主题：【原创】温家宝讲述的天下大势 -- 同人于野
- 复 cont.
家园 cont. Posted 27/02/07 at 10:13 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Vickky Angstrom from Calgary, Canada writes: L. Tang - I really appreciate your translation of the headline. I wonder: do you think this means that Chinese leaders think that they already have a democracy?
I am also curious how long you think it will take for a multi-party system to come to China. I hope China uses a different electoral system than ours when the time comes.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:14 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Alfred Dreyfus from Canada writes: For centuries the Chinese have thought and planned long-term. A hundred years is nothing to those who don't have to worry about an election every four or five.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:15 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: Watson Jones The fact that you just posted a text book definition of how the US system should work and why it's democratic was the first reason I suspected your post.. Then I realized you were actually from the US, of all the things Americans get divided over (guns, healthcare, education) them believing that their system is a democracy (if not the most superior) is by far the main thing they can agree on.. While you may disagree with the Canadian system, you need to do a bit of actual research on your political system.. The out of control lobbying and spending, the fact that judges don't rule based on what is right but what is popular, and subjecting minority rights decisions to referenda (which are nortoriously unreliable).. You call a referendum democratic, but when you give a complex problem to people who are not prepared/informed correctly to make a decision it is democracy in name only.. It's well known that people will often vote on a referenda as a way of supporting or punishing a government.. Partisan politics skews numbers even further.. combine this with the fact that you can't put a minority rights issue (gay marriage for example) up to a referenda, it's a MINORITY issue, of course they aren't going to win referenda, they're the minority.. that's what government is there for, to make the hard decisions, after weighing all the facts and understanding the consequences.. That's why we choose capable leaders to run the country in our best interest.. Don't get me wrong, I believe democracy is the best system available to us.. just don't kid yourself that the US is that great, or even that democratic (the last 2 presidential elections brought that into serious question, don't believe me let's have a recount.. oh wait you can't, because a Republican party suppoter makes the voting machines but won't allow anyone to verify the code and there's no paper ballots).. please do some research on referenda man.. ones not financed by the US government ideally.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:17 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
John Melnick from High River AB, Canada writes: Remember folks that this is the country that our attaining our Kyoto targets is supposed to set an example for. We lead and they shall follow.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:19 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
thomas ip from Shenzhen, Canada writes: dman T: I may be a clueless idiot but I am not naive.
Do you know how many 'intellectuals.....liberals' were killed in Ohio when they tried to protest against the Vietnam war?
So you think the students got a better deal in the US?
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:23 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
The Loyal Canadian Work Farce from Canada writes: In 25 years the gap between the rich and poor in China will be like the distance between Mars and Pluto. Just ask the leaders of North America's liberal econom....er...liberal democracy.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:24 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Vern McPherson from Toronto, Canada writes: Watson Jones from United States writes
And what was it you had rammed down your throat recently Whatty ?
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:25 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: thomas ip
Let's not forget that nifty little thing called the Cultural Revolution.. where you know 50 Million people were murdered.. for being liberals, and artists and you know being generally educated and realizing a faux communist fascist regime was not in the best interest of the people..
Oh and was it you that brought up the slave trade? I'm not sure but let's not forget who owned the slaves in Africa before they were sold to the Euro's.. The other tribes in Africa.. they have been warring and making slaves of one another for alot longer than we ever did..
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:29 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Jack Smith from vanvouver, Canada writes: There are handful of so-called political criminals in china, Some are of them maybe wrongly charged like those people who are wrongly held because of national security reason in canada, but most of them commited actual crime.
Open your own eyes before you talked about millions as number.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:34 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Jack Smith from vanvouver, Canada writes: Stubborn Ox
You posted so many numbers withour proof at all. Where did you get those wierd numbers? Even most anti-china or anti-china government person cannot imagine about that kind of number.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:35 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: 'but most of them commited actual crime.'
of course they did.. they spoke out about the government.. got together in too big of a group.. worshipped a god other than the party leader etc..
those are all crimes in China.. so technically you are correct...
- 复 cont.
家园 cont. Posted 27/02/07 at 10:37 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: So many numbers? I don't think I did.. I posted the 50 million killed in the cultural revolution.. other than that I don't believe I even used any..
