@grazie55555 Jesus grazie, a three year long debate. Interesting the opportunities that youtube offers...
Anyways, degrees, sure. Looking over what we have said, my only intention here is to make a clear distinction between societies with guaranteed rights and freedoms for its citizens and opportunities for social mobility as a fundamental part of its structure and those societies that are fundamentally inconsiderate of such things.
Direct democracy is only possible in city-states, I think.
@countertreason You've extended the statement. "China practices and preaches capitalism and liberal democracy" is not what I've ever said. It clearly isn't democratic. That's because we can clearly define democracy as a particular set of processes that China doesn't employ. But the term democracy is not absolute either. If it was then we could also say the united states isn't democratic, because it's not a state where EVERY person votes on EVERY issue. Degrees my friend.
Nothing is absolute, but statements can be true or false. "The United States practices and preaches capitalism and liberal democracy" is a true statement. Substitute "China" for "the United States" and the statement becomes false. If you don't believe me, then take a poll of educated people throughout the world. Every dollar I got says that they will agree with me.
It's not about ascending the ivory tower. It's about recognising that concepts like capitalism and socialism are dealt with in degrees, not absolutes.
I don't know... if it is your intent to ascend the levels of the ivory tower until the words 'capitalism' and 'socialism' totally lose meaning, count me out. As long as I live in one of the few nations in this world that finds it necessary to justify its legislation to its people, I will count myself one of the few lucky enough to live in liberal democratic capitalism. Freedom legally, politically and financially. Nobody can touch me or tell me nothing. I am damn lucky.
@countertreason sure, but there are varying degrees of liberalism and censorship in all countries. China's is developing admittedly. I just don't agree that terms like capitalism and socialism are as clear cut as you seem to think. There isn't one nation state in existence that has ever lived up to the ideals of capitalism, or socialism for that matter. Every nation has degrees of censorship and market control.
"That is growing" is key. Most of your Chinese friends do not know any better and are proud and disciplined. If China was a truly great nation, they would have immigration and not emigration.
And if you think for a second that just because Chinese people like buying clothing that they enjoy even half the market freedom we do... I don't know what to say. Go to China, then. Buy your favorite books, or watch your favorite movies. Tell me how that works out for you.
The Chinese have a degree of liberalism that is growing as its middle class grows. Most of my Chinese friends have very little problem with their Government, precisely because they largely stay out of their lives. They're free to spend their growing incomes on anything they like. And they sure love to shop.
There isn't a country that exists today - or ever HAS existed - whose markets aren't controlled. So there is no capitalism, if you want to use your definition for the word.
Yah, truly a model of capitalism. China's a totalitarian state. There is no such thing as a a totalitarian capitalist state. Capitalism, by its very nature, requires levels of freedom that can only be understood from the 18th and 19th century definitions of 'liberal' or 'liberalism'. Without 'liberalism' there is no capitalism. There can be a market, but not a free market. China has controlled markets. That is it. Arab dictators and banana republics; ditto.
@grazie55555 Jesus grazie, a three year long debate. Interesting the opportunities that youtube offers...
Anyways, degrees, sure. Looking over what we have said, my only intention here is to make a clear distinction between societies with guaranteed rights and freedoms for its citizens and opportunities for social mobility as a fundamental part of its structure and those societies that are fundamentally inconsiderate of such things.
Direct democracy is only possible in city-states, I think.
countertreason 10 months ago
@countertreason You've extended the statement. "China practices and preaches capitalism and liberal democracy" is not what I've ever said. It clearly isn't democratic. That's because we can clearly define democracy as a particular set of processes that China doesn't employ. But the term democracy is not absolute either. If it was then we could also say the united states isn't democratic, because it's not a state where EVERY person votes on EVERY issue. Degrees my friend.
grazie55555 10 months ago
Nothing is absolute, but statements can be true or false. "The United States practices and preaches capitalism and liberal democracy" is a true statement. Substitute "China" for "the United States" and the statement becomes false. If you don't believe me, then take a poll of educated people throughout the world. Every dollar I got says that they will agree with me.
countertreason 1 year ago
It's not about ascending the ivory tower. It's about recognising that concepts like capitalism and socialism are dealt with in degrees, not absolutes.
grazie55555 1 year ago
I don't know... if it is your intent to ascend the levels of the ivory tower until the words 'capitalism' and 'socialism' totally lose meaning, count me out. As long as I live in one of the few nations in this world that finds it necessary to justify its legislation to its people, I will count myself one of the few lucky enough to live in liberal democratic capitalism. Freedom legally, politically and financially. Nobody can touch me or tell me nothing. I am damn lucky.
countertreason 2 years ago
@countertreason sure, but there are varying degrees of liberalism and censorship in all countries. China's is developing admittedly. I just don't agree that terms like capitalism and socialism are as clear cut as you seem to think. There isn't one nation state in existence that has ever lived up to the ideals of capitalism, or socialism for that matter. Every nation has degrees of censorship and market control.
grazie55555 2 years ago
"That is growing" is key. Most of your Chinese friends do not know any better and are proud and disciplined. If China was a truly great nation, they would have immigration and not emigration.
And if you think for a second that just because Chinese people like buying clothing that they enjoy even half the market freedom we do... I don't know what to say. Go to China, then. Buy your favorite books, or watch your favorite movies. Tell me how that works out for you.
countertreason 2 years ago
The Chinese have a degree of liberalism that is growing as its middle class grows. Most of my Chinese friends have very little problem with their Government, precisely because they largely stay out of their lives. They're free to spend their growing incomes on anything they like. And they sure love to shop.
There isn't a country that exists today - or ever HAS existed - whose markets aren't controlled. So there is no capitalism, if you want to use your definition for the word.
grazie55555 2 years ago
Yah, truly a model of capitalism. China's a totalitarian state. There is no such thing as a a totalitarian capitalist state. Capitalism, by its very nature, requires levels of freedom that can only be understood from the 18th and 19th century definitions of 'liberal' or 'liberalism'. Without 'liberalism' there is no capitalism. There can be a market, but not a free market. China has controlled markets. That is it. Arab dictators and banana republics; ditto.
countertreason 2 years ago
I've been in capitalist nations that persecute dissidents brutally. China being a glaring example.
grazie55555 2 years ago