The far-right populist Alternative for Germany party rejects a values-based foreign policy, just as much as it rejects NATO and the US. That approach has attracted the attention of Beijing.
Serious question, do you? When I criticise the US I do so from a position of knowing how power works between its three branches of government, how the senate works, how local governance works, how elections work, how the courts work. Do you know how China conducts any of these? Do you know how they govern 1.6billion people?
It’s a one-party state with all candidates chosen by the party.
It may wear the skin of a democracy, but it is not a democracy.
This is the vaguest description ever and it’s not even correct with the vague points. There are multiple parties, and given that there are multiple parties the candidates certainly aren’t chosen by one party.
How are candidates chosen? Who elects them? When are elections held? What is the structure of the elections?
Do you know any of these things? Serious question. Have you ever investigated and learned this topic thoroughly? You know how the US system works I assume, I bet you vaguely understand some other systems too, like parliamentary ones such as the UK (or not, could be wrong). Have you ever actually investigated the topic or have you just passively repeated vague statements made by other people who are also passively repeating vague statements about it?
If you want me to I can in fact give you a fairly good summary of how the Chinese system actually works. But do you even want to know? Are you actually open to learning?
It’s a one-party state with all candidates chosen by the party.
I much prefer all those two or three party states where the candidates are chosen by their respective parties on the marching orders of the capitalist class
Though, in fairness, red man is actively hostile to LGBT people, migrants, and women whereas blue man is content to let LGBT people, migrants, and women suffer via apathetic neglect instead.
Imagine for a split second that the strongest government in the world is constantly attempting to cause the overthrow of your legitimately popular government, despite it being popular and significantly beloved by almost all people there. This external, most powerful government in the world tried to cause unrest in every possible way, including funding all opposition groups and organizations regardless of their violent/genocidal intent (e.g. Falun Gong, Islamic terror groups) and cause unrest on your borders (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Korea).
What do you do? When good faith polling shows that you’re popular and fulfilling the needs and desires of your country’s working class but a foreign press tries to speak about the terribleness and need for overthrow, do you just let that happen with more money and propoganda than you can possibly provide to support yourself? Or do you censor the BS and report to your population that these images/ideas/orgs are actually subversive and attempting to change the government they legitimately love.
In this hypothetical situation, what do you propose? Allowing the propaganda but claiming it’s wrong has failed in many projects, and resulted in massacres once fascism won (Chile, Indonesia). Just trying to set up a wall of no information works for a bit, but info can cross anyways (USSR). Allowing limited access if you search for it but not allowing it’s widespread propagation is the method of china. A VPN allows you to see it all, but it can’t be spread too widely before it is stopped from being viral.
Do you have a better solution? Because this is how China presents itself and how the Chinese population sees it
Meh, our democracy isn’t even that threatening to China (Taiwan’s is, it showcases a viable alternative to the CPC), they just had to leave us to our “contradictions”, they’d keep booming and we’d just keep buying their stuff while we eat each other alive, if China is doing this, they gotta be really desperate to turn Europe fascist again.
(Taiwan’s is, it showcases a viable alternative to the CPC)
Throwing chairs at each other in the Legislative Yuan over who gets to be America’s most loyal running dog isn’t seen by anyone thing China as a viable alternative to governance.
It’s ok, Hu Jintao really didn’t mind being dragged off the stage like an idiot in a country where face is everything. China does settle fistfights in private, which does set a good example for the populace, ngl.
Aside from the racism of the “face culture” narrative, the guy is a dinosaur and notably not an official, just there as a matter of respect and legacy as a former President. We don’t really know what happened, but those meetings are long and the dude is probably senile, so he was probably getting helped off the stage by aides at around the time they expected from the outset.
Did that sound like a thing that wasn’t wildly rascist when you wrote it? You can delete your comment. You simply can choose not to be rascist, it doesn’t cost you anything.
They share a common enemy, democracy.
China is a democracy
How high are you right meow?
Do you not know what the structure of China is?
Serious question, do you? When I criticise the US I do so from a position of knowing how power works between its three branches of government, how the senate works, how local governance works, how elections work, how the courts work. Do you know how China conducts any of these? Do you know how they govern 1.6billion people?
It’s a one-party state with all candidates chosen by the party.