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:38 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
X. T. from Waterloo, ON, Canada writes: Vickky Angstrom from Calgary:
Where did you get the source again? I do not think China has the capacity to hold 10 million in jails! I see you, like many Canadians and Americans, know absolutely nothing about anything in that part of the world. And I say it again, one of the best ways for these people to start learning geography is waging wars against some remote tinpot countries.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:40 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Eric Li from Calgary, Canada writes: This G&M article is written by someone who can read some Chinese characters but has NO ability to understand the meaning of a Chinese article and definitely does NOT understand the Chinese culture. The '100 years' appeared once in '我們必須堅持黨在社會主義初級階段的基本路線１００年不動搖，堅持改革和創新，使中國特色社會主義永葆蓬勃生機'(We must keep the socialist INITIAL STAGE for at least 100 years). 社會主義初級階段(the initial stage of socialist) was first introduced about 30 years ago by then Chinese Communist General Secretary ZHAO Ziyang. The use of “initial stage” paved a path for both the economic reform and the political reform achieved during the last 30 years. It is true that the Chinese leader does not talk very often about “democracy and political reform” . But the China's No. 3 leader’s paper did emphasise that “we should steady conduct the POLITICAL REFORM and socialist DEMOCRACY CONSTRUCTION at THE SAME TIME when we do economic reform” (我們在進行經濟體制改革的同時，穩步推進政治體制改革，社會主義民主法制建設不斷加強，人民的政治生活日趨活躍，人民在政治、經濟、文化、社會等方面的權利得到了較好維護。)
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:40 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Johnny La Rue from Victoria, BC, Canada writes: And to think people crap on Cuba for being socialist and look the other way when China admits to being the same. If Cuba manufactured western-bound goods (benefitting from workers getting less than a dollar an hour) and have Wal Mart make billions from it they'd be a 'good' socialist, too. Interesting parallel.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:41 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: I realize I shouldn't have posted those deaths as all the 'cultural revolution' but rather deaths attributed to Mao in his quest to set up his ideal marxist state..
People's Republic of China, Mao Zedong's regime (1949-1975): 40 000 000 [make link]
Agence France Press (25 Sept. 1999) citing at length from Courtois, Stephane, Le Livre Noir du Communism:
Rural purges, 1946-49: 2-5M deaths
Urban purges, 1950-57: 1M
Great Leap Forward: 20-43M
Cultural Revolution: 2-7M
Labor Camps: 20M
Tibet: 0.6-1.2M
TOTAL: 44.5 to 72M
I just pulled those off a site I googled.. don't have time for academic searches right now but if you have any Google-Fu I'm sure you'll find the approximate numbers.. Historians believe Mao was responsible for 10's of millions of deaths..
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:43 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
X. T. from Waterloo, ON, Canada writes: Eric Li from Calgary:
Don't waste your time. G&M is heavily biased. Just look at today's another article by Omar El Akkad, about raising money for a terrorist, I mean, Uyghur freedom fighter.
I suspect no reporter with G&M is actually literate in Chinese. They just want to make up some horror stories to feed the public.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:46 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: aw what's wrong.. everytime I stay in a thread and argue the people who seem like they are lying through their teeth just back off and stop posting..
better luck next time guys..
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:06 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Trillian Rand from Canada writes: Premier Wen Jiabao makes some interesting and valid points. For China to advance, it must create a system that allows all citizens to benefit, not just some. This is not political rhetoric, but stark reality. Almost certainly the Premier is using '100 years' figuratively, not literally, because democracy will rise from the bottom before it is imposed from the top, no matter how benevolent the government's intentions. Already large groups in China are actively encouraging democratic reforms. As the economy expands, this encouragement will become more strident.
For another aspect of the Premier's speech, go to the China Daily website: chinadaily.com.cn.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:07 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
mr motoc from Canada writes: All you boys and girls who HATE things like . . . rights . . . freedom . . . due process . . . and the rule of law -- all the favorites of sissy-pants left-wing looney types -- it looks like Communist China is THE country for YOU, for at least 100 years!
You must be so happy. Get on the web; book a one-way flight; you owe it to YOURSELVES.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:12 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
tony leong from Canada writes: well, obviously China has a long way to go with respect to human rights/democracy etc...
anyone that knows anything about the Chinese in general is that stability is very much a state to be desired...so nothing the Government says to that end ought to be surprising...
