China tries to stamp out 'Jasmine Revolution'

Jetboogieman said:

What the **** is wrong with you? its says your location under your avatar...

I was simply calling you a sort of nickname by it, no offense meant, American was reffering to me, you appeared to be backing him up, so I wanted you to explain in what way I was defending Chinese oppression...

You sure you're ok in the head there buddy?

Click to expand...

The wording of your post made it very ambiguous as to your meaning. You need to do something about the syntax of your sentences. My nickname is what is called a user name. It's shorter than East Tennessee too. So I'm not buying your explanation.

I already explained how you are defending China's government oppression. You can stop being obtuse any time now.

theunbubba said:

The wording of your post made it very ambiguous as to your meaning. You need to do something about the syntax of your sentences. My nickname is what is called a user name. It's shorter than East Tennessee too. So I'm not buying your explanation.

Click to expand...

Okay Now I'm really confused, what did you think occured here? And why was the threat of Physical violence nessecary?

I already explained how you are defending China's government oppression. You can stop being obtuse any time now.

Click to expand...

Really where?

Jetboogieman said:

Okay Now I'm really confused, what did you think occured here? And why was the threat of Physical violence nessecary?

Click to expand...

I'm not that stupid. You attempted to intimidate me by pointing out my location to me. That much is plain by the fact that my nickname is my username and it's shorter than what you claimed to be using. Nicknames are shorter and easier to use than the original. Like duh.

Jetboogieman said:

Really where?

Click to expand...

Post 17

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...-out-jasmine-revolution-2.html#post1059297364

theunbubba said:

I'm not that stupid. You attempted to intimidate me by pointing out my location to me. That much is plain by the fact that my nickname is my username and it's shorter than what you claimed to be using. Nicknames are shorter and easier to use than the original. Like duh.

Click to expand...

You're not being clear, do you think I traced you or something. That's a pretty serious Accusation. I don't know why I said it, I just did, I'm random.

Post 17

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...-out-jasmine-revolution-2.html#post1059297364

Click to expand...

What is that suppose to prove?

I meant everything that I said as more of a dark joke, I think the chinese leadership should be in prison for their human rights abuses, but right or wrong, what they're doing economically seems to be working, and their precautionary measures taken are most impressive, from a purely morbid security official standpoint.

Right or wrong I will give my enemies credit when they do something rather effective. Which they have.

China's autocrats should be worried about what's happening in the Arab world. Not because they're in any immediate danger of being toppled, but because it plants the seeds for democracy down the road.

Unlike many Arab regimes which are almost universally despised by their people, I don't really see much evidence that most Chinese are unhappy with their government at the present time. However, that could very easily change if/when the economy slows down and the country stops growing at 8-10% per year. As long as that continues, I think the Chinese will be willing to endure the human rights abuses in exchange for being lifted out of poverty. But China can't continue growing that quickly forever. Maybe they have another decade of rapid growth in them...maybe less. But when the economy slows down, I think China will democratize. And this time, I think it's more likely to be relatively peaceful than it was in 1989.

theunbubba said:

It's been 22 years since Tiananmen square. There has been plenty of time to infiltrate the hierarchy of the Communist party. The old guard is dying off and the new people don't see the need. It's like the Soviet Union. as soon as the old guard has lost enough people through attrition the next will be willing to change and weak enough to allow it. They will have no stomach for war. All it takes is another Yeltsin.

Click to expand...

That's possible as well... but, from my perspective, the Chinese government has those that would shut down rebellion swiftly and mercilessly.

It's when the military refuses to shoot down the protesters that the government collapses under it's own weight. Look at Romania, when that regime fell... what was it, a matter of days it took from the orders being given to the overthrow of Ceaușescu ?

There is a great deal of difficulty in specifically predicting the route things will go... but these protests that have engulfed the middle east and now China, is going to spread world-wide... that much at least seems certain.

theunbubba said:

Wrong. The central committee is a specific target and Hu is it's head. There will be real revolution in China soon. This is merely the beginning. They are testing the will of the Party right now. Between 2012 and 2017 there will be a sweeping revolution there. It is inevitable. With economic gains there comes a need for personal freedom. Lesiure time breeds dissatisfaction with being penned in like a slave. If they try to take away the economic gains it will only hasten the revolution. They need to hold free and fair multiparty elections and have a smooth transition to an open society or they will descend into anarchy.

Click to expand...

There is no head of the Central Committee. It is under the authority of the Politburo, which is itself under the authority of the Politburo Standing Committee. No one is the head of the PSC as it is a collective decision-making body. There is not and never has been anyone in absolute or even near-absolute control of the CPC. So your talk of revolution just suggest naivety.

theunbubba said:

It's been 22 years since Tiananmen square. There has been plenty of time to infiltrate the hierarchy of the Communist party. The old guard is dying off and the new people don't see the need. It's like the Soviet Union. as soon as the old guard has lost enough people through attrition the next will be willing to change and weak enough to allow it. They will have no stomach for war. All it takes is another Yeltsin.

