Quote from name:Tuxedo-Templar
All I'm saying is if there's an opening, however unlikely, I'd seriously wonder if they wouldn't jump on it, going by what I'm seeing. Or if it's not inconceivable they couldn't work to create an opening as well.
To them, the Dalai Lama is sort of like a Che Guvera or Bin Ladin-ish figure for the role he played back in the 50's.
So yes, it is quite difficult for them to have dialogue with a person they've been hating for the past 50 years.
Quote from name:Tuxedo-Templar
Hmm. Maybe what's going on with Hong Kong is a unique scenario, but if it's to be used as an example of attitude... I don't like it.
I understand that, in theory, if the conditions are cultivated to become more democratic, then down the road they may become more so. But I'm also thinking that's placing too much confidence in a democratic implementation having a desirous effect. That is, I'm not sure whether more democratic elements to China will ultimately render the CPC threat-less, or simply give it more power to become an even greater one later.
I understand that, in theory, if the conditions are cultivated to become more democratic, then down the road they may become more so. But I'm also thinking that's placing too much confidence in a democratic implementation having a desirous effect. That is, I'm not sure whether more democratic elements to China will ultimately render the CPC threat-less, or simply give it more power to become an even greater one later.
Hong Kong isn't an attitude...it's politics. More democratic elements doesn't give the CCP more power, it takes power away from the CCP. The CCP is already a totalitarian government - it literally can't gain any more power since it has absolute power.
The government doesn't "gain powers" by moving from a more controlling government to a less controlling one - it loses power.
Quote from name:Tuxedo-Templar
Hong Kong could be a very bad thing here, as it may end up as their little science project to figure out a way to successfully undermine and control a democracy. If that's the theme they'll learn to follow for the future, then, again, even if democratic elements are successfully installed in their country, it stands to reason they'll keep those elements on a leash such as to foster and profit from them, but all the while ultimately still allowing their CPC to retain core power.
Control like that could become extremely dangerous in the future.
Control like that could become extremely dangerous in the future.
Hong Kong's politics is based on elections. The CCP already has a lot of supporters in their political party. If the people vote a pro-CCP candidate into office, it's just politics. It's the same as Haliburton and oil lobbyists supporting candidates (who I will not name) and getting them into office. Democratic elements on a leash - one concession to the people will lead to other concessions. Understand that if a person enjoys one civil liberty, he will seek to gain other civil liberties.
Note that the CCP already has absolute control, and has no obligation to install ANY democracy whatsoever. They could've easily turned Hong Kong into a dictatorship. The fact they're giving up some of their powers and that Hong Kong is still testament that they're not hell bent on world domination or installing a fake democracy on population they already control.
Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Apr 20 2008, 5:36 pm by Intranetusa.
None.
I've been egging this discussion along to see where it'd end up. While it's not impossible for the scenario I've been pushing this whole time to happen, I acknowledge it's very far from likely to happen.
