As a Chinese who emigrated because of the many social problems of China, I'm not sure switching to democracy right now will be beneficial for regular Chinese. You've all heard stories about how bad mannered Chinese tourists are, but those are still somehow better than the average Chinese I'd say. Think about people who still eat shark fins today, who have no problem buying rhino horns or pangolin skins. (there are more extreme stuff, one example: https://www.animalsasia.org/intl/media/news/news-archive/fiv...). If you ever visited mainland China you probably noticed many public restrooms have no toilet paper. Some places tried to put toilet paper in but people would steal all of them right after.

I am not sure democracy can work with people like that. I fear it wont. I fear not enough educated/informed people will make democratic decisions that are harmful to themselves. I fear a democratic China will become the next Russia, the next Brazil, the next Turkey. At least the current party has done more poverty fighting than most of the third world democratic countries. (data available on world bank website)

Does China have problems? Absolutely. The question is if you really understand what are the problems, before we even start talking if the proposed solutions will work or not.

>Will the PRC just continue to exist as it is, forever? My last remaining hope is for massive power grabs by xi jinping (already happening), followed by government ineptitude as he ages and underlings squabble, followed by chaos upon his death. Beyond that I can't see any way out.

If that happens, is that a good thing? To you, or some Americans who see China as a foe, maybe. I doubt such a chaos is what the average Chinese wants.

P.S. PRC doesn't allow dual citizenship.

We have proof positive that the Chinese culture is not only compatible with democracy, it flourishes beneath it.

1. examples: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_Chung-hee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiang_Kai-shek

The USA managed it swaths of the country spread across a frontier.

Like, did Taiwan become drastic better after removal of martial laws? Or is Taiwan at a better position today mainly because of the help of U.S.? Is there any other third world democratic countries that have developed as fast or faster than China, who is NOT a U.S. ally?

What good does education do if it doesn't drive government changes? What changes would the PRC allow at all?

What would Chinese populism look like when it eventually emerges given more democratic features?

Are you sure we are ready for a Chinese Trump? and for the silent majority of China to dictate foreign policy?

I'm from the school of "be careful what you wish for".

Yes. A democratic China would be better for the world.

I'll take a democratically elected trump that is gone in at most 8 years over the now irremovable xi jinping.

So yes, democracy is unilaterally the better option for China.

It's not like in the West where people are critical of this kind of stuff. They've really excelled at developing a "hive mind" mentality with what the state media put out.

Ask other democratic nations if they can get away with voting for systematic oppression of a people via a vote.

Historically, decentralizing power (i.e. via democracy) leads to less shittiness for more people.

In any case, what possible reason would the average Chinese person have to systematically oppress the Uighurs or falun gong? They're only oppressed now because their religion poses a threat to the cultural control the Party exerts over the people. In a democracy, that control vanishes.

This question is crucial to indicate that you have no idea about ordinary Chinese people. You need to sit down with some Chinese to talk about it if you are really interested. So I encourage you to find some first gen immigrant from mainland China currently living in SFBA. It wont be hard to find them. I can even direct you to relevant social media sites if you like.

I don't think the trade conflict with China is without concession of the Democrats though. The Mexican conflict is.

And Trump will be gone soon, so there's that

As one raised in a democracy (the UK) and thankful for that, taking a big step back I don't know if democracy is a more stable system than others. Or even better in terms of long-term results. I wonder if our democracy is mainly the result of cheap energy which removed the hardscrabble existence of our ancestors and will go when cheap energy finishes (if we don't pull our socks up).

It's a contentious point, I'm not sure it's right, and I'm not punting for china. Just raising a question.

NB my father was born and raised in a military country with an oppressive government. Hearing some stories from him is why I know how fortunate I am.

A stable system does not mean a robust one. A tea cup on a counter is stable, but easily broken. A spinning top is not very stable but can survive most falls.

Why never? While I'm not arguing that democracies are inherently super stable (that's empirically false), I don't think that democracies are inherently less stable than dictatorships.

I would think an system that peacefully transitions power with the consent of the governed on a regular basis would typically be more stable than a system where the transition of power is generally a once in a lifetime event dependent on whomever holds the most power in government during the transition.

