

Harsh Justice In China - cellis
http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displayStory.cfm?story_id=15187020

======
maxklein
I may be wrong, but I support the chinese system of enforced social harmony.
China has a billion people, and a huge number of those people are not living
by a particularly high standard compared to people in the west. Chinas system
is forcing progress - it's causing huge jumps in the standards of living for
all of those people. It's a train speeding towards a better life for everyone.

China is providing infrastructure, healthcare, education, and equal rights
(sexual, ethnic, etc) for those people. The chinese system creates a socially
harmonious system (if you have been in china, you will know it is a very
peaceful country), while forcing progress.

Yes, for this, some rights are given up. Yes, dissent is not allowed. But it
only takes a few dissenters to destroy a system. Dissent has to be kept to a
minimum while the country marches forward.

There are two ways to progress : by letting everyone say everything they want,
which has so far led to huge wars and a LOT of failed states, or by having a
burocratic and strong leadership at the top that does extensive long term
planning. This has been shown to work (Singapore, China, Malaysia, Botswana).

It's easy to say that China should be more free. But the practical result will
be death, war and suffering. An educated and knowledgable society in future
will be well equiped to avoid war. Let china achieve a certain status, then we
can talk about relaxing the system.

Till then, for progress to continue, the policy of social harmony is not
optional.

~~~
forinti
I'm afraid you are really wrong.

The dictatorships in Latin America had economic progress, but a lot of
problems were simply ignored and ended up been tackled in the 80s with a lot
of pain.

Corruption was rampant but people didn't know about it because it simply
didn't show up in the press. People seem to think it magically appeared
overnight when the military left power.

A lot of money was ill-spent and huge debts were made which aren't well
explained.

There were megaprojects, just as China has now, but simple things like
sanitation, housing, and education were ignored. Urban centres grew with
little or no planning, resulting in the chaos we now have.

So I'm afraid you can't simply take away accountability and hope for the best.

~~~
maxklein
I am not advocating dictatorship or one-man rule. I am advocating a planned
economy and a burocratic system at the top, where a cadre of leaders plan and
decide how progress should happen. Be clear on that - single leader
dictatorships are the worst form of government. China does not have that
anymore and has not had it for a long time.

China has an elite class. Do you know how hard it is to get into the communist
party? Do you know you have to be REALLY good to be invited in. The party
selects intelligent and competent people to enter the leadership class a.k.a,
the party.

~~~
garply
You make the Communist party sound as if it's some super-elite club. It's not.
My girlfriend's a member and, while she's intelligent and well-educated, she
didn't have to do a whole lot to get in. I suspect a decent education is
enough.

Nor does being a member of the party suddenly make you a member of the
"leadership class". For her, it's like a club membership, she pays some small
dues every year and in return she can put it on her resume when she wants to.
It also helped her avoid some prereqs in college. I guess if she wanted to dig
further and start attending meetings regularly she could use it for
networking.

In short, being in the party != being a member of the ruling oligarchy which
calls the shots here. If you want to do that, marry into the family of someone
who has a good government post.

~~~
maxklein
Obviously being in the party does not mean you are in the ruling class. But to
be in the ruling class, you have to be part of the party, and the criteria to
get in the party will already filter out a lot of the idiots that have
destroyed so many countries.

