I don't know about that, slightly unrelated but I'm 4 times less likely to get murdered in China than in the USA.
The population seems to adhere to laws against harming fellow humans better than we do in the USA.
They will enforce pesticide bans, for example, on farmers they don’t like or where it is politically convenient to do so. Likewise, one can get away with murder if they are politically connected enough and in good grace (well, until the publicity gets bad and they become pariahs like Bo Xilai).
Video surveillance isn't launching everywhere, because of corrupcy.
And they don't care about foreigners ( with something happens). Chinese protects Chinese, no one else. They will also work with favors above law.
Whatever evidence you're using to support this assertion, I'm sure theres equal evidence from any other country.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2123499/chin...
People protesting police/army violence in USA share the same view of our state agents.
Western societies pride themselves as abiding by the rule of law, and it is an important ideal IMO, but the application in reality is more on a Bell curve.
I agree that the rule of law is a nice ideal, but there appears to be an emerging split between the effectiveness of rule of law systems and their proposed values.
The historical arguments were not just that the rule of law is ethical, but also that it is effective at delivering for its citizens. So when the OP points to murder rates or the article points to atrocious health standards that fall below even middle-income trap countries, then that doesn't exactly fill me with optimism.
If that's the definition then, um, yeah, I think "bell curve" is a very diplomatic term for the de facto reality in Western Nations. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the de facto reality in all nations, Western or not, falls well short of this rule of law ideal.
I've no evidence to support the following suspicion, but I think whenever humans are involved in a system, all of those well known human failings we have are going to manifest themselves in that system's output. I don't think there is a way around it actually.
In practice, there probably is no society governed by rule of law if equal treatment is going to be your measuring stick. I honestly don't think such a place exists.
Thing is, the current Chinese government sees “rule of law” completely undesirable as a concept, judiciary must acquiesce to the official class (which is synonymous with the party), whose opinion is the only one that matters.
Since we've gone down this rabbit-hole, doesn't that mean or infer that the states is no longer a "rule of law" country, since the current idyllic seems to be overturning laws - based purely on political alignment (e.g.: the "sudden rash" of states banning abortion because the end-goal is to overturn Roe v. Wade)?
The context for Brazil is mostly that it is a democracy from 1888 til nowadays, but with a shadow institutional period from the 60´s to the mid-eighties.
So the country had to rebuild it´s own institutions from the eighties til now, to serve a democracy instead of serving the wills of a dictatorship.
Now, its in a point of testing its institutional maturity, and the rule of law, by the ongoing crackdown on corruption and organized crime. A lot of big political figures from all sides (and executives) are in jail right now, and theres a current crackdown going on in the organized crime front.
But the big test right now is the current Brazilian government with its backwards policy. Will the organized institutions from the society, and the other powers besides the executive able to make a stand against going backwards?
Theres a big test going on in Brazil right now, if 'we' are able to pass this dangerous phase and still have the democratic institutions and balances in one piece, than i guess it will probably move foward and get stronger with time.
In this sense also, the US was lucky to have England as a cultural parent, because England was/is great in making solid institutions. From government to the academy.
The colonization process of the countries colonized by the spanish and the portugueses, were mostly a vampire-like kind of relation. Where they took everything they could, leaving a trail of exploitation and slavery behind.
The portuguese colonizers even used to forbid Brazil of the colonial/empire era to have a University, which we only manage to create the first one here in the 20´s.
Anyway, i guess the answer to the rule of law, is both; is "good enough for most things", and "we are getting there". Not something to be proud of, not something very advanced, but not bad either..
I don't know about that. Is done all the time. Also, 'developing/developed' is a incredibly crude taxonomy with few useful contexts and a very fuzzy border.
Heck, what people regard as a country "doing well" is different between different countries and their cultures.
In Brazil most federal inspection agencies are under funded and short on staff, limiting their operations. Offering bribe to inspection agents is also very common but risky since the government has been pushing a campaign and reforms against systemic corruption for the past few years.
Anyone who spent more then 30 seconds observing motorists on a freeway highway will know that this sort of selective enforcement is not limited to China.
I think the issue of enforcement should be separated to the issue of the spirit of the "rule of the law".