China is on course, IMO, to gradually loosen the reigns of power, but only under their guidelines and timeframe.
Watching the former USSR dissolve and then implode into the uber-rich and the poor, probably didn't give the Chinese any confidence with regard to a faster timetable a la perestroika
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:26 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
John Silverman from Canada writes: Does this mean the US will attack China? Because we all know that they often attach countries under the premise of trying to bring them democracy. Somehow I think they won't, which just goes to show they don't actually care about that and should stop using that as an excuse.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:28 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Ranald Walton from Hamilton, Canada writes: To the Chinese Dictators: Good luck on that one. It will be difficult for the elite to maintain control when a financial crisis hits sometime in the future. Probably China's biggest problem, and it is far bigger than any problem faced by the US, is its lack of political stability. Money does not like political chaos.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:29 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
david sandford from Canada writes: China seems less like socialism than a bunch of rich thugs milking a country. China's premier is more concerned about his rolls royce...
- 复 cont.
家园 cont. Posted 27/02/07 at 11:31 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Green Canada from Edmonton, Canada writes: we could have a new saying...Canada will cut GHGs when China becomes a democracy...the timeline is about the same.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:34 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Eric Li from Calgary, Canada writes: mr motoc from Canada: it might be harder for the Canadian Natives to find the differences among us based on WHEN we arrived here than HOW they arrived here.
We are discussing the meaning of a paper and nothing else.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:35 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
X. T. from Waterloo, ON, Canada writes: david sandford from Canada:
For your info, Win Jiabao has no Rolls. All high ranking state officers have to use native products, including their chauffeured vehicles. If you find they are thugs, good luck trying find a word for those in Washington and Ottawa. You may need an Oxford Dictionary.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:40 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
G. A. from Canada writes: It is easy to objectively condemn a statement proclaiming another century of Communist rule in a country with such potential, economic and otherwise. However, it is refreshing to see leaders taking a pragmatic stance to democratization. As we have quickly learned in Iraq and Afghanistan (among countless African and Latin American states), democracy requires the proper infrastructure to flourish, let alone take hold. Democracy, of course, is not simply elections, although much of the world holds the principle as such, quite infallibly. A true, Western embodied 'liberal' democracy requires an independent judiciary, free press, civil liberties, a viable welfare state, free and fair elections, freedom of religion, etc., etc...
If the leaders of China were to proclaim simple 'democracy' in 10 or 20 years - ostensibly meaning elections with some conjured up form of competition - readers might have had a more favourable response. However, when taking the full gamut of democratic ideals into consideration, the prediction of a century is certainly more feasible. We need not see another democratic promise broken any time soon.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:41 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
L Tang from Toronto, Canada writes: Stubborn Ox, I love you last name.
I can not agree more that many people were dead 'unnaturally' during Cultural Revolution ( or Cultural Lost!). The fact is that we don't know the fact.
But I suggest you forget this painful or horrible memory, like most Chinese are doing now. Like why there is baby boom in North America after war? The current Chinese crazy economic boom is in the same situation. The 60's is an unbeatable nightmare to China and her citizens.
But I think the number is not as big as millions, bcz massacre during that period is not heard; also many Chinese learned to shut up to survive quickly when they realize the mouth became dangerous organ.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:42 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Keith Petreman from Ottawa, Canada writes: Watson Jones from United States, I think to have a democracy you have to count all the votes. You can go around all day proclaiming America as a democracy but as long as the media there are controlled by fewer and fewer and as long as the referendums and elections involve systematic fraud and widespread disenfranchisement from the political system, I think it's fair game to question whether or not the US is really still a democracy.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:42 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Y Gong from Thunder Bay, Canada writes: The author of the article has a misunderstanding of the so-called '100 years', which actually counted from the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949. That means democracy is at least 40 more years away. In my opinion, this is a realistic plan.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:47 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Keith Petreman from Ottawa, Canada writes: mr motoc from Canada writes: All you boys and girls who HATE things like . . . rights . . . freedom . . . due process . . . and the rule of law -- all the favorites of sissy-pants left-wing looney types -- it looks like Communist China is THE country for YOU, for at least 100 years!
You must be so happy. Get on the web; book a one-way flight; you owe it to YOURSELVES.
