With regard to aohui's views that democracy relative to socialism, there is still ground to argue against his points.
Firstly, we have to see that democracy relative to other political systems, will still stand out the most with regard to the amount of equal opportunities given to men, the promise of having a say in the political arena as well as the idea of allowing the collective interests of the majority to be fulfilled by the government, democracy will henceforth prevent rebellions against the government, protecting the political and societal status quo since it is based on the assumption that the government is vested upon the mandate of the people and thus, legitimized by the society. Socialism relies on the pure assumption that the government is pure and uncorrupted, as there is absolutely no way where the people of the society can act as a counterbalance to the government's overwhelming power.
Indeed, you had mentioned of the idea of delegates representing the Chinese community and reflecting the people's interests to the government is a way for the Chinese government to get in touch with the society, we have to see that it is impossible for the Chinese government to work accordingly to all interests of the people given the fact that the notion of mutual consensus among the collective entity of people in a society is an impossible feat to achieve and at the end of the day, the government is still free to choose selectively the policies they can carry out at their own discretion with no counter-power by the people proves that the government is still omnipotent.
Next, the reason why we see a peaceful and stable society in China/other socialist states is ultimately due to the relatively clean image of the CCP as well as the efficiency of the Chinese government. My question to you is that "Will the future government be that efficient? Will it be that clean with no counter-power to balance their power?" Indeed, we see that China's relatively calm and stable society is due to the government's efficiency, but unfortunately this scene is unlikely to last for long once there is a paradigm shift in the power-politics of China where the people who have limited power over the political arena, are powerless against the new regime. And when this happens, political and social stability will henceby be a huge question once again for China.
This can be supported by the paradigm shift in power from Stalin to Nikita Khrushchev, who during the end of Stalin's regime, carried out a series of "De-stalinization" which resulted in a drastic shift in the economic direction, sparking off a series of protests and wide political instability, of which subsequently resulted in the forced retirement of Khrushchev by a toned-down internal rebellion of the Socialist State Party.
Ultimately, socialism relies on the assumption that the government will always be pure, clean and efficient and with no civilians acting as a counter-power to balance their power, it is inevitable for socio-political instability to take place in an event of a dynamic shift in power politics as brought up earlier.
Here, we need to see that democracy may be flawed in certain aspects theoretically, but it is perhaps the best which we can get from any political systems that had hitherto been carried out as democracy, though promotes the "Tyranny of the majority", is still the best way of governance as it means that the government's mandate is at the very least supported by the majority entity of the population, meaning that there will be a little chance for rebellions/revolutions to take place. A famous quote by Winston Churchhill further exemplifies this fact in that "Democracy is the worst form of government, except all the others that have been tried." Ultimately, we see that democracy has its own flaws, but relative to other political systems, there is no doubt that this political system is still the best out there.
It should also be noted that democracy had hitherto been considered the most stable form of governance as seen from an almost zero figure of democracies having major political/societal revolutions since the advent of WW2. It is in fact amazing that with WW2, We only see civilizations turning to democracy, and not democratic nations turning to other political systems.
Cx
Firstly, we have to see that democracy relative to other political systems, will still stand out the most with regard to the amount of equal opportunities given to men, the promise of having a say in the political arena as well as the idea of allowing the collective interests of the majority to be fulfilled by the government, democracy will henceforth prevent rebellions against the government, protecting the political and societal status quo since it is based on the assumption that the government is vested upon the mandate of the people and thus, legitimized by the society. Socialism relies on the pure assumption that the government is pure and uncorrupted, as there is absolutely no way where the people of the society can act as a counterbalance to the government's overwhelming power.
Indeed, you had mentioned of the idea of delegates representing the Chinese community and reflecting the people's interests to the government is a way for the Chinese government to get in touch with the society, we have to see that it is impossible for the Chinese government to work accordingly to all interests of the people given the fact that the notion of mutual consensus among the collective entity of people in a society is an impossible feat to achieve and at the end of the day, the government is still free to choose selectively the policies they can carry out at their own discretion with no counter-power by the people proves that the government is still omnipotent.
Next, the reason why we see a peaceful and stable society in China/other socialist states is ultimately due to the relatively clean image of the CCP as well as the efficiency of the Chinese government. My question to you is that "Will the future government be that efficient? Will it be that clean with no counter-power to balance their power?" Indeed, we see that China's relatively calm and stable society is due to the government's efficiency, but unfortunately this scene is unlikely to last for long once there is a paradigm shift in the power-politics of China where the people who have limited power over the political arena, are powerless against the new regime. And when this happens, political and social stability will henceby be a huge question once again for China.
This can be supported by the paradigm shift in power from Stalin to Nikita Khrushchev, who during the end of Stalin's regime, carried out a series of "De-stalinization" which resulted in a drastic shift in the economic direction, sparking off a series of protests and wide political instability, of which subsequently resulted in the forced retirement of Khrushchev by a toned-down internal rebellion of the Socialist State Party.
Ultimately, socialism relies on the assumption that the government will always be pure, clean and efficient and with no civilians acting as a counter-power to balance their power, it is inevitable for socio-political instability to take place in an event of a dynamic shift in power politics as brought up earlier.
Here, we need to see that democracy may be flawed in certain aspects theoretically, but it is perhaps the best which we can get from any political systems that had hitherto been carried out as democracy, though promotes the "Tyranny of the majority", is still the best way of governance as it means that the government's mandate is at the very least supported by the majority entity of the population, meaning that there will be a little chance for rebellions/revolutions to take place. A famous quote by Winston Churchhill further exemplifies this fact in that "Democracy is the worst form of government, except all the others that have been tried." Ultimately, we see that democracy has its own flaws, but relative to other political systems, there is no doubt that this political system is still the best out there.
It should also be noted that democracy had hitherto been considered the most stable form of governance as seen from an almost zero figure of democracies having major political/societal revolutions since the advent of WW2. It is in fact amazing that with WW2, We only see civilizations turning to democracy, and not democratic nations turning to other political systems.
Cx
No comments:
Post a Comment