In photos: Vietnamese president’s visit to Japan

[gambit]

Wasn't S.K as one time ruled by a dictatorship for over 30 yrs, Japan also was rule under some form of 1 party dictatorship for a long time as well? How bout Singapore also ruled under one party dictatorship but all 3 country are properious and not as a poor nations. Country allow to participate in free trade or not under any sanction with great leaders and capable men will develop their nation at a quicker pace and help elimate poverty. Communist was spread all around the world because of classes struggle during the feudal rule in the early 20 century. WW1 and WW2 many country still under colonial rule, people would used communist idealogy to uproot and fought against the empirialist worldwide. When your livilhood improve from a poverty background, people will less likely to feel discontend toward the government. Since Democracy isn't be all and end all silver bullets to govern a country, even as a single party dictatorship or a dictatorship that can improve people life, provide some form of social justice, and minimize corruption in their country, the population will less likely demand a total implement of democracy in their country. Not all democracy nations are rich and not corrupt without violating human right in their society. Soviet Union collapse and implemented free elected government but Putin can out maneuver the electoral process and become the Russian president for the 3rd time, when you have the money and the power behind you can manipulate the system to become a ruler.

You are still avoiding the question: Why are dictatorships preferable over participatory politics ? Or let me put it this way: Why SHOULD dictatorship be preferable over participatory politics ?

What SKR and JPN were after WW II are red herrings when it comes to my question. But if you want to go there, then how about Europe after WW II ? You think there are no classes under Marxism ? Think again, my naive friend. In politics, and the moment there is any community of sort there is politics, anything that can be used to distinguish one person from another -- will be used. Whether it is money or influence. In politics, influence and connections are just as good as money, if not better. It is man's inherent nature in desiring to better himself in anyway, be it with education or just a comfortable couch. Communism is the political expression of Marxism, and under communism, the classes are the same: the haves and the have-nots. In both money and influence. How else can you explain the families of Party leaders live much better lives than the masses the leaders claimed to represent ?

Did the usual land reform programs whenever and wherever communism was imposed work out in the long term ? No. The people who got the land ended up not much better than where they were before. In the end, the country remains the same as before the communists takeover. The pattern repeat itself over and over and yet no one seemed to learn -- until the ignoble and spectacular collapse of the Soviet Union.

So...Why SHOULD dictatorship be preferable over participatory politics ?

 

[gambit]

The guy is a serial liar, he makes up a lot of "fact" for the sake of backing up his lies. He wants Viet Nam to be another democrap like India or the Phillpines so he substitutes his observation from those two countries as what he saw in Viet Nam

No...I want Viet Nam to be like South Korea or Japan, the countries that invested in Viet Nam in spite of US sanctions.

You are nothing more than an ignorant fool. A stooge for a failed ideology. So how well has communism worked out for Viet Nam ? My house in the US is 3000 sq/ft on .25 acre. You got a house back there in VN ? I have two Jeeps and a motorcycle. A real motorcycle, not a scooter. What do you got in VN, a bicycle ? A Vespa ? Or perhaps even a 250 cc Honda ? Am middle class. How about you ? I bet you are not even middle class in VN. I bet I live better than the local Party officials you hope to marry to get a decent life.

It must sucks to be you, lady, to have so much petty jealousy for us Viet Kieus all because you want to rehabilitate a failed ideology.

 

[vtnsx]

No...I want Viet Nam to be like South Korea or Japan, the countries that invested in Viet Nam in spite of US sanctions.

You are nothing more than an ignorant fool. A stooge for a failed ideology. So how well has communism worked out for Viet Nam ? My house in the US is 3000 sq/ft on .25 acre. You got a house back there in VN ? I have two Jeeps and a motorcycle. A real motorcycle, not a scooter. What do you got in VN, a bicycle ? A Vespa ? Or perhaps even a 250 cc Honda ? Am middle class. How about you ? I bet you are not even middle class in VN. I bet I live better than the local Party officials you hope to marry to get a decent life.

It must sucks to be you, lady, to have so much petty jealousy for us Viet Kieus all because you want to rehabilitate a failed ideology.

Gambit, that was unneccessary.

 

[gambit]

Gambit, that was unneccessary.

Yes...It was.

Communists need to be exposed for what they are: ignorant and/or delusional fools.