I can understand the argument that transitioning power is less stable than maintaining existing power structures, but transitioning power is inevitable even if it's to an heir.

I wonder what sort of education you've had? I can easily and quickly think of dictatorships that killed or enslaved millions of their own citizens - it's practically a requirement to be a really good dictatorship, it seems. It's a struggle to think of any democracies which do that. Perhaps the Israel/Palestine conflict has shades of that, perhaps internment of Japanese in America during WW2 counts a bit, but it ended pretty fast and was due to a war.

I'm gonna take a wild guess that your current lack of faith in democracy is caused by Brexit. Am I right?

Please note the bit about my father.

But yours a very good point! So what do I mean? It depends on the word 'better' and 'stable'.

'stable' is easily covered - chinese society has existed in a stable form for thousands of years. There's no evidence that any democracy has, because democracy as I know it is a relatively recent thing. Yeah, greeks and democracy, but they also kept slaves so no.

'better'? Well, what do you mean by that. I suppose on reflection I was equating that with stable, so if you accept that then I've already covered it, and feudalism/totalitarianism/authoritarianism is perhaps 'better'. A stable society at the cost of individual happiness.

You define 'better' as equivalent to human rights, which I agree with, however my point is, be clear with your definitions of pivotal words! That's all. And I should have been so as well.

To be clear I'm not advocating nor would wish to live under, such regimes.

(and the brexit shite is a train wreck, and I am losing some faith in people who voted for brexit based on xenophobia and ignorance. I've met both sorts so I know they exist).

This is a patently false myth that the PRC promotes to legitimize its government. Never mind that the PRC is only 70 years old and radically different than the government that came before it, or the one 30 years before that, or 300 before that, or 200 before that...

Chinese language and culture has existed as long as all the others have. And furthermore, it has gone through just as many regime changes. Unless you're pretending each dynasty was a single government?

There is no definition of “stable" for which this is even approximately true.

Compare that to Britain which has had continuous revolution-free government for hundreds of years, has not split, has had no civil wars for centuries and doesn't disappear its own citizens. It looks pretty stable in comparison.

I think maybe your view of China is coloured by PRC propaganda. They love to claim thousands of years of history, that the PRC is the source of all stability and harmony in China, etc. But a cold reading of history makes it look a bit different.

I voted for Brexit, because the best countries are universally the most democratic countries. That's how I guessed your poor view of democracy might be related to it. We can say these views are stereotypes, but I met a lot of Brexit voters who just didn't like the EU institutions or the way they treat the country, and none (so far) that didn't like immigrants. I'm sure such people do exist, they just don't seem to be prevalent in the circles I move in. Unfortunately I have met a lot of Remain voters who seem unfortunately keen on dictatorship - I guess that's why Leave arguments about democracy are only ever met with irrelevant counterarguments like "racism! xenophobia!". The lack of democracy in the EU is one of the things that appeals to them about it!

Hard to say. China's society has been around since after the unification, 221BC (post-waring-states, the qin dynasty). It may have gone back further, to the shang dynasty (~1500 BC) but that was probably a period of conflict throughout. But does conflict in itself negate continuity of society?

But a) my knowledge of chinese history is minimal, and b) most important, how do you measure a society. The UK of now is different from the UK of 1980, how does one measure the continuation of a society? By culture? The Shang dynasty oracle bones have script that may be the precursor of chinese writing. Han period statuary is very reminiscent of modern chinese stuff.

Britain was likely pre-literate before the romans arrived (50BC IIRC) and the art was very different then, such as it was.

I don't know, how should we measure this? I mention art and writing as a proxy for culture as a proxy for society, but what should it be? We can't debate without agreeing basic terms.

> In the 20th century it's been conquered in an invasion

I think you mean the opium wars. I mention this in another post here. But they survived as a culture (arguably). "went through a communist revolution" - ditto survived (I might argue).

> PRC built huge concentration camps and 'disappeared' millions of people into them as

Yesss, I mention this in another post here. That is one way to have stability albeit an horrific one.

Compared to this, the UK was invaded repeatedly within the last 1000 years, the language was changed, the genetics were changed, the art changed... but what is a culture/society? These things? Other? Tell me.