I agree. Just thought it was worth re-stating.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:49 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Tony Baloney from In a cave west of Hamilton, Canada writes: I think it is absolutely wonderful that the ruling class in China is so concerned with improving the lives of the average Chinese rather than maintaining their own grip on power. I personally think they should hold off democracy for 200 years, to doubly ensure that economic progress is established. After all, look how poor the US has done under democracy.
I repeat, the ruling class in China has absolutely no interest in maintaining power for power's sake and is entirely interested only in the altruistic act of improving the lives of the Chinese population.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:54 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: Tony Baloney
Yeah that's exactly it, they care about the people.. It's not that the wealth is being heavily concentrated in the hands of a few along the coast while hundreds of millions live in poverty and are murdered by the army if they attempt to launch any kind of complaint or protest..
Even in highly controlled China, the west gets the news of the death squads crushing revolts of poor and desperate peasant farmers in small rural villages.. and don't forget the mobile execution platforms they converted buses into, so it's easier to go from town to town executing dissidents.. google it if you dare.. I'm not making it up..
Posted 27/02/07 at 12:01 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Mr Fijne from Calgary, Canada writes: Finally leaders who understand that democracy is flawed: just watch Canada the world's best wallet picking people who love to cripple those who bring wealth to them! In a democracy the lowest common denominator rules and that is why the politicians have to go so low to lure the idiots to vote for them on issues they don't understand! Ahh China, a first class communist country versus Canada a second class socialist one masquerading in conservative gears... Flaherty/Layton... In Canada, 10% are paying 50% of the income tax and thus should have 50% of the voting decision! You wanna have more say in the country? Work hard and smart and you'll create more wealth for all, pay more taxes and have more say! Let's go the Chinese way!
- 复 cont.
家园 cont. Posted 27/02/07 at 12:06 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
tony leong from Canada writes: oh yes Tony Baloney, of course, the population of the United States was 2, 527, 450 citizens...
try installing a true democracy to a country of over 1 billion people...
as for the motivations of the ruling class in US politics, that is a point that can easily be debated - the belief that any political system is truely altruistic is laughable at best, when administered to be human beings...
Posted 27/02/07 at 12:06 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: L Tang I appreciate your opinion, however perhaps it's the fact that I've grown up in a democracy that I can't have faith in the Chinese system.. I'm not saying democracy is perfect or that we have perfected it.. But the basic fundamentals of democracy, such as free speech, free press, right to assembly, due process, innocent until proven guilty etc. are all incredibly important to me.. I doubt I'll ever be able to fully understand some of these authoritarian regimes.. while I understand that having food is more important to most than voting, I can't support a government that actively murders it's own people.. Muchless stick my head in the sand about the cultural revolution.. Of course people keep their mouths shut and heads down now.. all the free thinkers, the academics, the philosohpers, anyone who was brave enough to be critical of what this system is and it's abuses has already been murdered.. there's no dissent because the last time there was, the government murdered it's own people with tanks and that was on television! The disregard for human life, much less individual liberties is what disgusts me about the Chinese government. While I understand the economics behind the deals we make with them, it makes me sick that we are in fact condoning murder of people who want nothing more than to pray, to speak out, to read free news or to view the internet without having thousands of people monitoring me ready to cut me off or come imprison/kill me depending on what I type.. These discussions on the G&M that I have daily I could never do.. I use these forums to speak of the flaws in my government, about what needs to be done to change it.. While I disagree with many posters on these boards, at least they are able to post their ideas..
Posted 27/02/07 at 12:10 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: Mr Fijne
please read some philosophy before you ever speak again man..
Posted 27/02/07 at 12:11 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
k. Beachhill from Canada writes: As for Watson Jones, he needs to read a bit of history, especially that of his own country, before he decides what democracy is. Having lived in many countries around the world, I consider myself fortunate to live in the greatest country on earth- CANADA. We may not live up to US standards, including their neo-imperialistic political and military ambitions, but we don't go around preaching one thing and doing another either. What happened to the US policy of 'not trading with the enemy-or communist countries'? Did China present too great an oportunity for US companies to practice their insatiable greed? No, Mr Jones, please let me have my unelected senate and unelected judges until such time that we feel a change in this system is needed. I sincerely hope we never achive anything close to the kind of 'democracy?' you and your fellow brainwashed breathren aprove of. The world could not withstand it.
