Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Well said.

Also, some European countries do have better democracies than the US. It horrifies me that the China is now basically becoming another US in so many aspects of the society. But it seems to be very hard to stop now. I can only hope that the European countries can preserve their democracy longer. I dunno.



sort by: page size:

Those European countries are also democracies, though. In many cases, they are more democratic, because they don't have undemocratic features like the Senate.

China is already democratic tho. They have workers congress on the national level, plenty of people's assemblies on the provencial and city level. They also have consultative assemblies for business issues.

Citizens are very satisfied of their government, despite some of its excesses, unlike so called western democratic governments.

Their material condititons are as good as in Europe, at least for most folks.

Just because you do not directly elect the president of your government doesn't make you less democratic. Switzerland doesn't elect its government by universal suffrage, neither does the UK, or the EU. Their democratic model is just different.


It's hard to see how democracies are any better than the Chinese authoritarian system when stuff like this happens.

I want to believe in democracy, but most real democracies seem to be intent on self-destruction and devolving to authoritarian states.


I would speculate that US and EU countries are more suitable for democracy than the other countries from anti-corruption point of view

I think a well-functioning democracy with an educated electorate will do better than China, but I wouldn't argue that the US meets those criteria. A better comparison might be the Nordic countries. If that's too much cherry-picking for you, consider that China is probably also the best-functioning autocracy in the world; plenty of autocracies are terrible.

[flagged]

There are countries that are much closer to democracies than the US at least.

China is a kind of democracy and a very meritorious one at that already.

Just because they aren't copy cat 100% clone of US/UK democracy, it doesn't mean they aren't a democracy.

Also countries like Great Britain, France and all other big European powers made bulk of their super power status when ruled by Monarchs. The democracies later carried the inertia of those eras. Which is understandable. Once you build a sound educational ecosystem, with a great economy with an industrialized economic base, democracy works like a charm. There is a long term supply of good leaders and educated masses to vote for them.

Also democracy is not a process designed to produce good leaders. It's only a process that elects them in a system where they are already present, with a populace that can recognize.


Yes indeed, because there are genuinely more democratic countries than others. China for example is very different from the United States or Canada in terms of governance, and so too is this the case if you compare say, Cuba and the Netherlands or any other number of western European states.

Similarly, much of Europe scores higher on the Democracy Index than the US. The US loves to say how democratic it is, but it's democratic in a few specific ways and misses out on most other aspects. The 538 podcast did a good breakdown of this a year or two ago.

America + Europe have been getting Democracy! good and hard for quite a while, time to shake things up

western democracy is good for people in the west.

not other countless nations that have been enslaved, colonized, invaded, subjugated, stripped in the name of democracy and religion.

Russia, CCP etc are horrible too - but let us not forget history.

The Global South Remembers.


That's a question you can't even pose about the Chinese system if you live under it. So yes, Democracy is better.

Not saying that is not true. Yet living in one of the few direct democracies it is the very best we have in terms of democracy. On a bigger scale liquid democracy may is more interesting.

Edit:// the EU or even the US has shown multiple times that it will act against the majority of they can.


For all that is broken about US democracy, I'd prefer a unipolar world with the US and EU running things than a multipolar world where the current regimes in China (or Russia) have equal standing.

Fact is Western countries are not democracies or even close to being democratic, never were (switzerland has some democratic components) and western governments are increasingly corrupt as it is a part of the end of the life cycle of empires and civilizations[1] as shown by history.

[1]: The fate of empires and the search for survival by Sir John Glubb


Democracy is a long developed ideal in the west, from when the Greeks invented it. Yes, Europe goes through spates of authoritarianism and was under autocratic rule for much of its history, but the direction is clear, Germany and Italy had no cultural problem in snapping back to democracy after WW2, and Portugal and Spain saw little value in continuing dictatorships after Franco and Salazar either.

I find skin tone to be a much bigger deal among the elites of India and China than in the west. It’s clear that classism plays a huge role in those countries, where the elites rule with little regard for the common people.


Your comment is the exact one I see on HN and reddit.

Yet the USA and EU have democracies with close to a billion people combined. India is an example of a developing democracy with a population close to China and all the issues that come with a huge population. Yet India is a democracy and the people have gone from a population ruled by the British to a democracy.

The people of anywhere should get to decide what they want.


I'd argue that democracy doesn't matter nearly as much as constitutional freedoms of assembly, speech (to a certain degree), independent press, ect. China still fears protest/revolution and will work in such a way that benefits their population in order to prevent uprisings and civil unrest.

Add on the fact that the vast majority of issues that we view as democratic victories in the US, were more than anything, driven by direct action or initial change at the local level (a level which is democratic in china). Where in the cases where major change happened in a different way, it happened through the Judiciary which is also not democratic.

Add on the fact that many of the direct democratic measures in the US tend to be destructive (prop 13, voting against any tax increase even if necessary over the long term), and there becomes a reason why a political system with a single party, namely a party with a largely unified political goal, is preferable.

I'd also question when in US history (or elsewhere) has there ever been a time where democratic elections peacefully overthrew the ruling body. Usually there is significant continuity from administration to administration, where any serious political change happens due to outside direct action.

next

Legal | privacy