.

 

China has an Authoritarian government, but its no where close to a dictatorship-----and hasn't been for more than 30 years.

 

I'm sorry I added to your confusion through a typographical error.

 

The term is one party dictatorship. It means a one-person dictatorship, but a system where only one party rules. That only one party holds power in China is a fact.

 

By the sentence structure along this typo should have been obvious, but to make it as clear as possible the original sentence should have read: "It doesn't mean a one-person dictatorship ... "

 

I don't think the article is in any way misleading or, in your words, "BS". What is, however, BS is your comprehension of the term "one party dictatorship." The term means that China is controlled by only one party. That is a fact and no matter how much you cry and moan that fact is not altered.

[Guest Pommey]

i think Jins idea of a democratic republic which is a mix of the best of westen democracy and influanced by chinas past has alot going for it.

I think china is way too smart to believe that copying any one existing system will work for them.

[Dan R]

It continues to amaze me how we regard one party governments as undemocratic but find the longest running two party control as being democratic.

 

And whenever we have had the opportunity to reform a countries system we insist on multiparty systems to protect minority rights. But we do everything possible to block a multiparty system in our own country.

 

Obviously the article was an attack on the CCP and communism in general.

Edited May 9, 2009 by Dan R (see edit history)

[Guest shutterbug]

Such articles generally cheer on dissidents and express outrage at their oppressors. One thing that is rarely talked about is the toll on their families. Oh yeah, the articles always point out how miserable the authorities make their families' lives become, but there is an angle rarely looked at: the dissidents, almost always men, have an obligation to his family as a husband, as a son, and sometimes as a father. Isn't it in the family's interest for the husband, son, and father to stay out of jail?

 

Among other things shown on the face of Ms. Liu, featured in the New York Times article listed at the beginning of this thread, I see resignation. I saw the same thing some 20 years ago, when ËÕ½­£¬the wife of another dissident, Wang Xizhe ÍõÏ£ÕÜ, was interviewed by a TV station in Hong Kong. For the first 21 years of their marriage, he was in jail for 14 years, she worked a full-time job while taking care of his parents and accepted such responsibilities without complaint. When Mr. Wang was forced into exile, he shocked the Chinese community by declaring that he would join the Nationalist Party so that the Communist Party could be overthrown someday. I remember myself thinking at the time: the Nationalist Party?? A party that lost a civil war to the communists, and then 40 years later found itself disintegrating thanks to an enemy from within, hand-picked and groomed by the late Chiang Ching-kuo? You can't find a more pathetic loser than a party like that. Now 61 years old and living in Northern California, Mr. Wang still spends his days squabbling with just about every other Chinese dissident. He once said he felt sorry toward his wife and yet he hasn't done anything about it...

[Guest Tony n Terrific]

It continues to amaze me how we regard one party governments as undemocratic but find the longest running two party control as being democratic.

 

And whenever we have had the opportunity to reform a countries system we insist on multiparty systems to protect minority rights. But we do everything possible to block a multiparty system in our own country.

 

Obviously the article was an attack on the CCP and communism in general.

George Wallace hit the nail on the head in 1968 when he was running for president on the American Independant party ticket. He said, " Name me one bit of difference between the Democratic and the Republican parties other then the spelling".

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

It continues to amaze me how we regard one party governments as undemocratic but find the longest running two party control as being democratic.

 

And whenever we have had the opportunity to reform a countries system we insist on multiparty systems to protect minority rights. But we do everything possible to block a multiparty system in our own country.

 

Obviously the article was an attack on the CCP and communism in general.

George Wallace hit the nail on the head in 1968 when he was running for president on the American Independant party ticket. He said, " Name me one bit of difference between the Democratic and the Republican parties other then the spelling".

 

George was mistaken on this and many other issues.