Posted 27/02/07 at 12:12 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Rebecca Leung from Richmond Hill, Canada writes: I agree with G.A.
The Canadian democratic system took 80 years to develop to the stage where its Chinese citizens can vote (1867 - 1947).
Why shouldn't the Chinese take their time too?
I'm a grateful Canadian and not pointing fingers but sometimes things take a long time to be done right.
Posted 27/02/07 at 12:22 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
robert marshall from Scarborough, Canada writes: So what should we move back to a feudal system of government then Mr Fijne and have it where the working classes fate is left in the hands of the wealthy? I don't think so ... the problem is that many of the people that go to the polls don't have the full picture from each of the big issues. What our society needs to be doing is ensuring that people are more aware of all sides of an issue before they make their decision ... that way they have the opportunity to get an understanding of all sides of the story. Unfortunately neither the liberals or the NDP (or any political party) would want these type of voters because then the people would be making better decisions and those might not vote from some of the current clowns in parliament that don't seem to get anything done (i.e. all 3 stooges (Layton, Dion and Harper)). We might even have it where politicians actually get things done instead to spending more time taking shots at the other politicians (hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha).
Have a good day
Posted 27/02/07 at 12:28 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Mr Fijne from Calgary, Canada writes: Stubborn Ox yeah man, dude don't like it when it hits home... dude.
Posted 27/02/07 at 12:29 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Y Gong from Thunder Bay, Canada writes: Joseph Sis say a fairly accurate truth for those people living cities. In deed, human right issue in China is far from satisfactory based on western standard (but definitely not as bad as some of the posts described here). That is part of the reason why it take 100 years to build a democratic society. Just ask how many years it took the Canadian goverment to apologize for HEAD TAX.
It is biased to blame everything on communist government just because it is communist. No other chinese government can improve human rights overnight.
Posted 27/02/07 at 12:30 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Bernard B from Canada writes: Hey, Watson Jones. While I agree with some of your posts, the will of the majority is not necessarily freedom. I find it incredible that honest, hardworking gay coupldes cannot enjoy equal security because the yokels don't like it. I think Marx referred to this as the Tryrany of teh People: Religious Socalism
- 复 cont.
家园 cont. Posted 27/02/07 at 12:34 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Kevka Y. from London, Canada writes: The Chinese leadership and its shadowy commanders are very smart and increasingly sophisticated...They do indeed think in centuries. It has always been their way. They will do what is right for the Chinese people, at their own pace, and should not have to answer to pressure to aquire other systems they don't find useful at the moment.
Posted 27/02/07 at 12:36 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
X. T. from Waterloo, ON, Canada writes: Stubborn Ox from Calgary:
One should learn from past, not stay in it.
I was born in that Cultural Revolution period. I guarantee I know a whole lot more than your books tell you. One of my ancestors was clubbed to death by those 'land reform' people, who are in fact village thugs. He was a military officer with the communists at that time and dragged back home from battlefield.
What I am saying is, no one is perfect in past. Everyone has own share of atrocities, and in this case Canadians are not innocent either. Mao is a tyrant in many senses, but he is long dead along with much of his legacies.
What is more important, and also the entire purpose for us to look back into history, is looking forward. Much as you love democracy, and for once I was in protests on streets back in 1989, this is not the only or the best system for everyone on every day. It certainly does not happen overnight, especially for a country of 1.3 billion people. What we want to see is that they are moving this way, and I certainly see much improvement over last few years.
Your numbers of 'political prisoners' is nothing but falsity. I admit they do sometimes prosecute people because they spread different ideas - Fa Lun-Gong is one but you really have to know what it is to judge if they are wrong on this.
If you really want to know the real China, your books or those Chinese illiterate G&M reporters don't help too much. Why not go there and have a trip? I guarantee you will have no safety problems - That is if you do not involve in freedom fighting as our latest Canada's favorite Celil did.
