Democracy gives India edge over China, say experts

[Chinese-Dragon]

agreed if china is a democracy we will be alteast 100 years aheads of india no doubt about it , singapore , hk, taiwan and korea are fine examples what china can do if we are a democracy

To clarify, Singapore, HK, Taiwan and South Korea were all non-democracies during their early development phase.

It was only AFTER they had become developed economies, that they carried out political liberalization.

Even in my own city HK, we have never been a democracy, and today we still are not (i.e. we cannot elect our top leaders). Yet we have an HDI ranking above countries like Britain/France/Spain, and the 2nd highest life expectancy on Earth.

Singapore and HK are two examples of Chinese cities that have reached an advanced stage of development without democracy, even today Singapore is still classified as a "Hybrid" system, and HK is not a democracy at all. This shows how advanced Chinese societies can become after only a few decades of development.

 

[terranMarine]

As long the system works in China who cares what some Indians or western people think about China. Our country is continuously developing and planning ahead, the past decades we have seen strong growth and some reform. Sure there are still lots of poverty and many social issues to face but that's also happening in western countries where democracies have been praised by the whites. Now look at these so called democracies, i see plenty unrest going on, government not listening to its people. Governing millions of people isn't the same as 1.3 bln and China isn't doing a bad job either.

 

[eddieInUK]

Taiwan's democracy is only 12 years old. Look how chaotic we are right now. As we stand right now, there's no way to have any constructive conversation in congress for the good of all people. It's always bickering and non-sense and defamation and reality show.
When I was in high school (like 6 years ago) I never thought I would say something like this. But I'm really envy of all the 5-year, 10-year, and 15-year plans put forward by the communist party. A developed country doesn't necessarily mean it has democratic. Or put it another way, democracy is not the only system that can have their people's voice heard, right?
This is like the fallacy of capitalism must and only can exist in a democratic system (which now we know is totally false).

We have the same language and same culture foundation. There are lots of research on Taiwan in mainland China. I agree that the idea of freedom, human rights but, not in west style. We have our history, culture so we should find the way fits us.
Anyway, did you change your passport ? How is Taiwan now ? Is economy OK currently ?

 

[Nan Yang]

I only criticize India when you guys start bashing us. Starting with Jbond in this thread (now banned) and followed up by all the other Indians.

Though if you want me to speak completely objectively, I have no problem with the concept of "democracy in a developing country". I think it can be a very good advantage, look at Brazil for instance.

India and their democrazy already lost.

Arguing with these people just make you vomit blood

 

[eddieInUK]

I just have one question on India, in India, how many land belongs to land lord ? Do you have exact data or statistics on it ?

 

[jayron]

If anything, such a chaotic democracy is holding India back. I think democracy works only if the people are literate and knowledgeable. I would rather prefer a benevolent dictatorship till the nation attains a certain level of development. It has worked in S.Korea, Japan , Singapore and Malaysia.

 

[eddieInUK]

If anything, such a chaotic democracy is holding India back. I think democracy works only if the people are literate and knowledgeable. I would rather prefer a benevolent dictatorship till the nation attains a certain level of development. It has worked in S.Korea, Japan , Singapore and Malaysia.

I stand with you on this. People are stupid, given freedom they will only do stupid things and easy to be manipulated. I would not say dictatorship is good, but a stronger government seems feasible for early development. Indians' internal stuff is decided by Indians, I can not elaborate that much.
Lets openly talk about it. Just feel free to compare China and India, what has China's government did and what the Indian government did.

Lets openly talk about it. Just feel free to compare China and India, what has China's government did and what the Indian government did.
I start first, Mao almost killed or removed all the land lords and give land to farmers. Thats why in early stage, China can soon go into industry stage. How many landlords are still in India ?

 

[Sasquatch]

To clarify, Singapore, HK, Taiwan and South Korea were all non-democracies during their early development phase.

It was only AFTER they had become developed economies, that they carried out political liberalization.

Even in my own city HK, we have never been a democracy, and today we still are not (i.e. we cannot elect our top leaders). Yet we have an HDI ranking above countries like Britain/France/Spain, and the 2nd highest life expectancy on Earth.

Singapore and HK are two examples of Chinese cities that have reached an advanced stage of development without democracy, even today Singapore is still classified as a "Hybrid" system, and HK is not a democracy at all. This shows how advanced Chinese societies can become after only a few decades of development.

Singapore's authoritative model brought them execellent development, same with Taipei authoritative rule on it's economic development then political reform.

I'm sure you have looked at this ? while it can't work for China it does offer some incite main focus should be on Development & Economy while some reform such as modifying the OCD( One Child Policy), more transparency and cutting down on corruption.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-far-east/215468-will-china-adopt-singapore-model.html

I think we need to clarify if political liberalization equals western style democracy. I'm all for more political participation from the grass roots. But people from mainland should think twice before really going forward for western style democracy (it's a one way trip). I surely hope China won't adopt western democracy blindly like us. Democracy is a relatively young political system, and it's not proven to work yet (how many democratic systems actually have lived longer than any of China's past dynasty?)

Taiwan's democracy is only 12 years old. Look how chaotic we are right now. As we stand right now, there's no way to have any constructive conversation in congress for the good of all people. It's always bickering and non-sense and defamation and reality show.

