[quote=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.[/quote] 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=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.[/quote] 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=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 [i]extremely [/i]dangerous in the future.[/quote] 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.

Quote from 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 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.

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 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.

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.

[quote=name:Tuxedo-Templar]*sigh* Ok then, I think I'll cut the crap. :P 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. But I don't doubt China is going to become very powerful with time. Probably even more powerful than the US, eventually. Whether that becomes a bad thing, or just means another world power to coexist with, I can't rightly say. But that's why I'm pushing the topic to find that out.[/quote] I doubt China will stay a totalitarian government for very long. People who get richer tend to demand more civil rights. And any government, democracy or oligarchy, is still composed of the people. In fact, I'm sure their CCP party already has many members who favor more civil liberties and democracy. It's only a matter of time - and I estimate a few decades. The same historical trend of moving from totalitarianism to more rights/democracy can be seen around the world... Also, it's funny to note that the early prominent Russian communists - Leon Trotsky (and maybe even Lenin), believed that socalism without democracy would be a failure.

Quote from Tuxedo-Templar

*sigh*
Ok then, I think I'll cut the crap. 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.
But I don't doubt China is going to become very powerful with time. Probably even more powerful than the US, eventually. Whether that becomes a bad thing, or just means another world power to coexist with, I can't rightly say. But that's why I'm pushing the topic to find that out.

I doubt China will stay a totalitarian government for very long. People who get richer tend to demand more civil rights. And any government, democracy or oligarchy, is still composed of the people. In fact, I'm sure their CCP party already has many members who favor more civil liberties and democracy. It's only a matter of time - and I estimate a few decades.

The same historical trend of moving from totalitarianism to more rights/democracy can be seen around the world...

Also, it's funny to note that the early prominent Russian communists - Leon Trotsky (and maybe even Lenin), believed that socalism without democracy would be a failure.

[quote] I doubt China will stay a totalitarian government for very long. People who get richer tend to demand more civil rights. And any government, democracy or oligarchy, is still composed of the people. In fact, I'm sure their CCP party already has many members who favor more civil liberties and democracy. It's only a matter of time - and I estimate a few decades. The same historical trend of moving from totalitarianism to more rights/democracy can be seen around the world... Also, it's funny to note that the early prominent Russian communists - Leon Trotsky (and maybe even Lenin), believed that socalism without democracy would be a failure.[/quote] People who are actually rich get perfect civil rights in China.

Quote

I doubt China will stay a totalitarian government for very long. People who get richer tend to demand more civil rights. And any government, democracy or oligarchy, is still composed of the people. In fact, I'm sure their CCP party already has many members who favor more civil liberties and democracy. It's only a matter of time - and I estimate a few decades.

The same historical trend of moving from totalitarianism to more rights/democracy can be seen around the world...

Also, it's funny to note that the early prominent Russian communists - Leon Trotsky (and maybe even Lenin), believed that socalism without democracy would be a failure.

People who are actually rich get perfect civil rights in China.

[quote=name:BeDazed]People who are actually rich get perfect civil rights in China.[/quote] Negative. Rich business men often get the death penalty for corruption in China. The wealthy aren't exempt from the Han One Child Policy either. And if you read the yahoo news article lately, several prominent top CCP party officials have been sentenced to death and/or life in prison for corruption recently. No one gets perfect civil rights in China...

Quote from BeDazed

People who are actually rich get perfect civil rights in China.

Negative. Rich business men often get the death penalty for corruption in China. The wealthy aren't exempt from the
Han One Child Policy either. And if you read the yahoo news article lately, several prominent top CCP party officials have been
sentenced to death and/or life in prison for corruption recently.

No one gets perfect civil rights in China...

How long is that One Child policy going to last, anyhow?

How long is that One Child policy going to last, anyhow?

No clue...I guess as long as their government deems it necessary. I suppose it was necessary back in the 70's to stop population growth to ward off famine/starvation, but nowadays...bleh... :/

No clue...I guess as long as their government deems it necessary.

I suppose it was necessary back in the 70's to stop population growth to ward off famine/starvation, but nowadays...bleh... :/

if you live in china,you will find your comment is not free and everything is limted...... i'm a chinese.every time i use google to search something about Tibet(or something is not good for Party).it will cause error.then you cant see anything........ now i know that it's all because of "GFW" set by goverment

if you live in china,you will find your comment is not free and everything is limted......

i'm a chinese.every time i use google to search something about Tibet(or something is not good for Party).it will cause error.then you cant see anything........

now i know that it's all because of "GFW" set by goverment