Not to say they are not intelligent. Many of them are very intelligent. But many of them are ignorant and became gullible. Many of them are delusional about human nature and that they think they can change that nature by simple fiat. And all of them are fools.

Show me a single successful communist country in the world. Not one of them can. The only thing they can do is point out the flaws of the democratic/capitalist systems, as if somehow that would make the sorry history of communism more palatable and that we should give communism another try. From this, we can say that communism make people stupid as well.

 

[EastSea]

Japanese businesses vow to expand operations in Viet Nam

VietNamNet Bridge – President Truong Tan Sang of Viet Nam yesterday (March 17) told the Chairman of the Japan External Trade Organisation (JETRO), Hiroyuki Ishige, he was delighted at a survey that showed up to 70 per cent of Japanese businesses in Viet Nam planned to expand their operations.

Sang, who is in Japan on a State visit, added that he hoped two-way trade between Viet Nam and Japan would hit US$50 billion before 2020.

The same day, at a meeting with Japanese Emperor Akihito in Tokyo, the Vietnamese leader said that Viet Nam gave top priority to ties with Japan.

Sang praised the country for its long culture, hardworking and creative people and outstanding economic growth.

Emperor Akihito said he appreciated Viet Nam's thoughts and support in past years, especially after the 2011 earthquake and tsunami disasters.

The two leaders said the 40th anniversary of Viet Nam-Japan diplomatic ties last year accelerated bilateral ties.

Sang invited the Emperor, his wife and members of the Japanese royal family to visit Viet Nam. The invitation was accepted.

Sang told Japanese business leaders that Viet Nam would continue to create the best possible conditions for foreign investors, including those from Japan.

At a meeting with the Vice-chairman of the Japan Business Federation, Masahiro Sakane, Sang spoke highly of the federation's role in enhancing economic, trade and investment ties.

He said the framework established by the federation, such as the Viet Nam-Japan Joint Initiative, had helped build a more attractive investment climate in Viet Nam.

The President attended a seminar with leaders of Japan's largest groups organised by the business federation which discussed Viet Nam's economic situation and orientations.

He asked Japanese firms for more help with education and training to create high-quality human resources.

Representatives of Japanese groups spoke up about boosting trade and investment between the two countries, especially to help Viet Nam achieve sustainable development and its industrialisation goals by 2020.

At a meeting with the Chief Executive Officer of Sumitomo Corporation, Kuniharu Nakamura, the Vietnamese leader said he valued the corporation's support for Viet Nam in education, including its provision of more than 2,000 scholarships since 1996.

Longstanding relations

Also yesterday at a Viet Nam–Japan business forum, Sang said he appreciated how Japanese firms bolstered ties.

He added that Viet Nam considered the success of Japanese businesses as its own.

Participants said that Viet Nam–Japan ties had thrived since the strategic partnership was established in 2009.

Japan is now the major investor, the biggest supplier of official development assistance and the fourth largest trade partner of Viet Nam.

Sang witnessed the signing of an agreement on co-operation between chambers of commerce in the two nations.

He also presented the Chief Justice of the Japanese Supreme Court, Takesaki Hironobu, with a Friendship Order.

Hironobu noted that the Supreme Court of Japan would contribute more to Vietnamese and Japanese ties, especially in judicial reform.

At a reception for the Governor of Aichi prefecture, Hideaki Omura, the Vietnamese leader said he hoped that Aichi would welcome more Vietnamese students and graduates. It is currently home to the largest number of Vietnamese students from within the ASEAN region.

Omura said that the two sides should build on their strength. This included establishing a direct air route from Aichi to Viet Nam.

Also the same day, Sang greeted former Acting President of the Democratic Party, Yoshito Sengoku, and former Senator Matsuda Iwao.

Sang said a similarity of cultures and long-standing relations had created a strong foundation for their people.

Meeting with the President of the Nikkei Group, Tsuneo Kita, Sang hailed the news agency for promoting bilateral co-operation.

Kita said as Japan's leading media group, Nikkei would continue providing helpful and timely information about Viet Nam's business climate for Japanese enterprises.

Source: VNS

 

[cnleio]

No...I want Viet Nam to be like South Korea or Japan, the countries that invested in Viet Nam in spite of US sanctions.

