peter236

It is all about rapid economic growth is associated with a period of little democracy.
Examples: UK, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan

In UK, the system of universal suffrage did not exist in the United Kingdom until 1928. However, UK grew rapidly during the industrialization revolution.

Democracy is not good for developing countries. Examples: India, Mexico, Phillippines which are corrupted

And developed education and less corruption requires a strong economy to support.
That means economic development has priority now.

peter236

回復  rockypath


lso, you may have reserved the cause-and-result relationship.

Western countries came up with democracy.  also, if you dig into history, the idea of democracy already seeded since ancient Greek.   

Anyway, Western countries had democracy, and the culture for that.  They went through a series of revolution and war both in Europe and N.America until the system was established.  One thing "cool" about democracy system is that it has the self-correct mechanism and it is still evolving right now.   Anyway, because of many factors, western countries got rich and I believe part of it is because of democracy system that brings equal (or relatively equal) opportunities to people and thus respect varies rights of different people, thus the counties get wealthier and wealthier.

rainbow-davie 發表於 2011-4-16 17:01

If you look at Greece today, what is happening to their society? Their political system allows their people to ask for the best welfare system in the world, something that they cannot afford anymore. Now their government wants to cut back on their spending, but the people still protest.
Their country is on the brink of financial bankruptcy. Is democracy going to solve it? Does the change of a political party in power going to change it?

I am not saying democracy is bad. Just look at the US, they are basically a 2-party rule society.
For China, what they need now is a stable society for rapid economic growth.
Democracy can come later. e.g Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea, Hong Kong and the UK. They all had a period of rapid economic growth before any form of democracy was introduced.

peter236

I think dictatorship can only grow to certain size and stuck though.
Dictatorship is very risky, but ...
Prelude 發表於 2011-4-17 13:18

A dictatorship is where the leader tries to pass the position to his sons or daughters. e.g North Korea, many African and middle east countries.

So mainland China is not a dictatorship. The Chinese leaders are just bureaucrats that implement the policies. China is more like Singapore or Japan where there is 1-party rule or near 1-party rule.

The important thing is how to change China, in the future, into a 2-party system(parties that are big enough to get elected)  like the US, Canada or UK. Too many political party is bad for any country especially developing countries.

peter236

低能仔，

民主制度淨係響富裕嘅西方社會先至有用？你無病阿化？

講國家GDP，中國係現今世界第二，除咗老 ...

再講多個同中國大陸最接近嘅例子：中華民國。你唔好話俾我聽中華民國係西方社會呀？人地國民黨49年由大陸着草走過去臺灣，個民主根基又好深咩？結果咪一樣搞得好好睇睇？人地已經成功政黨輪替咗兩次；在野黨兩次合法同和平咁顛覆咗當權嘅政府。
Lik 發表於 2011-4-17 23:25

Well, you can always learn from democratic India which is corrupt and poor. And also the Philippines which is corrupt.

If you really want to learn from the ROC. Did the ROC implement democracy the day they went to Taiwan in 1949? Did they implement democracy in 1911 when they founded the ROC?
Just look at Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea, Hong Kong and the UK. They all had a period of rapid economic growth before any form of democracy was introduced.

The size of China's population and geographic size, are already challenges to get everyone on the same page. Taiwan province is much smaller and more easily governed.

For China, what they need now is a stable society for rapid economic growth.

peter236

From a political and economical point of view, yes. From a social point of view, no. The problem w ...
Ovaltine 發表於 2011-4-20 11:51

Ai wei wei, the fat guy, sure tells you nutrition is very good in China nowadays.