It may wear the skin of a democracy, but it is not a democracy.
According to their respective peoples, China has an infinitely more vibrant and responsive democracy than the United States.
I’d hate to think you’d be so blind to the irony of saying such a thing as ‘wearing the skin of democracy’ if you were living in the west.
Either way I’d be ashamed to act like you have and speak despite having such ignorance about the Chinese system of democracy.
This is the vaguest description ever and it’s not even correct with the vague points. There are multiple parties, and given that there are multiple parties the candidates certainly aren’t chosen by one party.
How are candidates chosen? Who elects them? When are elections held? What is the structure of the elections?
Do you know any of these things? Serious question. Have you ever investigated and learned this topic thoroughly? You know how the US system works I assume, I bet you vaguely understand some other systems too, like parliamentary ones such as the UK (or not, could be wrong). Have you ever actually investigated the topic or have you just passively repeated vague statements made by other people who are also passively repeating vague statements about it?
If you want me to I can in fact give you a fairly good summary of how the Chinese system actually works. But do you even want to know? Are you actually open to learning?
So you don’t know the structure
I much prefer all those two or three party states where the candidates are chosen by their respective parties on the marching orders of the capitalist class
Democracy is when you vote between red man and blue man, both of whom have the same policies.
And both are funded by the same Bankers, Weapons Makers and Resource Extractors
Though, in fairness, red man is actively hostile to LGBT people, migrants, and women whereas blue man is content to let LGBT people, migrants, and women suffer via apathetic neglect instead.
Truly a vibrant political system.
Democracy is when The People Decide if trans people should exist but the tax rate policy is written by the rich
lmao dog you shoulda just said “i don’t know anything about that, why don’t you tell me?”
it still would have taken you zero effort and you’d have avoided embarrassing yourself
President for life doesn’t sound democratic.
Term limits that silence the will of the people don’t sound democratic to me
Neither does censoring criticism of the government and proxy depictions of it.
Imagine for a split second that the strongest government in the world is constantly attempting to cause the overthrow of your legitimately popular government, despite it being popular and significantly beloved by almost all people there. This external, most powerful government in the world tried to cause unrest in every possible way, including funding all opposition groups and organizations regardless of their violent/genocidal intent (e.g. Falun Gong, Islamic terror groups) and cause unrest on your borders (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Korea).
What do you do? When good faith polling shows that you’re popular and fulfilling the needs and desires of your country’s working class but a foreign press tries to speak about the terribleness and need for overthrow, do you just let that happen with more money and propoganda than you can possibly provide to support yourself? Or do you censor the BS and report to your population that these images/ideas/orgs are actually subversive and attempting to change the government they legitimately love.
In this hypothetical situation, what do you propose? Allowing the propaganda but claiming it’s wrong has failed in many projects, and resulted in massacres once fascism won (Chile, Indonesia). Just trying to set up a wall of no information works for a bit, but info can cross anyways (USSR). Allowing limited access if you search for it but not allowing it’s widespread propagation is the method of china. A VPN allows you to see it all, but it can’t be spread too widely before it is stopped from being viral.
Do you have a better solution? Because this is how China presents itself and how the Chinese population sees it
What’s that got to do with China?
Meh, our democracy isn’t even that threatening to China (Taiwan’s is, it showcases a viable alternative to the CPC), they just had to leave us to our “contradictions”, they’d keep booming and we’d just keep buying their stuff while we eat each other alive, if China is doing this, they gotta be really desperate to turn Europe fascist again.
Throwing chairs at each other in the Legislative Yuan over who gets to be America’s most loyal running dog isn’t seen by anyone thing China as a viable alternative to governance.
It’s ok, Hu Jintao really didn’t mind being dragged off the stage like an idiot in a country where face is everything. China does settle fistfights in private, which does set a good example for the populace, ngl.
PS: https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/面子:
Aside from the racism of the “face culture” narrative, the guy is a dinosaur and notably not an official, just there as a matter of respect and legacy as a former President. We don’t really know what happened, but those meetings are long and the dude is probably senile, so he was probably getting helped off the stage by aides at around the time they expected from the outset.
Did that sound like a thing that wasn’t wildly rascist when you wrote it? You can delete your comment. You simply can choose not to be rascist, it doesn’t cost you anything.
Muh face