> I think maybe your view of China is coloured by PRC propaganda

No. Please my other posts here. And stability and harmony are a matter of definition. I am sure my and your vision of it is something far nicer than china's crushing 'pacification' but unless we define things, we're spinning our wheels.

Also this thread is not about brexit and in this context I'm not willing to discuss it. I don't know why you're bringing it up.

Your knowledge of Chinese history seems pretty good to me!

By the invasion I didn't mean the opium wars, I was referring to the Sino-Japanese wars in which Japan essentially conquered most of China.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_invasion_of_Manchuria

China has probably had a somewhat more stable writing system and gene pool compared to Britain, that's true. I suspect with more knowledge there'd turn out to be pretty large differences over time too. For instance medieval Britain used the Latin alphabet/writing system. The language has changed enormously since that time, but still uses that script. Probably Chinese is the same.

Getting back to the original point (and I'll drop Brexit), your original question was whether democratic systems are really more stable than others. With my definition of stability as avoiding civil wars, revolutions, and other violent transfers of governmental power, I feel pretty sure they are more stable. If you define it as absence of change in art or other forms of culture, I'd concede the point - I'd expect a dictatorship to have less change in art and language, simply because culture benefits from free expression and some of the most creative people in society are often rebellious, which doesn't fit well with such societies.

However, I quite enjoy unstable (or dynamic) culture paired with stable (or peaceful) constitutional change. That seems like a good mix, and it also seems to require democracy.

Pinning anything down is a bugger but I'll accept your definition of "without [civil] wars or non-peaceful transfers of governmental power". It's pretty good. (just to be a complete bastard, do 'the troubles' of northern ireland count as civil war?)

My knowledge of chinese history is an illusion. I've always found the culture interesting and the 2D & 3D art/sculpture much more elegant than a lot of western stuff. Can't say the same about the music... I picked up a remaindered book on the oracle bones <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_bone>. Regarding the art, I was leafing through a book on ancient chinese artefacts. But the more I know, the less I know. And yes, [edit: ancient] chinese script is doubtless as legible to a modern person as anglo-saxon is to us, likely even less so.

I'll read up on your manchuria link, thanks - I wasn't aware it was that it was so extensive. I recall loadsa abominations by the japanese etc etc so it goes.

I understand where you're coming from, thanks again!

Perhaps we should ask the tens of thousands of families and cultures that were wiped out in endless war?

Also Brazil and Russia are not democratic (right now). Neither have a democratically elected leader.

And how would you assure a democratic China will not have a corrupted election scheme that resemble Russia's?

Without you stating any evidence, I dare to say your sense is wrong. Chinese are more than ready for capitalism if the current system is not already it.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Brazilian_general_electio...

"Lula’s criminal conviction on corruption charges last year came under highly suspicious circumstances. All year long, polls showed him as the clear front-runner for the 2018 presidential race [...] Ever since, Lula has been held in a makeshift prison cell inside a Federal Police building in Curitiba [...] An electoral court then barred Lula’s candidacy for president. Barring Lula from running as a candidate paved the way for the election of the far-right extremist Jair Bolsonaro" https://theintercept.com/2019/05/22/lula-brazil-ex-president...

I am always a little bit concerned about how it comes across for a Chinese person, because I do not want to offend them. And most of my points are about Xi's rule ( and actually somewhat cautious about it going globally).

Can you enlight me on "what is happening now", if you are offended in a personal way or is it obvious that there is a difference?

Generally speaking I wont get offended as long as the discussion is rational and logical. Me personally dont care much about country or patriotism. But Chinese are like any other populations, each individual can be quite different.

I'm not really in the loop of what is happening now but I do think sometimes only (trade?) wars can resolve unbridgeable misunderstandings.

And when we talk about China = all the stuff that has been going on lately, comments here are not pro Xi mostly.

We all know the project management tree swing cartoon[1]. We can almost replace the project with China within this cartoon lol.

1.http://www.zentao.pm/file.php?f=201712/f_2a1ca764ce384a33d05...

edit: I read some of your other comments and I dont think you know China as much as you imagined you know. There's news about Belgian police shot a refugee child for example. I wont based on that to say all belgian kills refugee children. So treat news from China as news if you dont mind. More extreme things happen within a population of 1.5 billion.

