But what I meant is really about whether HN is a good place to discuss this issue, where for most other discussions we expect to find some good comments from domain experts.
I think that should not give a license to stop discussion and criticism if you are from a different country. There is a pretty good understanding of political ideologies across the world about authoritarianism. We have seen the results of dictatorships and authoritarian governments and how they turned out. There is absolutely no reason to say that "It is different, it is a different perspective about governance". Absolutely, it is different and there is a universal understanding of what that difference is.
George Orwell accurately outlines what is going on in Kashgar and other regions in China. He outlined it decades ago.
If I were Chinese citizen, I would be the first one to question the government's actions. Except, that the Chinese people tried to protest in 1988 and it ended in a massacre.
I have been to China many times and I love the people there, culture, and how they live lives just like anyone else in the world. Criticism against the government and political ideology has nothing to do with "an attack against China". I know you're not saying that but I wanted to clarify.
If this is not the biggest human right achievement during that 30 years I dont know what is. I also looked up data from world bank for India and Brazil and they albeit democracies seem less effective toward eliminating their proveties.
Do I want China becomes an even better place? yes. I emigrated but not my close relatives and friends and classmates. I miss them. Can China become a better place by pressure from western countries? I doubt it. It instead makes a great number of Chinese more anti-western.
What can make China a better place in my mind, is western countries showing what real democracy can do to make their own countries better. You bet all the Trump/Brexit/US healthcare/wars/drugs are not making ordinary Chinese more exciting embracing democracy.
Or maybe I'm wrong from the beginning that you are not interested in making China better with those discussions or criticisms.
1. Only one party is permitted, effectively making that party a part of the government and thus being equivalent to banning parties.
2. You have to be a party member to vote. This is available to those with a good reputation.
Those oddities don't seem to be disqualifying. The USA didn't begin with parties or universal suffrage.
Furthermore, I'd encourage spectramax or anyone this video if not seen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs (Basically under a dictatorship you still need to represent the citizens in some degree.)
At this point I don't remember what I'm arguing and again I'm not an expert in social science who can contribute to a conversation on solving China's problem or the issue reported by NYT. I hope HN remains as a place where I can always see insights from people who truly understand the domain and can give constructive comments.
If you want to count productivity or expansion of borders or some positive statistic about Nazi government, there are many. But that is a largely different discussion. Note: I’m not implying Nazi rule to PRC, just trying to make a point.
I feel like you have an inherent bias of being Chinese and you want to see your home country improve and be proud of. That’s fair and a natural reaction. But your ideas and points are alarmingly irrational in my view. What you’re advocating is essentially justifying dystopian society that always, __always__ promises the good of the people. You should really read 1984 by George Orwell.
There is no such thing as a benevolent dictatorship or authoritarian government. When a man is given unlimited power, we are stupid monkeys that get an insane jolt by this “power trip” that’s its impossible to stay benevolent. Who is to say the next guy after Xi is going to be benevolent. Human nature and psychology is actually quite scary in certain situations (The Stanford Prison experiment, Milgram experiment).
I guess what I wanted to say to you is I feel this discussion will not be able to produce actionable or make ourselves more knowledgable on the matter.
As I said more pressure from western countries probably will not make China better. Chinese citizens hate the government to some degree, but if you think they are closer to western ideologies, value your version of human rights and freedom more than what current Chinese government provides, you probably need a reality check.
Since you have communication channels with other Chinese, plz go ask them whether they consider what's going on in Xinjiang is a big issue worth protesting for. Ask them if they would like to be provided better human right standards from western country governments on Chinese soil.
Plz watch this if you haven't https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs
I've read those experiments. But so what? They are not physical laws. I dont like dictatorship. But say if China becomes a democracy today, how do you prevent China becomes next Russia (electing Putin), or next Turkey? or next Philippine? or next Brazil?
Democracy cannot solve every social problems. I dont think most Chinese citizens have the appetit to swallow your approach toward governing although I dont have any better suggestions. Maybe the helplessness from me feels like I'm defending current Chinese government but I'm not. I'm just not good enough on social science to provide a better solution. If there's one I'd like it gone faster than you.
2. I recommend you read the book Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind by Yuval Noah Harari. The main relevant ideas: a. The evolution/progression of human kind doesn't necessarily have to benefit individuals. (this kinda circled back to 1) b. Democracy and liberal values are only hold dearly by a fraction of human beings during a small fraction of human history. There's probably not enough proof that those values are indispensable to human progress in all situations. It's just during this period of time the super powers of the world happen to possess them.
On that point, I think we agree. One of the frustrating aspects of the news / social media cycle today seems to be that outrage sells, and people getting agitated and talking past each other just means more impressions and more ad revenue.
HN usually manages to stay above that, but perhaps not so much on this topic.