You are nothing more than an ignorant fool. A stooge for a failed ideology. So how well has communism worked out for Viet Nam ? My house in the US is 3000 tq/ft on .25 acre. You got a house back there in VN ? I have two Jeeps and a motorcycle. A real motorcycle, not a scooter. What do you got in VN, a bicycle ? A Vespa ? Or perhaps even a 250 cc Honda ? Am middle class. How about you ? I bet you are not even middle class in VN. I bet I live better than the local Party officials you hope to marry to get a decent life.

It must sucks to be you, lady, to have so much petty jealousy for us Viet Kieus all because you want to rehabilitate a failed ideology.

Well it become interesting, when @gambit start to teach Vietnamese ... I come from communism China YES u know, age 28, if i say have a 140m2 house worth 0.2million U.S dollar no loans,and have some deposits(not many). Which class i can belong to in today United State? Right now i get salary near 1,400 U.S dollar/month, i didn't buy car yet usually take bus or subway everyday.

Do i have the HOPE in China? Or Do i have A HOPE in America ? Im just curious what's my life condition in U.S ?

To prove i tell the truth,u can check this pic thread: the life in China

 

[sincity]

You are still avoiding the question: Why are dictatorships preferable over participatory politics ? Or let me put it this way: Why SHOULD dictatorship be preferable over participatory politics ?

What SKR and JPN were after WW II are red herrings when it comes to my question. But if you want to go there, then how about Europe after WW II ? You think there are no classes under Marxism ? Think again, my naive friend. In politics, and the moment there is any community of sort there is politics, anything that can be used to distinguish one person from another -- will be used. Whether it is money or influence. In politics, influence and connections are just as good as money, if not better. It is man's inherent nature in desiring to better himself in anyway, be it with education or just a comfortable couch. Communism is the political expression of Marxism, and under communism, the classes are the same: the haves and the have-nots. In both money and influence. How else can you explain the families of Party leaders live much better lives than the masses the leaders claimed to represent ?

Did the usual land reform programs whenever and wherever communism was imposed work out in the long term ? No. The people who got the land ended up not much better than where they were before. In the end, the country remains the same as before the communists takeover. The pattern repeat itself over and over and yet no one seemed to learn -- until the ignoble and spectacular collapse of the Soviet Union.

So...Why SHOULD dictatorship be preferable over participatory politics ?

Ideally democracy society will be better than a dictatorship but in reality democracy without a rich economy then the population in the democracy society also suffer within the same condition of the people in dictatorship society. You should ask about 100 millions of Indian, Phillippinos, Mexican how their democracy society work out for them in the last 30 yrs? These people suffered in horrid economic condition without any industrial base or financial system to lift them out of their stricken poverty. Would a democracy society serve as a magic pill to cure all the illness in their society? Aren't these people have to live under the same corrupt democratic elected government as with the people live under communist and dictorship regime? To ask me why dictorship is preferrable to democratic elect government like to ask the homeless if he prefer a warm meal with a decend place to live over a freedom to participate in politic. There aren't any clear cut answers to why democratic government better serve the people than a dictatorship or one party system with the capable leaders can deliver what the population need in their society. Most but not all people are inherently are corrupt, greedy, selfish to the point when they in power they only look out after their own interest be it in a democratic society or in any other form of government. A corrupt leadder elected through a democratic process will trample on the right of their population but couldn't deliver the economy to meet the need of their population. After the orange revolution in Ukraine and the elected democratic government lost their election to the former ousted corrupt government because the democratic elected government also as corrupt compare to the previous government, now Ukraine start another revolution to ousted a legitimate people elected government just lost Crimea sovereignty over to Russia and the threat of Eastern and Southern Ukraine will join Russia federation. Democracy revolution couldn't solve Ukraine problems but end up break their country apart. I ask you what did Democracy ever benefit the people of Ukraine?

