We Can Marry Democratic And Authoritarian Values Into One!

The above video tries to explore the idea of marrying Democracy and Meritocracy values into one system.  In real life, currently, we do not have a system in which both values could be incorporated in a balance manner.  For an example, in the West, Democracy is being valued more, thus the systems lean toward mediocre leaders with greatest popularity.  In the East, the opposite case mostly occurs.  Still, there probably are situations that smooth sailing does occur for the West, and bad sailing does occur for the East.  This is a luck and bad luck happenstances.  For an example, the people in the West might just pick the best leaders by chance, thus the system could be run by the most popular leaders who are not mediocre.  In the East, bad luck could occur, thus the system could have corrupted, mediocre leaders who hold the positions of power and don’t want to relinquish such powerful positions — thus they become unpopular for sure.

The luck and bad luck happenstances are the unexpected elements, thus these things are beyond the control of the system.  What people want are the system that can be configured in a way that ensures the highest chance of electing the best leaders that could run the country in the best manner if possible.  Unfortunately, electing is more of a popularity contest than electing the best leaders.  Why?  Election is about who got more votes, and thus in theory anyone could be running for a position to get votes.  Strangers vote for each other — it’s more about who appears to be the most competence gets the popularity — thus getting the position.  In the Meritocracy system, a pretender who could keep the act together might also appear to be competence, thus fooling the previous leaders who vouch for his or her promotion.  Still, the Meritocracy system is built to ensure the highest chance of picking leaders according to meritocracy values.

When marrying Democracy with Meritocracy, we’re running into a direct conflict.  Democracy encourages the priority of voting while Meritocracy encourages the priority of strictly observing/testing before a promotion.  Thus, in reality we don’t see any system which distributes equal powers to Democracy and Meritocracy.  In China, I think some local regions do have elections, but it’s obviously one party state — so there is no true election at the very top.  So the true dilemma is how are we marrying the Democracy and Meritocracy together?

I have an idea!  Why don’t we have a constitution that ensures a house of Democracy which governs by election, but the house of Democracy is there to examine the performances of the most popular leaders who had gotten the positions through the voting process.  After the leaders’ terms are up, they need to be either promoted to longer term positions according to their performance-report-cards, but if their performances are poor they could be demoted or even be impeached.  Once they got promoted to longer term positions they could move into the house of Meritocracy.  Still, even once they reach the house of Meritocracy, more examinations must be done to ensure that the leaders within the house of Meritocracy are truly excellent.  If they’re just pretending to be excellent at their jobs, they could still be impeached within the house of Meritocracy.

Well, I think the idea I suggest above could be tested out for the case of marrying Democracy and Meritocracy together.  It’s like the people got to participate in a popularity contest before the real leaders could eventually be recognized.  Such a system does provide layers of examinations of our leaders so they could not take it easy and get so corrupted such as becoming lazy in serving people, involving in corruptions and scandals, and so forth.  What do you think?

Advertisements

My Thought On Presidential Election of 2016

In a democracy like the United States, a leader who got too many baggages like Hillary Clinton, you lose, because the United States loves the underdog.  In authoritarian state such as in China, a leader can win according to how specialize and how large the experience he or she has.  I think Hillary Clinton lost the White House to president elect Donald Trump, because she represents a dynasty.  The people in the United States are always looking out for fresher ideas that may give them hope, and president elect Donald Trump is definitely something that a majority people of the United States are going for.  Of course, it’s hard to say how well would president elect Donald Trump run against someone else.  It’s now clear that Hillary Clinton isn’t going to be the next president as she represents the Clinton dynasty.

Before Donald Trump is a clear known winner of the presidential election, a lot people were and probably still are against him.  Will he be able to bring those people onto his side in the coming years?  If president elect Donald Trump won’t be able to bring the oppositions to work with him, we may very well have another four or eight years of divisions within the United States.  Since the United States is a home to so many different groups of ethnicities and cultures, I fear divisions within will bring down the United States even more.  I hope that our next president will be able to unite the people so the United States won’t degrade.  After all, what people need most are security and wealth building opportunities, because these things will improve people lives.

Why Are The Chinese Flourishing Under An Authoritarian Regime?

Why isn’t the Chinese government allowing the Chinese to elect the country’s leaders and yet China is still flourishing?  Western people like us are often wondering why this is the case.  Some people from the United States and other western states have believed that once the Chinese are wealthier, they would demand a full blown democracy sort of governmental regime.  Nonetheless, I think this sort of belief is kind of make believe.

Chinese history had recorded many Chinese historical dynasties that were able to provide prosperity that had no equal in historical time periods, and so the ancient Chinese were able to flourish and get wealthy in all sorts of manners.  Yet, in those time, the Chinese were all ruled by a king or an emperor.  The modern Chinese regime is similar yet different than the past dynasties in several ways.

Basically, the modern Chinese regime is an authoritarian body, because the Chinese cannot elect their leaders.  This is very similar to how past ancient dynasties had ruled China.  Nonetheless, Chinese modern regime is different than the past ancient Chinese regimes/dynasties in a sense that Chinese modern leaders are not likely to be able to pass their positions down to their children as if their positions could be inherited.  Instead, there is a process within one party system that would weed out the bad and pick the good to govern an institution within China.  Nonetheless, this process is very similar to how the ancient Chinese dynasties had done in promoting meritocracy.