[IllinoisDave]

Such articles generally cheer on dissidents and express outrage at their oppressors. One thing that is rarely talked about is the toll on their families. Oh yeah, the articles always point out how miserable the authorities make their families' lives become, but there is an angle rarely looked at: the dissidents, almost always men, have an obligation to his family as a husband, as a son, and sometimes as a father. Isn't it in the family's interest for the husband, son, and father to stay out of jail?

 

Among other things shown on the face of Ms. Liu, featured in the New York Times article listed at the beginning of this thread, I see resignation. I saw the same thing some 20 years ago, when 苏江，the wife of another dissident, Wang Xizhe 王希哲, was interviewed by a TV station in Hong Kong. For the first 21 years of their marriage, he was in jail for 14 years, she worked a full-time job while taking care of his parents and accepted such responsibilities without complaint. When Mr. Wang was forced into exile, he shocked the Chinese community by declaring that he would join the Nationalist Party so that the Communist Party could be overthrown someday. I remember myself thinking at the time: the Nationalist Party?? A party that lost a civil war to the communists, and then 40 years later found itself disintegrating thanks to an enemy from within, hand-picked and groomed by the late Chiang Ching-kuo? You can't find a more pathetic loser than a party like that. Now 61 years old and living in Northern California, Mr. Wang still spends his days squabbling with just about every other Chinese dissident. He once said he felt sorry toward his wife and yet he hasn't done anything about it...

We've no doubt seen the same look of resignation on the faces of Winnie Mandela and Coretta Scott King. I'm sure, like their husbands, Mr. Liu would much rather be with his family than in jail. Unfortunately history doesn't only call those for whom sacrifice is convenient.

Edited May 10, 2009 by IllinoisDave (see edit history)

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

It continues to amaze me how we regard one party governments as undemocratic but find the longest running two party control as being democratic.

 

And whenever we have had the opportunity to reform a countries system we insist on multiparty systems to protect minority rights. But we do everything possible to block a multiparty system in our own country.

 

Obviously the article was an attack on the CCP and communism in general.

It is amazing, but it just goes on and on. There is an obnoxious perception that if it's not out of America and Western ideology, then it's not good.

[Guest shutterbug]

We've no doubt seen the same look of resignation on the faces of Winnie Mandela and Coretta Scott King. I'm sure, like their husbands, Mr. Liu would much rather be with his family than in jail. Unfortunately history doesn't only call those for whom sacrifice is convenient.

 

That's hindsight though, isn't it? Most men who aspire to be inspiring figures do not get very far when chasing their dreams. Comparing any current Chinese dissident to Nelson Mandela or MLK is off base: the conditions on the ground are very different. ÁõÏþ²¨ Liu Xiaobo had a certain level of appeal among college students when he was a university lecturer 20 years ago (and no one knew him outside the circle), such appeal is completely gone now.

 

Politics make strange bedfellows. When Nelson Mandela and ANC swept to power, many thought South Africa would immediately break off diplomatic ties with the Nationalist government in Taiwan, after all the Chinese Communist Party had been a stauch supporter of Mandela and ANC in his darkest hours, while the Nationalists were cozy with the apartheid government all along. Why did Mandela drag his feet on this, was is really because the lack of democracy in China as he publicly stated? No, it was because the Nationalists sensed the change of wind and started "contributing" to ANC, just so it wouldn't get cut off from the largest country left in the world that recognized the Nationalist government in Taipei rather than the Communist government in Beijing; seeing this as a betrayal, Beijing started helping ANC's rival. The stupidity of both governments throwing money at obscure (and often much smaller than South Africa for that matter) countries to win "diplomatic ties" back in the 1990s still boggles my mind. In the end, Mandela came around because of the economic interest involved. Go figure.

[IllinoisDave]

We've no doubt seen the same look of resignation on the faces of Winnie Mandela and Coretta Scott King. I'm sure, like their husbands, Mr. Liu would much rather be with his family than in jail. Unfortunately history doesn't only call those for whom sacrifice is convenient.