Posted 27/02/07 at 12:40 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
X. T. from Waterloo, ON, Canada writes: Oh, just in case you want to see China I have a hotel recommendation for ya:
Grant Hyatt Beijing
It is expensive (duh! it is Hyatt), about $250/night for a standard suite. But if you go inside, you will enjoy the services you can never have in North America. It is about 15 minutes walk from Tian'anmen Square. All things are very pricey even by Canadian standard. They also have a great bakery, very reasonably priced and very high quality. You won't miss Tim Hortons for a long time after that. :-)
Posted 27/02/07 at 12:53 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
The Loyal Canadian Work Farce from Canada writes: Shocking and appalling that Canada's Conservalibs would do business with such an oppressive undemocratic one party economy. But let's see - Prescott Bush did big business with Hitler's Nazis, George Bush Sr. did business with Saddam Hussein and the bin Ladens, ditto Bush Jr. And now Canada is doing a rip-roaring business with those nasty Communist Chinese Shocking and appalling that Canada 's leaders would indulge in appeasement that makes Neville Chamberlain look like a boy scout.
Posted 27/02/07 at 1:02 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
L Tang from Toronto, Canada writes: Stubborn Ox, I really respect you than other yelling-only dude.
What can cure one person may kill another in the same illness, especially how to take the treatment. Try to know more about who you want to help.
Don't agree with the process does not mean veto to the result. Maybe Wen and Hu are in the same feeling.
Anyway, I respect you opinions, or agree with most of them.
Posted 27/02/07 at 1:10 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
L Tang from Toronto, Canada writes: Jeremy F from Alberta, Canada writes: Looks like we have a few chinese spy's in here...
Does not sound like a democratic way...
Posted 27/02/07 at 1:14 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Alfred Dreyfus from Canada writes: After the meltdown in the old Soviet Union, the Chinese are wise to pace themselves when it comes to political reforem. A century is nothing in the big picture, but eternity in a democracy.
Posted 27/02/07 at 1:51 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
J G from Whitby, Canada writes: And soon we will be buying Chinese cars which further them to maintain their ways. .....
DaimlerChrysler AG, seeking to cut costs and boost sales in North America, said Tuesday it will start selling Chinese-made cars in that market and western Europe as it tries to meet demand for smaller, more economical vehicles.
The world's fifth-largest automaker said its supervisory board approved the framework of a limited partnership that will see China's Chery Motor Co. build the cars in China.
They will be sold in North America and western Europe under the aegis of its Chrysler Group brands, which include Dodge and Jeep. Financial details were not released.
I have a Dodge Magnum and I will not buy Chrysler again!
- 复 cont.
家园 cont. Posted 27/02/07 at 1:55 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
r b from calgary, Canada writes: I normally do not comment on issues of purely foreign interest - my concern is first and foremost protection of North American economies and lifestyles: translation - I really don't give a damn about China's lack, or accomplishment of, democracy. I don't care when, or if it is achieved, I care far more about the behavior of whatever Chinese regime happens to be in power is with respect to the outrages of ongoing patent infringement and intellectual property theft by China. However a posting by a Josepf Sis requires rebuttal. As with many Canadians who are posted in foreign lands, this fellow came back all starry-eyed to tell us how much better 'they' do things in 'such and such' land. Perhaps. Having lived through a decade plus of Kleiny numbskullitude in AB, even I sometimes wistfully yearn for an intelligent hand at the wheel. But I recall that some of my family had the experience of living in a nation that experienced a miraculous recovery from devasatation. Within 3 years of the ascension of a new government, people were fed, industry was humming, the trains ran on time. The National Socialists were quite efficient if nothing else. Now settle down, I am not directly comparing 1930's Germany to the China of today: China appears to be a relatively benign dictatorship (perhaps a bit heavy handed on the capital punishment issue, but the Chinese posters on these boards don't seem to mind). But in general, dictatorships are more efficient. Just pray that you are not a born dissenter. Then of course there is the sticky issue of why there continues to be those 'teeming masses yearning to breathe free'. Your Chinese friends who ' laugh and think we are clueless' (your words) may want to ponder that. Myself, I will take the chaos of North American imperfect democracy to semi-benign dictatorship any time. Game on.
Posted 27/02/07 at 2:06 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
CPT America from United States writes: Just remember morally superior Canadians, those who live in glass houses should not throw stones!
Posted 27/02/07 at 2:07 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Scott Anderson from Windsor, Canada writes: Wow! Hear that sucken sound of Global destabilization? Well at least a good 40 to 60 years anyways. But I think China will see civil war and unrest first.
Same thing that needs to happen in the Middle East a major civil war so the Muslims can take back the faith from the hijackers in their society. It's time a culture and people who have been handed modern technology move the forward 500 years to an even playing field as the most of the world.
