If the party officials are having closed door discussions on who will lead, the mandate of the masses seems obscured, or absent.
Do you mean electeds? The party, which itself has internal democracy, is a seperate institution from the legislatures, which include members of minority parties
Also why do you think it is closed door?
If xi’s popularity took a nose dive, how would the common citizen express their opinion? On what schedule? If the “elected” officials strongly favored keeping xi, but the citizenry strongly favored large leadership change, how would that occur?
If the leadership and people have a disagreement and it isn't resolvable through dialog elected officials can be recalled.
Well, socialist countries operate on concensus for major positions- the idea is that the vote is only part of the democratic process, and a large part of democracy lives in creating constructive feedback cycles between the people and the government and between different levels of government where concerns are understood and addressed.
If there was a competitor for Xi, it would not be part of the voting process, it would be in discussions amongst electeds for who is best for the role, and then a vote would happen where people approve of or disapprove of their representatives choice.
Literally Harvard affiliated studies show immense satisfaction with the government
Have realistic elections been happening?
Yes, have you looked at how elections function in China?
On one hand yes, on the other hand China is a democracy with a dominant marxist leninist party which understands that imperialism is an unstable system and that mutual development is better for the long term stability and prosperity of China because MLs literally wrote the book on understanding imperialism
They've explicitly said "the era of zero sum diplomacy is over"
Temporarily” has a pretty consistent habit of becoming permanent. It’s either malicious or extremely naive on Lenin’s part to believe that ypu can concentrate power into the hands of a few people and then they’ll just voluntarily give it up.
Temporary refers to disenfranchising the former bourgeoisie and nobility, not concentrating power? The USSR had a four tier federated legislative structure with the executive appointed by the legislature.
Which term is Xi on now at this point again? Oh right, he made himself dictator for life…
Yeah, and Castro was also dictator for life /s
I know it is unimaginable to you that leaders can stay popular and maintain a democratic mandate because you live in a bourgeois democracy but come on.
You know that term limits were invented because FDR was too popular right? They are an antidemocratic measure.
dictatorship
Are you referring to "dictatorship of the proletariat"? Because if you read what he wrote, it means "democracy where the former oppressor class is temporarily politically disenfranchised"
It feels like you're playing telephone with yourself while trying to get zingers in
Which is part if why communism has always failed or collapsed into a fascist state capitalism (like China).
China has better life expectancy than the US when it was a feudal state occupied by Japan 80 years ago, what is your metric for failure lol? China is also leading the renewable push, and has made massive innovations in participatory democracy.
MODHAT calling communist nations fascist serves to enable holocaust trivialization, doing this again will net you a ban.
China has forgiven billions in loans
Also literally read Lenin's definition of imperialism before you start saying bullshit like "taking over assets in another country is imperialism"
We nuke bigotry, we are not willing to make this place unwelcoming for people so right wingers feel more comfy expressing their opinions.
You don't get to be overtly bigoted toward trans people here, sorry! 😭
Someone didn't read about how automation serves to discipline workers and make it even harder to collectively bargain I see
view more: next ›
Yeah no problem, and I appreciate your perspective on it as a Canadian. 😄