 

That's hindsight though, isn't it? Most men who aspire to be inspiring figures do not get very far when chasing their dreams. Comparing any current Chinese dissident to Nelson Mandela or MLK is off base: the conditions on the ground are very different. 刘晓波 Liu Xiaobo had a certain level of appeal among college students when he was a university lecturer 20 years ago (and no one knew him outside the circle), such appeal is completely gone now.

 

Politics make strange bedfellows. When Nelson Mandela and ANC swept to power, many thought South Africa would immediately break off diplomatic ties with the Nationalist government in Taiwan, after all the Chinese Communist Party had been a stauch supporter of Mandela and ANC in his darkest hours, while the Nationalists were cozy with the apartheid government all along. Why did Mandela drag his feet on this, was is really because the lack of democracy in China as he publicly stated? No, it was because the Nationalists sensed the change of wind and started "contributing" to ANC, just so it wouldn't get cut off from the largest country left in the world that recognized the Nationalist government in Taipei rather than the Communist government in Beijing; seeing this as a betrayal, Beijing started helping ANC's rival. The stupidity of both governments throwing money at obscure (and often much smaller than South Africa for that matter) countries to win "diplomatic ties" back in the 1990s still boggles my mind. In the end, Mandela came around because of the economic interest involved. Go figure.

All history is hindsight isn't it? The point wasn't to compare them. The point was that if Mandela and King hadn't at least tried, the world would be a very different place. Who's to say the same won't be said of Liu in twenty years? If all great figures of history had stopped their endeavors due to familial obligations, as you seem to be suggesting Liu should do, there'd be far less great figures of history. There's not guarantee that Liu is or will be a great figure or that he'll affect people's lives one iota. But it's certain he won't if he doesn't try.

[Jeikun]

What warning did Beijing have before the quake?

 

 

There is a somebody must pay mentality in the US, that is simply sickening. When I look around me today, I see a country of people that want a better life for their children. They are slow to blame, but quick to help. They don't get stuck on what should or could have been done, but rather on what needs to be done.

 

 

This is good. The blame game is definately a problem in the US and other western countries more than in the east. "How do we fix this?" is the most important question in many cases, but we are too busy asking "Who can we pin this on?"

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

What warning did Beijing have before the quake?

 

 

There is a somebody must pay mentality in the US, that is simply sickening. When I look around me today, I see a country of people that want a better life for their children. They are slow to blame, but quick to help. They don't get stuck on what should or could have been done, but rather on what needs to be done.

 

 

This is good. The blame game is definately a problem in the US and other western countries more than in the east. "How do we fix this?" is the most important question in many cases, but we are too busy asking "Who can we pin this on?"

 

 

Right. There is a difference between the people who seek solutions, and those who seek to blame.

[griz326]

Our CIA, when it's not screwing up royally, can be masterful in the art of infiltration, manipulation and disinformation. Any time I see any person from any country opposing a government or some national interest headlined in countries all over the planet the first question in my head is "I wonder how many fingers we have in the pie?"

 

I fully expect that in a few years, the Chinese will be freer than USCs although I doubt it will be American-style freedom; it will be Chinese-style freedom...if it's not Chinese-style won't work there.

[HKG]

I found China a paradox, in it's "freedoms"; One I noticed they have is an economic freedom, which the people of the USA enjoy, one they do not have is property ownership, like in the US, if the government wants the land they take it no eminent domain as in the USA, after Tiananmen Square of twenty years ago, the Chinese government is as strong or stronger than ever and the people of China do not seem too concerned about a Democratic way of life or change by insurrection for history has shown when the, Dogs of war are released in China, millions die and suffer.

[Guest Tony n Terrific]

China has tried democracy before from 1912 to 1949. It became corrupt and led to civil war and warlords in China. The civil war only stopped when the Japanese invaded and occupied China only to resume again as soon as WW2 ended. As far the Chinese thinking on democracy it is a status quo type of thinking. We are the same way here in the US. Look at the incompentant incumbents we continue to re-elect.