Why not let the exploitation of Democracies continue as Russia has done to the west for technology and money only to plan a re closing of the curtain by the great dictator Putin probably by 2012.
Posted 27/02/07 at 2:34 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
CPT America from United States writes: Okay I am no Chinese rocket scientist but this one takes the cake. 'The Canadian democratic system took 80 years to develop to the stage where its Chinese citizens can vote (1867 - 1947).' Since when are (were)foreign citizens allowed to vote?
Posted 27/02/07 at 2:12 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Bond Shearing from Calgary, writes: A 100 years before any possibility of democracy, hardly something to bragg about. At least not in our lifetime.
Posted 27/02/07 at 2:39 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Tor Sandberg from Toronto, Canada writes: No democracy in China for another 100 years!? Where is the American economic embargo like the one imposed on Cuba? I deeply wish Conservatives could see the hypocrisies in all their actions.
Posted 27/02/07 at 2:20 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
gulu Ng from Canada writes: Try the chinese airline (anyone of them). you will never fly with AC, or UA, or whatever again.
Posted 27/02/07 at 2:46 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
david sandford from Canada writes: X. T. from Waterloo, ON,X. T.
I guess thugs is a universal term then. thanks for the info.
- 复 cont.
家园 cont. Posted 27/02/07 at 3:05 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Joseph T from Victoria, Canada writes: XT & Eric Li: you are right. The majority of the people on this board are clueless and don't understand Chinese, even though they say they lived there etc etc. You have to change your entire mindset to understand the subtle nuances of Chinese word meanings and train of thought. I know this for a fact, that I had to be able to change my mindset to think in Chinese or English to understand the subtle nuances. Most westerners are clueless about this simple fact.
It is however, groundbreaking, for a senior leader of the party to now mention a time frame and the context to moving to a democratic form of government. Another clueless western thinking point is time frame. 100 years is but a drop in the bucket in China's 5000 year history. The chinese concept of time is very different than the west. The westerner mind cannot see pass their noses.
Posted 27/02/07 at 3:08 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Joseph T from Victoria, Canada writes: CPT: the reference is to Canadian citizens of chinese extraction.
The west has discriminate against Asians heavily. The racial politics practiced by the west against Asians were truly disgusting. Asians had to endure various forms of indignities around the world as they achieve success. Yet, Asians, in most cases turned the other cheek and with dignity moved forward. Westerners should be ashame of themselves for their attitudes and practices.
The various western based societies have raped and plunder various resources around the world the last several centuries. These societies have had the greatest harmful impact on this planet compared to any other society.
Posted 27/02/07 at 3:17 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Ranald Walton from Hamilton, Canada writes: It is mindboggling to read posters here apologizing for the Chinese political elite, while living under the protection of Canada. The posters would have a little more credibility if they walked the talk (ie lived in China). Personally I like freedom of speech and democracy, and thankfully our forefathers (and foremothers?) were willing to kill and die to defend those rights. Besides, political stability is necessary before capitalism works. The corpses of the contemporary Chinese leadership will be hanging from lamposts by piano wire, during the next depression.
Posted 27/02/07 at 3:28 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
William Berry from Winston Salem, United States writes: The Western mind CAN see past its nose, a Chinese Communist leader saying Democracy is 100 years away means that for 100 more years the Chinese people will continue to live in a totalitarian state, very similar to slavery, while the Western economies continue to go into a nose dive due to a very warped Trade imbalance versus the Chinese. Western (including Canada) democracies will continue to see their manufacturing jobs go to the People's (HA!) Republic of China, where people either work for pennies for government-owned companies, or go to "re-education camps." It means that a near dictatorship will continue to use its army and national police to impose the will of the elite upon the masses, down to the level of a person's right to think! Look at the "Made In _" tags on the goods you buy, especially in low cost consumer goods, appliances, furniture and clothing, and you will note that a VERY high percentage of them say "CHINA." World War III has turned into a TRADE WAR and CHINA is WINNING!