Click to expand...

People who liken China to the Soviet Union, in my opinion, reveal they have a fundamental misunderstanding with regards to the subject. While I have no doubt the next generation of leaders will be more progressive and democratic it will not be some massive change. Part of the problem with your comparison is that until Gorbachev no real reform in any area had been pursued. In China market reform was being pursued as early as the 1950's and it was in fact backlash against these attitudes from certain officials that sparked off the Cultural Revolution, which was nothing more than a power struggle over such issues. In addition political reforms have been pursued for decades and people in China have far more rights than people did at any time under the Soviet government.

BmanMcfly said:

Historically, one of the best ways to quell a revolution is to take that anger and point it at a neighboring country.... in this case, I hate to say it, but... well, if Hu comes out and says 'china's problems are the US's fault because of all their bad debts with us' (or something more eloquent to that effect)... Not saying this WILL happen, just that people don't seem to mind brutal dictators if the country is at war.

Though, if China DID go the war route then, it wouldn't necessarily be aimed at the US either.

(for the chinese censors block this out)
The other option would be that the Chinese might just make another example of those that would oppose them.. like they did at Tiananmen square.

Click to expand...

Tiananmen had nothing to do with making an example out of anyone. If they had very quickly engaged in a crackdown that would be one thing, but it took a great deal before the Chinese government sent in the military and under the circumstances deaths were inevitable. Had the same kind of mass action happened in the United States I doubt our government would act any different.

Demon of Light said:

A revolution in China can have no reasonable chance of success for the simple reason that there is no clear target. Who are they supposed to remove? China's system was developed from the beginning with the intention of preventing any one person or group from controlling everything. Now, that does not mean popular action cannot have an effect on reform as this has been the case many times in the PRC's history for good and for bad, but a "revolution" is just a naive term used by people who actually think China can be characterized in any way as a dictatorship.

Click to expand...

It's not a single man dictatorship, but it's still a one party dictatorship. The Chinese government will use force, unjustified by law and democratic philosophy, against its people to maintain its grip on nearly absolute power. To most people, that's a dictatorship.

nonpareil said:

It's not a single man dictatorship, but it's still a one party dictatorship. The Chinese government will use force, unjustified by law and democratic philosophy, against its people to maintain its grip on nearly absolute power. To most people, that's a dictatorship.

Click to expand...

"One party dictatorship" is no more logical a term than "two party dictatorship" because how many political organizations exist is irrelevant. Dictatorship is defined by one-man rule. It is about an individual being at the top of the pyramid and directing all actions undertaken by the government in a manner that is absolute and without regard to the rights of the people.

The Chinese central government also does not have nearly absolute power in any manner so it cannot maintain its grip as there is none.

Demon of Light said:

"One party dictatorship" is no more logical a term than "two party dictatorship" because how many political organizations exist is irrelevant. Dictatorship is defined by one-man rule. It is about an individual being at the top of the pyramid and directing all actions undertaken by the government in a manner that is absolute and without regard to the rights of the people.

Click to expand...

Fair enough.

The Chinese central government also does not have nearly absolute power in any manner so it cannot maintain its grip as there is none.

Click to expand...

Who else share power with the CCP?

nonpareil said:

Who else share power with the CCP?

Click to expand...

Well, while there are different political parties and independents who take part in the government I was not thinking of that. Rather China does not have a highly centralized system of government. It is more centralized than it once was in some ways, but there are also more checks on power and clearer protections for rights. The central government cannot simply dictate what the provincial or local governments should do.

Demon of Light said:

People who liken China to the Soviet Union, in my opinion, reveal they have a fundamental misunderstanding with regards to the subject. While I have no doubt the next generation of leaders will be more progressive and democratic it will not be some massive change. Part of the problem with your comparison is that until Gorbachev no real reform in any area had been pursued. In China market reform was being pursued as early as the 1950's and it was in fact backlash against these attitudes from certain officials that sparked off the Cultural Revolution, which was nothing more than a power struggle over such issues. In addition political reforms have been pursued for decades and people in China have far more rights than people did at any time under the Soviet government.

Click to expand...

This is an important point. In the USSR the state was standing in the way of capital, in China they are working together.

Demon of Light said:

Well, while there are different political parties and independents who take part in the government I was not thinking of that.

Click to expand...

Just because a political party exist doesn't mean it shares any power with the CCP. If you say there is, it would be news to me, so I would really like to know which party that is.

Rather China does not have a highly centralized system of government. It is more centralized than it once was in some ways, but there are also more checks on power and clearer protections for rights. The central government cannot simply dictate what the provincial or local governments should do.

Click to expand...

Actually it does. It sets policy which the local government follows, though maybe not the exact steps. If the local government do something wrong and those at the top in Beijing hear about it, they can simply remove that local chief. But the fact remains, they are all from one party. No single organisation can dictate every thing its memebers do, it doesn't change the fact that the CCP is the only party in power in China (unless you can point out how other parties share that power).