chewybrian wrote: ↑May 31st, 2021, 6:37 am
It's fair to say that a lot of similar outcomes occur from the Chinese and American systems. People are people, and they will try to take power just to have it, they will act selfishly and cruelly in many cases. The key difference is the possibility of recourse built in to the American system. You won't see a Martin Luther King or Rosa Parks emerge and bring about change within China on behalf of the Uighurs, or of Tibet or Taiwan. If they did, they would be silenced before they could have the same impact. If China went to war with Taiwan, you could not have the public backlash within China that took place in America which eventually ended the Vietnam war. If it existed...
You're probably idealizing and putting more confidence in the "American" system than it actually deserves. Even if one overlooks that Martin Luther King was shot dead, the idea that political dissidence is widely tolerated in so called "Western democracies" has no base in reality. Anything is tolerated as long as it presents no actual threat to the political and economic system, but let's not forget the fate of the Assanges and the Snowdens, just to mention recent cases, all of which enforced the Espionage Act of 1917, which is still intact. Press censorship was widely implemented in the US during the Bush administration to protect the government from scrutiny about the Iraq invasion. The anti-red witch hunt of the cold war not only was one of the first waves of "cancel culture", it produced the execution of the Rosenbergs. When one looks at political forces in the hegemonic centers of capitalist systems, such as the US, it looks as if their own citizens are favored with more political rights than any other country, however, this is at the expense of the rights of other citizens of the world in which these countries intervene heavily to control almost every aspect of their political and economic life, using clandestine, unaccountable operations of "security" agencies such as the NSA and the CIA, as every major imperial power has done in the past. And that includes also a lot of assasinations of political leaders, genocide, wars, etc., for which the perpetrators (military or civilians) cannot be held accountable. US crimes of war cannot be prosecuted in any international tribunal. At the same time, these hegemonic powers actively contribute in the prosecution and killing of dissidents by their non-democratic allies. So, if we reduce the notions of freedom and democracy to only what happens within the borders of a national state, it may be that some states are more authoritarian than others, and communist China might come out as having a very firm political control of its citizens, but one should not forget that any attempt in "Western democracies" to overthrow their current political regime, will be repelled with heavy force. It's just a matter of calling those manifestations of dissidence "rebellion" or "fight for freedom" to serve your political interests.
chewybrian wrote: ↑May 31st, 2021, 6:37 am
So, we can engage in whataboutism and find abuses all around. But, the checks and balances and human rights written into law here are pretty important. I can be represented by a lawyer, even if I cannot afford one. I can speak my mind, assemble peaceably in public, worship (or not) as I please. These protections don't stop people from being people, both the tyrants and the gullible ones who follow them. They don't create an environment where justice reigns. But, they allow the possibility for justice to win out in the end.
Formally speaking, most of these civilian rights are in place in the Chinese court system. Such a large and economically developed country simply would not work without a rule of law and order. No doubt that the system is not strange to abuses of political power, but when one looks at the list of political prisoners in the US, one is tempted to believe that such abuses are associated with the very existence of the state as an inherent repressive organ of society.
chewybrian wrote: ↑May 31st, 2021, 6:37 am
Is it state capitalism or pure communism in China? It is probably closer to the former. But, you asked what was wrong with China's communism. My answer is not that it is not economically productive (although the profits are distributed very unevenly and unfairly, just as they are in the U.S.). My answer is that they are missing important protections that are present in many other places in the world. I would rather forgo the extra profit and keep the rights, if that is the choice. In the end, the rights matter more.
My impression is that state propaganda in the West is responsible for people having an unbalanced view of the real state of affairs regarding citizen's rights in their own countries or the countries that fall within their own geopolitical system, in comparison to their rivals. It's an information war, where the defects of your enemies are overblown and the ones of your allies are minimized.
