Xi Jinping to UN General Assembly: "Democracy is not special right reserved for an individual country"

[chinasun]

这个中文：

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/globaltimes-chinese-patients-head-to-india-for-

China claimed the South China Sea in a completely one-sided move that saw it create many artificial islands in that sea used to facilitate it's armies.
Vietnam, The Phillipines and Indonesia have complained about these developments, as has the rest of the international community.

I think China preaches peace and prosperity, but practices sneaky domination and control.

If you think China is aggressive in the South China Sea, you are a victim of western propaganda. This is the map most would use to demonstrate the excessive claims of China in the South China Sea.

The dash line you see so close to other countries bordering the South China Sea. WTF! This dash line was drawn and published in 1947 after successfully reclaiming from the Imperial Japanese by the Nationalist Government.

This is the actual map of the Spratlys in South China Sea

The red flag with one star is not China, it belongs to Vietnam.

If you are China, would you be shooting at those islands to get them back? Of course! But China didn’t do it, not even when Vietnam was aggressively grabbing them.

Why is China so aggressive in the South China Sea? Could it be because of the lack of balancing power?

Answer (1 of 18): > Question: Why is China so aggressive in the South China Sea? Could it be because of the lack of balancing power? Answer: It is very simple that China has no longer used the strategy “Hide your strength, Buy your time” of Mr. Deng Xiaoping and has started to challenge the US h...

www.quora.com

 

[Pandora]

Current Democracy models are a joke. They have turned governing setups a privilege only reserved for elites. It is promoting inequality and uneven income distribution amongst countries like Pakistan. I believe in a strong central govt rather than power being distributed like a candy for corrupts. Sindh will never recover from benefit of democracy that was bestowed to it via 18th Amendment.

 

[nang2]

Current Democracy models are a joke. They have turned governing setups a privilege only reserved for elites. It is promoting inequality and uneven income distribution amongst countries like Pakistan. I believe in a strong central govt rather than power being distributed like a candy for corrupts. Sindh will never recover from benefit of democracy that was bestowed to it via 18th Amendment.

That is very weird. Landing a government position means a person is an elite. In a way, governing setups are always made up by elites. They are not reserved for elites. They are elites. Why would anyone want to be governed by some non-elite? Here, I use the US definition of "elite":

US : a person who is a member of an elite : a successful and powerful person

 

[Novus ordu seclorum]

That is very weird. Landing a government position means a person is an elite. In a way, governing setups are always made up by elites. They are not reserved for elites. They are elites. Why would anyone want to be governed by some non-elite? Here, I use the US definition of "elite":

US : a person who is a member of an elite : a successful and powerful person

I have no desire to be governed by a successful and powerful person. Good governance is by the righteous. People who don't want to leave anyone behind and don't want to force anyone. People who believe in rights.

 

[nang2]

I have no desire to be governed by a successful and powerful person. Good governance is by the righteous. People who don't want to leave anyone behind and don't want to force anyone. People who believe in rights.

By governing people, he is POWERFUL. What power is more powerful than governing people in this world?

 

[Novus ordu seclorum]

I have issues. Hitler was elected in a multi party democratic country, wasn't he? Donald Trump? India has been a multi party democratic country for over 70 years. Why is it still one of the poorest, good for nothing country in the world? The US has two parties, China has one, India has 1000, How many is enough, too many, not enough? Why not let everyone be a party? Why have a government at all? Does the word "reality" mean anything or everyone in the world has to live in their delusions for ever? So you think you are better than us just because you can cast a random vote to "represent" one in a trillion once in a while? Lecture me please

On the other hand communism is democracy gone wild which forces people into reeducation centers as if they are cattle. People who love freedom cannot consider this as anything other than an existential threat. Fascism isn't any better. India may have more than one party but it is governed by Hindutva fascist ideology.

 

[Novus ordu seclorum]

By governing people, he is POWERFUL. What power is more powerful than governing people in this world?

Power comes with responsibility and rights of the people. I would not be okay with being governed as if people are employees in a corporation. But governments today have way more power than a corporation, are far more corrupt, and far less profitable.

 

[nang2]

Power comes with responsibility and rights of the people. I would not be okay with being governed as if people are employees in a corporation. But governments today have way more power than a corporation, are far more corrupt, and far less profitable.

Responsibility is only real when it can be enforced. There are many cases where power doesn't come with responsibility. Self righteous people often think they can get away with the responsibility because they are so righteous. Even if they do something wrong, their hearts are always in the right place, aren't they? That is why the idea that "Good governance is by the righteous" often leads to power without responsibility.