But it's not endolged by anyone here. That's a pretty big difference.

India has a big population and doesn't threaten the sovereignty of democratic nations like Taiwan.

I'm happy to acknowledge the good things happening in China and the advancements its made since the cultural revolution (of which my partner's mother can tell you stories of from her time in labor camps), but not when the objective is to try to sweep under the rug the massive crimes against humanity China is doing, right now.

According to world bank data, China had 755.8 million people living on less than $1.9 a day in 1990. In 2013 it's 25.2 million.

What about India? There are still 268 million people earning less than $1.9 per day in 2011 and data are not collected afterwards[1]. More than doubled the infant mortality rate[2].

Now I believe you live in SFBA. There are ton of mainland Chinese working at AMZ, at FB, at Google, etc. Tons of them in Chinese grocery stores. Go ask them if they think India is better than mainland China to live. Now that they live freely away from mainland China's propaganda, go ask them if they care about the massive crime you are talking about to the degree they would want a government overthrown and have a government similar to India's.

Again my point is there are huge problems about PRC. Still, it would be highly unlikely that the solution is what you, a nonexpert, proposed. I believe there are westerners who understand the problems better than me. But they've spent years of effort studying the issues. Not like you or even me who just read some news articles and think we knew better. Thinking about it it's almost like climate change. Everyone has a say to it no matter what experts think.

1 http://povertydata.worldbank.org/poverty/country/CHN http://povertydata.worldbank.org/poverty/country/IND http://povertydata.worldbank.org/poverty/country/RUS http://povertydata.worldbank.org/poverty/country/BRA look up some other third world countries as you see fit.

2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mo...

I'll not monitor this thread anymore but I've sent you a msg we can talk there.

In 1970 41% of Chinese are illiterate, comparing to 63% Indians. In 2015 India is at 30%, PRC at 6%.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/projections-of-the-rate-o... ^ this source is interesting. it's actually sponsored by ycombinator. anyway if you look into many categories you'll probably have a good idea how India compares to China now. The many charts of this page is enough for me: https://ourworldindata.org/hunger-and-undernourishment

When we get the big bubble pop which seems to be hastening in, their people may start to feel a lot less comfortable. We'll see then what happens but I don't think it will be remotely nice as their government will start to blame anyone but themselves (well naturally!) and political tensions will rise.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-henan-prope...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-henan-consu...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-henan-socia...

But who would do that? And why??????? So confusing....

In all seriousness, "democracy" is at this point almost meaningless as a barometer of good governance. There are a lot of spectacularly successful autocracies and a lot of dismally awful democracies. In the broad scheme of things, the CPC has done a damned good job of advancing the interests of the Chinese people. China might one day gradually transition towards democracy in the manner of Singapore, but many Chinese people are rightly fearful of the possibility of the collapse of the CPC. The most common outcome after the overthrow of a dictatorship is chaos and economic collapse, followed by a much worse dictatorship.

Certainly the nation has modernized rapidly. But at what cost? Western media speaks of famines, proxy wars, land grabs, implicit and explicit suppression of anything/anyone different.

(Not saying other forms of governing are guaranteed to do better, but at least with democracies power is supposed to be more distributed.)

The sole mechanism by which the party became a force for stability is slowly being eliminated: collective leadership in China is now something of a joke. That’s where things went wrong under Mao; it’s why the “bad emperor” problem exists as a concept; and it’s where things are beginning to go wrong at the edges (Xinjiang, Tibet…) under Xi.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

It is easy to focus on a single news story and forgetting that China is a much freer society today than it was 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago.

Two steps forward one step back. In the last ten years, more people have travelled, studied, or learned about the world than ever before. The people running the show will die one day, that's not representative of what will happen. It's what the people think that determines what will happen. What the younger generations have experienced in their personal lives will translate to what they want for society, and that's my measure: the younger people are much freer in their personal lives than those 10 years ago. They know what they want, and one day they will get it.

Pretty clear that less liberty is the outcome for all.

That's debatable but we know for a fact the USA was freer 10 years ago.

>The PAP has been returned to power in every general election and has thus formed the Cabinet since 1959

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Singapore

"kids to Canada to collect foreign dual citizenship"

China does not allow for dual citizenship.

That was evil.