It's all about economy stupid, people just want to make money and have a better live be it in a dictator or democracy society

 

[gambit]

Ideally democracy society will be better than a dictatorship but in reality democracy without a rich economy then the population in the democracy society also suffer within the same condition of the people in dictatorship society. You should ask about 100 millions of Indian, Phillippinos, Mexican how their democracy society work out for them in the last 30 yrs? These people suffered in horrid economic condition without any industrial base or financial system to lift them out of their stricken poverty. Would a democracy society serve as a magic pill to cure all the illness in their society? Aren't these people have to live under the same corrupt democratic elected government as with the people live under communist and dictorship regime? To ask me why dictorship is preferrable to democratic elect government like to ask the homeless if he prefer a warm meal with a decend place to live over a freedom to participate in politic. There aren't any clear cut answers to why democratic government better serve the people than a dictatorship or one party system with the capable leaders can deliver what the population need in their society. Most but not all people are inherently are corrupt, greedy, selfish to the point when they in power they only look out after their own interest be it in a democratic society or in any other form of government. A corrupt leadder elected through a democratic process will trample on the right of their population but couldn't deliver the economy to meet the need of their population. After the orange revolution in Ukraine and the elected democratic government lost their election to the former ousted corrupt government because the democratic elected government also as corrupt compare to the previous government, now Ukraine start another revolution to ousted a legitimate people elected government just lost Crimea sovereignty over to Russia and the threat of Eastern and Southern Ukraine will join Russia federation. Democracy revolution couldn't solve Ukraine problems but end up break their country apart. I ask you what did Democracy ever benefit the people of Ukraine?

It's all about economy stupid, people just want to make money and have a better live be it in a dictator or democracy society

The highlighted are contradictory. If something is judged to be 'ideal' it mean there is nothing even to par, let alone surpass the 'ideal'.

Democracy does not guaranteed wealth or an incorruptible leadership. On the other hand, it has been Marxists who were persistent in telling the masses that only with Marxism, vis-a-vis the communist man, that the classes will be abolished, all hopes fulfilled, and because the country will be ruled by the (abstract) people, corruption and exploitation will be a thing of the past.

So how did that worked out for you ?

One of my favorite authors is Francis Fukuyama...

The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution: Francis Fukuyama: 9780374533229: Amazon.com: Books

In his latest book, the lesson is that participatory politics should accompany increasing wealth, be it for the peasantry or the landed gentry or the nobles. If increasing political freedoms cannot accompany increasing wealth for any reason, such as the Koreas after a war that divided the country and that each side require a type of 'strong man' leadership to hold the defend the new countries, then such freedoms should not lag too far behind the increasing wealth lest the temporary dictatorship turns into a permanence. Look at the annual tens of thousands of citizen violent protests against the local authority, for example.

It is time for the incompetent communists running Viet Nam to retire. They have brought nothing but misery, oppression, and bloodbaths in their reign of terror since 1975. If it is 'the economy, stupid', then do not say that to us who live under democracy/capitalism. Call those who know nothing about economics but insist in following Marxism -- stupid.

Democracy and capitalism may not guarantee wealth, but Marxism and communism do guarantee poverty. Your choice.

 

[sincity]

The highlighted are contradictory. If something is judged to be 'ideal' it mean there is nothing even to par, let alone surpass the 'ideal'.

Democracy does not guaranteed wealth or an incorruptible leadership. On the other hand, it has been Marxists who were persistent in telling the masses that only with Marxism, vis-a-vis the communist man, that the classes will be abolished, all hopes fulfilled, and because the country will be ruled by the (abstract) people, corruption and exploitation will be a thing of the past.

So how did that worked out for you ?

One of my favorite authors is Francis Fukuyama...

The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution: Francis Fukuyama: 9780374533229: Amazon.com: Books

In his latest book, the lesson is that participatory politics should accompany increasing wealth, be it for the peasantry or the landed gentry or the nobles. If increasing political freedoms cannot accompany increasing wealth for any reason, such as the Koreas after a war that divided the country and that each side require a type of 'strong man' leadership to hold the defend the new countries, then such freedoms should not lag too far behind the increasing wealth lest the temporary dictatorship turns into a permanence. Look at the annual tens of thousands of citizen violent protests against the local authority, for example.

It is time for the incompetent communists running Viet Nam to retire. They have brought nothing but misery, oppression, and bloodbaths in their reign of terror since 1975. If it is 'the economy, stupid', then do not say that to us who live under democracy/capitalism. Call those who know nothing about economics but insist in following Marxism -- stupid.

Democracy and capitalism may not guarantee wealth, but Marxism and communism do guarantee poverty. Your choice.