If you want the power with responsibility, you need to be governed as if you are the employer. But tell me which employer would say "good work is by the righteous". Employer's mentality is much simpler: if you are capable and with reasonable integrity, do the work; if you screw it up, you will be fired. Don't expect your employees are saints.

 

[Imran Khan]

USA democracy is paid lobbying you pay more you got what you want simple .

 

[nang2]

USA democracy is paid lobbying you pay more you got what you want simple .

The question is about how much democracy, not about perfect democracy. People know more shortcoming about US democracy. Anybody knows how self-claimed "democracy" works in China?

 

[Novus ordu seclorum]

Responsibility is only real when it can be enforced. There are many cases where power doesn't come with responsibility. Self righteous people often think they can get away with the responsibility because they are so righteous. Even if they do something wrong, their hearts are always in the right place, aren't they? That is why the idea that "Good governance is by the righteous" often leads to power without responsibility.

If you want the power with responsibility, you need to be governed as if you are the employer. But tell me which employer would say "good work is by the righteous". Employer's mentality is much simpler: if you are capable and with reasonable integrity, do the work; if you screw it up, you will be fired. Don't expect your employees are saints.

Governments have power because people pay tax. Governments exist as a service, so they need to be righteous to govern. Righteous means not taking away the rights of anyone. Communism and fascism utterly fail in this, democracy has a chance of self correcting but can take years and decades and lead to misery for people. I consider 20th century forms of governments the worst mass violaters of human rights ever. Remember, humans existed without government for tens of thousands of years.

 

[nang2]

Governments have power because people pay tax. Governments exist as a service, so they need to be righteous to govern. Righteous means not taking away the rights of anyone. Communism and fascism utterly fail in this, democracy has a chance of self correcting but can take years and decades and lead to misery for people. I consider 20th century forms of governments the worst mass violaters of human rights ever. Remember, humans existed without government for tens of thousands of years.

Yes, and the more tax you pay, the more powerful it is. The powerful it becomes, the more likely it will tramp on people's rights. Therefore, I would say that the less powerful government is, the more likely it is righteous, according to your definition of "righteous". But how do you prevent a government from becoming more powerful in the name of being "righteous"? All 20th century forms of government self inflate in the name of being righteous. Have you seen any government seeks more power in the name of injustice or want to hurt its own people? Yet, they all grow bigger and bigger and you pay more and more tax. How did that happen?

 

[Novus ordu seclorum]

Yes, and the more tax you pay, the more powerful it is. The powerful it becomes, the more likely it will tramp on people's rights. Therefore, I would say that the less powerful government is, the more likely it is righteous, according to your definition of "righteous". But how do you prevent a government from becoming more powerful in the name of being "righteous"? All 20th century forms of government self inflate in the name of being righteous. Have you seen any government seeks more power in the name of injustice or want to hurt its own people? Yet, they all grow bigger and bigger and you pay more and more tax. How did that happen?

Governments must not exist to satisfy power trip egos of people. Governments should be goal oriented. They should provide services and not harm people or become a block to an individual. Make the way easy and not bind people in redtape. But that is not what I see and experience.

 

[nang2]

Governments must not exist to satisfy power trip egos of people. Governments should be goal oriented. They should provide services and not harm people or become a block to an individual. Make the way easy and not bind people in redtape. But that is not what I see and experience.

The question is how you prevent the power grab for egos. It is not like you say "must not" and they will just obey your words. The world does not work around "must" and "should". These words have no meaning when you cannot enforce them. If experience tells us anything, enforcing this "must not" is very difficult, if possible at all, unless you can read people's mind. Since you don't, time and time again, you will be tricked into giving them more and more power. The common practice is to use fear and bribery. People easily give up their freedom for a little more safety. And bribing people with people's money never fails.

 

[Novus ordu seclorum]

The question is how you prevent the power grab for egos. It is not like you say "must not" and they will just obey your words. The world does not work around "must" and "should". These words have no meaning when you cannot enforce them. If experience tells us anything, enforcing this "must not" is very difficult, if possible at all, unless you can read people's mind. Since you don't, time and time again, you will be tricked into giving them more and more power. The common practice is to use fear and bribery. People easily give up their freedom for a little more safety. And bribing people with people's money never fails.

What I described as should and must are theoretical obligations of a government. That is why there is system of separation of powers with checks and balance in what is called the democratic form of government to ensure government power does not go out of control or become lopsided. It is not perfect and harms people and individuals. Another form of government is "Islamic". Anybody could go straight to the Prophet [governor] with a complaint. Good governance begins with priority to the individual. Bad governance crushes the individual.