Anyway, as historical periods in China has shown us that the Chinese can unite and operate just fine under one party system, and so we in the West should not expect China to emulate the Western democratic systems.  Nobody knows the future, perhaps China may emulate the West in the future, but in my opinion I don’t think this will likely to occur at all.  Instead, I think China would still be one party state in foreseeable future, and yet the Chinese will be able to flourish in this particular environment.

G20 In China: Performances For The Leaders

World leaders of most powerful 20 countries are in China for G20.  China isn’t playing around when it hosts the G20 for the first time.  Thus, in Hangzhou, China displays awesome performances to welcome the leaders of the countries that are attending the G20.  Check out the performances in the video right after the break.

Chaos Will Ensue If Internal Issues Cannot Be Solved

If a country is weakening, internal and external problems will exacerbate.  When internal issues cannot be addressed, chaos ensues, and this in turn weakens the external defensive measures.  Internal chaos can open up a hole which may allow external forces to infiltrate.  At first, benign problems may occur such as immigration, but the longer a country stays weaken, the problems will only grow worse and may lead to even more problems.

A weak country may lose resources in protecting one’s border.  As a border becomes lawless, crimes from neighboring countries will pour in.  As foreign criminals take root in a weakened country, such a country will have to deploy even more resources to combat growing crimes.  Since the country is already internally weakened, resources will not be easily deployed, and so the internal issues won’t be effectively confronted.

The longer the country cannot address internal issues, the influences and abilities of such a country can only grow weaker, because external forces will most likely to attack the weaknesses of such a country.  In my opinion, if diplomacy cannot be used to solve external issues in near term, it’s wiser to address the internal issues immediately.  Only when internal issues are no longer the problems, then the country can confidently face external issues with more resolves.

Afterthought:  I think it’s very important to keep the border tight, and only allowing legal immigrants to apply for stays within a country.  Tight border can prevent foreign crimes to pour in, thus helping a country to save resources for other internal issues.

Why Chinese People Don’t Feel Oppressed By Their Authoritative Regime?

One of the top stories from my Quora’s feed is a question in regarding to “why a lot of Chinese people don’t feel oppressed by their regime“, and this topic generates many interesting answers through Quora.  Here in the West, our heart is with democracy, because it’s the ideal that we have been taught and inspired by since childhood.  In practice, true democracy probably isn’t really existed.  In the West, we practice partial democracy, because our system makes it hard for true democracy to flourish.  Otherwise, we would have seen hundreds if not thousands of major political parties that compete for governmental power.  Instead of such thing, we have two major political parties in the United States (i.e., Democrats and the Republicans).  Elsewhere in the West, few major political parties would hold the key to governmental positions.  If we really practice true democracy, the system would be way more complex and chaotic.  The competition for governmental positions would be way more competitive, and ideals would be constantly conflicting each other to create political gridlock of sorts.  Thus, partial democracy is in practice instead.  Freedom of speech, press, and so on would still be considered the core elements that support the partial democracy foundation.  In the East such as in China though, we have seen Chinese people practice a political system in which we in the West think as authoritative regime.

Why Chinese people don’t feel oppressed by their regime?  This question is very interesting, because as China rises the West is wearily trying to understand China more. China is just going to get more powerful, and so the West is concentrating on how to prepare when facing an even more powerful China in the near future.  China isn’t practicing partial democracy, because there is only one political party in China — yet China is still prospering.  Basically, nothing is written in stone in which to set the requirements for partial democracy to be the only path to have a successful political structure.  It seems China is an authoritative regime that listens to people’s wishes and dreams.  Although Chinese government is hell bending on stopping any sort of controversial political views from average and non-average citizens alike, the regime in China does strive to improve everyday people’s lives by nurturing a stable job market, healthy economy, youthful innovative research and development institutions and environment, and so forth.  Meanwhile, China’s one party system is trying to weed out corruptions from within the political party and elsewhere in China.

The Chinese youngsters — who are born after the major upheavals (e.g., Tiananmen Square protest of 1989, cultural revolution during Mao Zedong’s day, etc…) — do not have any experience in hardship as how their parents had experienced before, but they have been taught of how their parents were suffering from the chaoses that occurred in China.  Their parents speak of extreme hunger during Mao Zedong’s Great Leap Forward movement, because their parents remembered the Great Famine which caused untold amount of deaths that caused by hunger and extreme poverty during those days.  Chinese youngsters can also look at so called democracy states elsewhere around the world that are doing poorly in providing jobs, wealth, and happy life for the citizens, and so they can appreciate that their Chinese government is doing something right which allows them to prosper.  For an example, Chinese youngsters would look at India as a poor, chaotic largest democracy state in the world.  In Africa, Chinese youngsters see how democracy does not put foods on average citizens’ kitchen tables.  Chinese youngsters may dislike their strict government, but they do not yet mind of being disciplined by a strict government as long the Chinese government is doing the right things for the people.

In summary, I think the phrase “people rule” is quite powerful and real, because no matter the political system would be, what matters most is the people within such a system.  Although the system does rule the people, but it’s that the people who are feeding the system.  Without the right people that can intelligently upkeep the system, the system would get corrupted and rotted from the core, and this is when it’s hostile to their own people.  As the people within the system feel uncomfortable and unbreathable, it’s when the people are going to overthrow such a system.  The common sense and fundamentals of decency can be locked away for some time, but it doesn’t mean the unjustness can go on forever.  I think, as long a governmental system in the West or in the East is doing the right things for its people, the system can thrive on for quite some time.  This is why I don’t think we should be surprised to see the Chinese people are proud of their government, because the Chinese are prosper under their current regime.  (I once heard a phrase which speaks of how the Chinese don’t love their government, but they do respect their government.)