What I mean ideally in term of can you live up to the idea or the philosophical speaking of the utopia society create from an polical ideology whether a democracy vs communist ideology. Many problems in our civilization can't be solve through a quick fix scheme of idealogy approach to the problems. Isn't democracy guarantor of equal right to all but fail short to this idea itself since no men are born alike and no men are born equal? Just as commuist can't abolist the classes within the society they rule, equal right from democratic society can never be achieve. You can't uphold the right of a segment of the population without infringed on the other. Communism felt short and collapse within itself because the politic intermix with economy, without the wealth concentrated in the population, communism lack the financial support from the poor populaton like a stack of cards collapse from it base. In a democratic society allow the individual the freedom to participate in a free market but with lack oversight and regulation few cons men to manupilated the system for their personal gain and threaten the nation on the brink of financial collapse.

Democracy can't personal freedom and capitalism can't guarantee personal wealth then what good for a human being to lose their life over to preserve the false promise and false hope from the ideology of democracy revolution?

 

[vtnsx]

What I mean ideally in term of can you live up to the idea or the philosophical speaking of the utopia society create from an polical ideology whether a democracy vs communist ideology. Many problems in our civilization can't be solve through a quick fix scheme of idealogy approach to the problems. Isn't democracy guarantor of equal right to all but fail short to this idea itself since no men are born alike and no men are born equal? Just as commuist can't abolist the classes within the society they rule, equal right from democratic society can never be achieve. You can't uphold the right of a segment of the population without infringed on the other. Communism felt short and collapse within itself because the politic intermix with economy, without the wealth concentrated in the population, communism lack the financial support from the poor populaton like a stack of cards collapse from it base. In a democratic society allow the individual the freedom to participate in a free market but with lack oversight and regulation few cons men to manupilated the system for their personal gain and threaten the nation on the brink of financial collapse.

Democracy can't personal freedom and capitalism can't guarantee personal wealth then what good for a human being to lose their life over to preserve the false promise and false hope from the ideology of democracy revolution?

It's called the NWO New World Order. One country & one currency. There will be no war, no suffering, equalized wealth and there's no one government but multiple parties.

 

[sincity]

It's called the NWO New World Order. One country & one currency. There will be no war, no suffering, equalized wealth and there's no one government but multiple parties.

How can there be a new world order, in US only 2 well establish party with Republican and Democrat dominate the political landscape without a 3rd party have the financial backing of the elite to threaten the 2 dinasour political party.

 

[vtnsx]

How can there be a new world order, in US only 2 well establish party with Republican and Democrat dominate the political landscape without a 3rd party have the financial backing of the elite to threaten the 2 dinasour political party.

That's not what I'm talking about.

 

[sincity]

That's not what I'm talking about.

You mean to said the world united under one form of government with couple political party fighting over to rule the world, I gave you the prime example how power and politic elite will fight with teeth and nail not to lose their power.

 

[vtnsx]

You mean to said the world united under one form of government with couple political party fighting over to rule the world, I gave you the prime example how power and politic elite will fight with teeth and nail not to lose their power.

sure

 

[Viva_Viet]

You are still avoiding the question: Why are dictatorships preferable over participatory politics ? Or let me put it this way: Why SHOULD dictatorship be preferable over participatory politics ?

What SKR and JPN were after WW II are red herrings when it comes to my question. But if you want to go there, then how about Europe after WW II ? You think there are no classes under Marxism ? Think again, my naive friend. In politics, and the moment there is any community of sort there is politics, anything that can be used to distinguish one person from another -- will be used. Whether it is money or influence. In politics, influence and connections are just as good as money, if not better. It is man's inherent nature in desiring to better himself in anyway, be it with education or just a comfortable couch. Communism is the political expression of Marxism, and under communism, the classes are the same: the haves and the have-nots. In both money and influence. How else can you explain the families of Party leaders live much better lives than the masses the leaders claimed to represent ?

Did the usual land reform programs whenever and wherever communism was imposed work out in the long term ? No. The people who got the land ended up not much better than where they were before. In the end, the country remains the same as before the communists takeover. The pattern repeat itself over and over and yet no one seemed to learn -- until the ignoble and spectacular collapse of the Soviet Union.

So...Why SHOULD dictatorship be preferable over participatory politics ?

What wrong with u again, Mr Gambit ?? Comrade Putin is reviving Great Soviet union by annexing Crime now,.Just wait and see the communist will come to USA and enslave u again soon