家园 good 家园 del 家园 凑个热闹。 温家宝说：我国正处在并将长期处在社会主义初级阶段。这句话有两个定位：一个是社会主义初级阶段；另一个是中国将长期处于这个阶段。
中国的社会主义初级阶段定位，最早是叶剑英在1979年国庆30周年讲话中提出来的。据说，社会主义初级阶段包含两层含义：第一，中国社会已经是社会主义社会。第二，这个社会主义社会还处在初级阶段，并且不能超越这个阶段。
又据说，社会主义和社会主义初级阶段，其本质就是社会经济制度中公有制所占比例。在社会主义初级阶段，公有制所占比例应该是多少？有人说，80%才是主体，才是社会主义；也有人说，51%就是占主体，就是社会主义。剩下的当然可以是私有制了。
众所周知，共产主义者不喜欢私有制，把消灭私有制当作终身奋斗目标。面对掌握国家政权的共产主义者，私有制在社会建设中战战兢兢地活着。当共产主义者向全社会发出号召发展私有制时，一个个个人既激动又恐慌，激动的是个人可以拿主意为社会生产了，恐慌的是个人能为社会生产多久，将来是否还会株连九族。
据说，为了解决这个问题，有共产主义者对外讲五十年不会变，对内讲二十年不变，此后又说坚持一百年不动摇。帝国主义者也跟着瞎起哄：只要走上自由经济之路，根本用不了那么久，共产主义者就会抛弃共产主义。
二十多年过去了，私有制在中国大地上恢复了活力，并且有了个雏形，政府不得不计划在法律上恢复保护私有财产的功能。因此，国家总理说了，中国将长期处于这个初级阶段。长期是多长？或许一百年，或许一千年，反正是很长。
- 复 凑个热闹。
家园 多谢！我理解，以前提“社会主义初级阶段”，文字上来看，, 多谢！我理解，以前提“社会主义初级阶段”，文字上来看，实际是搞私有化的“借口”。强调的是我们将长期处于这个阶段。
而现在温家宝提“社会主义初级阶段”，强调的是这个阶段制度太落后，急需改变。
家园 要区别“社会主义阶段”和“社会主义初级阶段” 以前说从资本主义到共产主义有一个过渡阶段，叫“社会主义”
但中国现状是封建主义到资本主义这段路还没走完，所以把这个“社会主义”叫初级，实际就是补资本主义这个课。这是经典马克思历史唯物主义，不是借口。毛的《新民主主义论》也是这么说的。
家园 没有那么简单吧？ 据说，温总理在他的整篇文章中没有提马克思，也没提毛泽东。俺没有去证实这个说法。俺觉着，社会主义初级阶段可能还是一个未知的东西。假如属于经典马克思历史唯物主义，邓大人为什么要提“摸石头”理论，是否有点多余了。
其实，你也可能注意到，中央政府提出社会主义初级阶段时，曾伴随着一个社会政治定位：中国已经是社会主义。那么，在社会主义条件下，政府应该怎样补资本主义这一课？比如说政府和资本的关系，应该是政府领导下的资本，还是资本推动下的政府？再比如说，既然承认私有制存在的合理性，物权法的出台过程为什么又如此艰难？
- 复 没有那么简单吧？
家园 把社会主义定义在公有制和私有制的概念上有误区 现在讲公有制和私有制，一般理解的概念是生产资料的完全支配权利，这种概念是马克思经典概念，但是已经过时了。
现代市场经济制度其主导左右的是公司，所谓的公司私有制，不是对生产资料的任意支配权，而是满足市场规范和履行合同和社会责任后的剩余支配权和剩余索取权。
所以纠缠公有制还是私有制的争论不会有什么结果，因为这些概念已经没有现实意义。完善法制才是最重要的。如何制度和首先是一个财产制度。财产制度如何促进和保护社会整体利益是问题所在，把制度的某些方面插上公有制或私有制的标签，然后根据这些标签来判断好坏，就会迷失健全制度和完善制度的方向。
家园 财产制度如何促进和保护社会整体利益是问题所在？ 那么，管理着“社会整体利益”的国家政府及其代理的地方政府应该如何履行保护个人财产利益呢，特别是当双方有了冲突的时候。有人说，物权法把国家、集体和个人列为“平等主体”，是罕见的无知和荒谬；挖了社会主义经济制度的基础，废弃了社会主义初级阶段基本经济制度的主体。这种想法的文章，网上很多很多。据说，有些文章作者还是把研究社会经济制度作为求生手段的专家。他们都在想些什么？