1. Population planning in an overcrowded nation is required. No quibbles on that.
However, it is not ideal to do so through a diktat. The better mode would be the democratic way i.e. which persuades the people to understand the negativity of having large families for themselves as also for the Nation.
Giving a diktat only leads to malpractices. This would not have happened if it was done by persuasion:
The above would indicate the malpractice and social problems that can happen if there are Govt diktats to the population and not persuasion as is done in democracies.
In India, we are also overpopulated, but it is being done with persuasion through public awareness programmes. To prevent gender selection so that there are only male children, sonography for sex determination of the foetus is forbidden and illegal.
Of course, a Govt diktat with fines and education deprivation will have instant success, though with the disadvantage of having an huge surplus of males leading to social imbalance and socially harmful activities.
2. No one care about religion in China?
If so, what do you mean Buddhists are not monitored? Does that not mean that there are Buddhists and does the fact that they are not monitored not mean that the said Buddhists practice their religion? Contradiction in your statement, if I may say.
You state that Buddhists are not monitored. Applicable to the Tibetans or are they the terrorists you allude to and hence don’t exist? Does it mean that Chinese don’t have Christians and Muslims? If they are there, are they not citizens of China? Or are you suggesting that they are not recognised that they also exist. Are there not the Muslim Huis. even if you wish to classify the Uyghurs as ‘terrorists’.
Now, if there were no religion and no Christians, then maybe this could be explained.
By the way, are there not clandestine ‘house’ churches in China that are there to avoid Govt monitoring?
3. Censorship is 100% and you say you agree on the degree. You also state that English sites are not censored.
What is the reason why English sites are not censored if Chinese sites are? I have not understood the logic. Does it mean that all who understand English are pro Government and pro CCP people and Communist Party cardholders?
Whatever is the case, could this be explained since this report and your comments are at divergence and so to a layman, as me, it is convoluted.
4. Compensation is always paid you state. The issue is fair compensation as per the market rates.
As far as demolition on illegally occupied area is concerned, one can understand. There are enough of sites to indicate how even property owned by people are forcibly demolished in connivance with the authorities.
There are many links one could append to include of people committing suicide over the issue or even being murdered.
Let me give only one report from China. Org.
I am sure a century old hutongs are not on illegal occupation of land.
5. I am surprised that you are not aware of many countries where the education is multilingual. As a starter it is suffice to mention India, Spain, Philippines, Africa, France et al.
Just Google.
I would also like to add that many are unconformable with Chinese posters since they pass off justifications that prove to be outright wrong that even is not supported by the Chinese media!
It creates a trust deficit and so even if a Chinese poster is telling the facts right, there is always the doubt that it one of those fast one off the cuff.
Not losing face is an important of Chinese psychology, but then distorting facts is even worse.
Lastly, there is no country that is absolutely perfect, no matter how much we love our country!!
