You've gotta be kidding me. What in "western politics" is the equivalent of detaining free adult citizens charged with no crime, with no evidence toward any imminent threat, denied legal representation and speedy trial, in the hundreds of thousands?
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/11/rakem-balogun-...
The FBI raided a man's home on the basis of Facebook posts that the agency itself admitted couldn't be characterized as threats to any person or organization. They nevertheless held him without bail for five months while they attempted to find evidence to justify a charge of abetting terrorism or the like. They couldn't come up with anything. In the end they charged him with unlawful gun possession, but that charge was specious enough that it thrown out by a judge before even going to trial. In the meantime the man lost his job and his home.
This wasn't the normal functioning of law enforcement. This was abuse of law enforcement to punish politically disfavored speech (which speech, I repeat, the law-enforcement agency in question conceded was non-threatening).
The decision to deny bail was based on logic that they provided in open court. I'll let you look at their logic and decide for yourself whether it makes sense.
This is at least a reasonable system even if it needs some adjustments to get closer to justice.
I referenced the following two URLs:
http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/30/is-a-court-case-in-texas...
I'm not sure why that is a justification. The Chinese security services clearly got the authority to act as they did to. It doesn't make it right.
It's a justification because they had to provide evidence to a judge who had to assess it given our laws. What better system should I expect? If it's not a system problem and so there's a particular failing in this case, please point it out.
How was the authority given to the Chinese security services? This is a very important detail, because you can setup systems with checks and balances and laws or you can give carte blanche.
It is a travesty, I'll agree. But words have meanings, and "abducted" is not what that was.
(Yes, you can pick a nit about whether that's really a "crime", and you can argue about whether it should be. It's still illegal, under the existing law, for those people to be here.)
This is the model for the next world-wide government after China wipes the USA off the map as planned. Most people can’t deal with this information, despite the fact that it is staring them right in the face. “Made in China” is a curse that people have accepted though, so as usual they get exactly what they deserve.
The "China of Today" one could say was created by Western Powers would be Taiwan, but even Taiwan had it's foundings on anti-Western sentiments (Chiang Kai-Shek despised Western democracy).
You can also read an article about it on Yales website titled “Yale spurs Maos emergence“.
I wish I were wrong about the direction things are heading in, but I'm not.