The Chinese people trust their government and are able to directly shape it’s policy and directly elect their representatives
China does have elections, and for genuine representation, no lobbying or canvassing is allowed.
Following the precepts of democratic elections, “In accordance with the principles of universal suffrage, equal rights, multiple candidates, and secret ballot”, deputies to people’s congresses at the township and county levels are elected by the Chinese people.
These representatives, the deputies closest to the public, make up 94% of the national total, and are entrusted with electing the higher-level representatives. The deputies to people’s congresses at the level of townships and counties elect deputies to people’s congresses of cities; they, in turn, elect deputies at the provincial level, who elect deputies at the national level.
From these grassroots onward, in China, it is meritocracy all the way. Decades of practical experience, usually with increasingly large populations, ensures progressively greater competence, as candidates get the top jobs that require such capacity.
Communist Party of China […] in 2020, when the draft of its 14th Five-Year Plan (from 2021 to 2025) was submitted to public consultation online for the first time. The general public was able to participate in planning its own social and economic development, making more than a million suggestions from August 16 to 29, 2020, from which over 1,000 opinions and suggestions were incorporated.
For someone that is engaging in a logical fallacy of appealing to purity with regard to source, where is your source on the political structure of either country?
The substack has listed sources for the information cited, did you see that? They are historical studies and documentaries produced by third parties. I’m curious if you can even find a western-biased source that disputes the factual description of how China’s government is structured as described in the link.
Clearly the people of China trust their government and since you have yet to provide a source explaining how their government is organized we can only go with my source which clearly indicated that there is direct democracy
Edelman is a global communications firm that partners with businesses and organizations to evolve, promote and protect their brands and reputations.
Sounds like they don’t care about the truth, only making whatever their clients want to be “presentable”/accepted and how much they get paid for it.
Clearly the people of China trust their government and since you have yet to provide a source explaining how their government is organized we can only go with my source which clearly indicated that there is direct democracy
And you’re operating without understanding the historical reasons for it. For the Chinese people the CCP is leagues better than what came before. What came before the CCP was…quite bad. So from their POV and objectively, yes the CCP is pretty decent for the Chinese people as they would sacrifice things like freedom of speech because of the stability the CCP provides.
But what’s good for them does not automatically translate to good for the world, especially in countries where basic human rights have been somewhat enjoyed to varying degrees
Well yea, but one of the favored line of arguments is the “The CCP has a 95% approval rating!”, which is probably true, but there’s a good reason for it. And you know I don’t blame the Chinese people one bit, if all I and my parents had known was death and famine and an authoritarian government came in and brought stability and prosperity for the first time in generations, id look the other way on a ton of things too
Since you are so knowledgeable about China and North Korea could you explain the structure of their government?
For anyone curious here are two short articles outlining the political structure:
China
North Korea
The Chinese people trust their government and are able to directly shape it’s policy and directly elect their representatives
Following the precepts of democratic elections, “In accordance with the principles of universal suffrage, equal rights, multiple candidates, and secret ballot”, deputies to people’s congresses at the township and county levels are elected by the Chinese people.
These representatives, the deputies closest to the public, make up 94% of the national total, and are entrusted with electing the higher-level representatives. The deputies to people’s congresses at the level of townships and counties elect deputies to people’s congresses of cities; they, in turn, elect deputies at the provincial level, who elect deputies at the national level.
From these grassroots onward, in China, it is meritocracy all the way. Decades of practical experience, usually with increasingly large populations, ensures progressively greater competence, as candidates get the top jobs that require such capacity.
And there we go, one link direct from the Chinese gov, I’m sure that can be absolutely trusted
And one link from a random substack, not like anyone can start a substack and write anything in it or anything LMAO
For someone that is engaging in a logical fallacy of appealing to purity with regard to source, where is your source on the political structure of either country?
The substack has listed sources for the information cited, did you see that? They are historical studies and documentaries produced by third parties. I’m curious if you can even find a western-biased source that disputes the factual description of how China’s government is structured as described in the link.
What about the Edelman Trust Barometer?
https://www.edelman.com/sites/g/files/aatuss191/files/2025-01/2025 Edelman Trust Barometer Global Report_01.23.25.pdf
https://www.edelman.com/about-us
Clearly the people of China trust their government and since you have yet to provide a source explaining how their government is organized we can only go with my source which clearly indicated that there is direct democracy
Sounds like they don’t care about the truth, only making whatever their clients want to be “presentable”/accepted and how much they get paid for it.
And you’re operating without understanding the historical reasons for it. For the Chinese people the CCP is leagues better than what came before. What came before the CCP was…quite bad. So from their POV and objectively, yes the CCP is pretty decent for the Chinese people as they would sacrifice things like freedom of speech because of the stability the CCP provides.
But what’s good for them does not automatically translate to good for the world, especially in countries where basic human rights have been somewhat enjoyed to varying degrees
“Better than what became before” is not the same as good. Just saying.
Well yea, but one of the favored line of arguments is the “The CCP has a 95% approval rating!”, which is probably true, but there’s a good reason for it. And you know I don’t blame the Chinese people one bit, if all I and my parents had known was death and famine and an authoritarian government came in and brought stability and prosperity for the first time in generations, id look the other way on a ton of things too