When I was in high school (like 6 years ago) I never thought I would say something like this. But I'm really envy of all the 5-year, 10-year, and 15-year plans put forward by the communist party. A developed country doesn't necessarily mean it has to be democratic. Or put it another way, democracy is not the only system that can have their people's voice heard, right?
This is like the fallacy of capitalism must and only can exist in a democratic system (which now we know is totally false).

Taipei followed the same as South Korea did on economic development then political, KMT did a pretty good job despite some corrupt after Chiang gave up his obsession with reconquering the mainland. Japan was Asia's first copycat but they managed to over come it and South Korea, Taipei followed same will happen for China, but we also will learn from their mistakes.

 

[jayron]

I stand with you on this. People are stupid, given freedom they will only do stupid things and easy to be manipulated. I would not say dictatorship is good, but a stronger government seems feasible for early development. Indians' internal stuff is decided by Indians, I can not elaborate that much.
Lets openly talk about it. Just feel free to compare China and India, what has China's government did and what the Indian government did.

Lets openly talk about it. Just feel free to compare China and India, what has China's government did and what the Indian government did.
I start first, Mao almost killed or removed all the land lords and give land to farmers. Thats why in early stage, China can soon go into industry stage. How many landlords are still in India ?

Actually India also abolished feudalism and confiscated the lands of Kings. But didn't kill any one. Some states redistributed lands to poor farmers. I don't necessarily agree with what Mao did. He caused death and destruction in China on an immense scale.I think China started developing only after his death.

India is an extremely diverse nation . So it is all the more difficult to choose a system that will satisfy everyone.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Singapore's authoritative model brought them execellent development, same with Taipei authoritative rule on it's economic development then political reform.

Taipei followed the same as South Korea did on economic development then political, KMT did a pretty good job despite some corrupt after Chiang gave up his obsession with reconquering the mainland. Japan was Asia's first copycat but they managed to over come it and South Korea, Taipei followed same will happen for China, but we also will learn from their mistakes.

Japan was a de-facto "one-party" state until 2009 as well, when the opposition was finally voted in after half a decade of one-party rule.

Japan: The trouble with one-party rule | The Economist

I guess this is just how it goes in East Asia. Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan... all developed under a non-democratic setup, and only decided to go for political liberalization AFTER they became advanced (developed) economies.

 

[Sasquatch]

Japan was a de-facto "one-party" state until 2009 as well, when the opposition was finally voted in after half a decade of one-party rule.

Japan: The trouble with one-party rule | The Economist

I guess this is just how it goes in East Asia. Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan... all developed under a non-democratic setup, and only decided to go for political liberalization AFTER they became advanced (developed) economies.

It might have something to do with the Confucian-style social structure that exists in the East Asian region.

CPC is going to rule for another 20 years, and Deng said China should be a democracy around 2050, but if China were to be a democracy say around 2020(which won't happen it should be authoritarian democracy) the only REAL benefit would be more pressure on Taipei to reunify, other then that I don't see much that it could bring and yes East Asia is more towards Economy & Development first then democracy and human rights as many Western countries are.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

CPC is going to rule for another 20 years, and Deng said China should be a democracy around 2050, but if China were to be a democracy say around 2020(which won't happen it should be authoritarian democracy) the only REAL benefit would be more pressure on Taipei to reunify, other then that I don't see much that it could bring and yes East Asia is more towards Economy & Development first then democracy and human rights as many Western countries are.

Come to think of it, a similar thing happened in the West as well. America for example became a superpower in 1945 (it was already a developed country several decades before that), but full democracy in terms of black people being given non-discriminatory voting rights only happened in 1965.

Voting Rights Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And when Britain was becoming a great power, it wasn't a full democracy either but rather a Monarchy.

 

[Sasquatch]

Come to think of it, a similar thing happened in the West as well. America for example became a superpower in 1945 (it was already a developed country several decades before that), but full democracy in terms of black people being given non-discriminatory voting rights only happened in 1965.

Voting Rights Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And when Britain was becoming a great power, it wasn't a full democracy either but rather a Monarchy.

I was visiting the UK & Germany not to long ago from what I have observed they have a little to much democracy to get say certain things bills passed & also due to mass uncontrollable illegal immigration plenty get citizenship those who are deported go through a long process they also have to respect the illegal immigrants rights on the other hand in China illegals are sent back and drug dealers executed just my observation.

but you certainly don't need democracy to be a superpower the USSR if it could implement economic reforms first.

 

[eddieInUK]

Actually India also abolished feudalism and confiscated the lands of Kings. But didn't kill any one. Some states redistributed lands to poor farmers. I don't necessarily agree with what Mao did. He caused death and destruction in China on an immense scale.I think China started developing only after his death.
India is an extremely diverse nation . So it is all the more difficult to choose a system that will satisfy everyone.

So, how many lands are still belonging to the landlords ?

 

[dreamer53320]

We have the same language and same culture foundation. There are lots of research on Taiwan in mainland China. I agree that the idea of freedom, human rights but, not in west style. We have our history, culture so we should find the way fits us.
Anyway, did you change your passport ? How is Taiwan now ? Is economy OK currently ?

No, I didn't change my passport, I'm just studying in the US. But I want to be a sea turtle in the future to be part of the history of reunification and the return of China to the top of the world.

Taiwan is ok I guess in term of Economy (ECFA really helped Taiwan a great deal). But politically it's in turmoil .....and in gridlock.............