Hacker News Reader

Comment by edwinyzh | Hacker News Reader

"The people have chosen an autocratic government" - saying so is so unfair to us. Maybe people like me who desire for an unblocked Internet is a minority (when compared to the population in this country), but people who desire for safe milk and food, clean water and fresh air for their babies are not!

But on the other hand, I must say that your observations described in your first paragraph are correct. Take the recent Hong Kong protest for an example, almost all people I know, including the highly educated people, are "tricked" by the censored local newspaper and are not on the same side of the HK people, and that made me sad and irritated...

View on HN

We in the US complain about our lack of choice in the political system. We have two parties, making our choices rather limited in elections.

However, China has a one party system. There is no counter to the Communist Party.

If you only vote Republican or only vote Democrat in a sense you've limited yourself to a one-party system.

Let's say you are sitting in your office for 8 hours. In one case you could leave but probably won't - in the other case your boss puts a lock on your door for those 8 hours. Would that make a difference to you?

Poor analogy. And I don't think there needs to be an analogy; the issue is already quite simple.

The USA's political system is substantially less free than many other nations. In turn, China is substantially less free than the US. Whether equating the two is really hyperbolic is debatable - functionally speaking, vested interests are allowed to run unchecked in both countries.

The main difference really lies in the source of power. In China, the Party runs the show and corporations fall into line. In the US it's the opposite, where corporations hold sway over the white house.

China at least has aspirations to lift the living standards of all its citizens. It's not easy but they're getting there - compare China with India for instance. Can't say the same for the US.

> In China, the Party runs the show and corporations fall into line.

The corporations can always bribe into the party, and many of the corporations are owned by princelings (or say Wen Jiaobao mom's jewelry empire that got NYT blocked). I would say that China is much worse in that regard.

> China at least has aspirations to lift the living standards of all its citizens.

Income inequality is only getting worse, not better. All boats are lifting right now, just those with guangxi get lifted much faster, while those at the bottom barely keep pace with inflation. If the economy falters this year, it could get very interesting.

I think it's only a portion of the issue - another difference is that the US has a true constitution-based legal system.

you get the point. one or two or multi part is not important at all.

there are different groups in one party. To be selected as President is very very competitive.

I think that's a bit disingenuous as to how single party politics work.

> Take the recent Hong Kong protest for an example, almost all people I know, including the highly educated people, are "tricked" by the censored local newspaper and are not on the same side of the HK people, and that made me sad and irritated

As I understood it, the HK protestors undermined their own support within China with their racism and condescension toward mainland Chinese and the perception* that they never protested autocratic British rule. If I were a Chinese citizen, even if I wanted the same things as the HK protestors, I wouldn't support them out of self-respect.

*I say perception to give HK the benefit of the doubt. A quick Googling didn't yield anything except an unhelpful Quora answer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com