发信人: magicfat (魔法胖子), 信区: America
标 题: (link) “美国民主”？一个弥天大谎！
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Tue Jun 17 15:08:30 2008)

Anybody watching this thread? OP is obviously
almost boringly misinformed FUD, but some of the
replies are actually pretty interesting.

http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t1/ChinaNews/31611878_0_1.html

--

※ 来源:·WWW 未名空间站 海外: mitbbs.com 中国: mitbbs.cn·[FROM: 205.143.]

发信人: ayanami (螃蟹@FROSTSHOCK PWNS YOU!!11!), 信区: America
标 题: Re: (link) “美国民主”？一个弥天大谎！
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Tue Jun 17 15:31:48 2008), 转信

JJWW好长。

这个世界上只有中国人才会花这么长的时间和精力去讨论
民主是不是适合中国。

还写文章来掩饰。

【 在 magicfat (魔法胖子) 的大作中提到: 】
: Anybody watching this thread? OP is obviously
: almost boringly misinformed FUD, but some of the
: replies are actually pretty interesting.
: http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t1/ChinaNews/31611878_0_1.html



--

※ 来源:·BBS 未名空间站 海外: mitbbs.com 中国: mitbbs.cn·[FROM: 96.56.]

发信人: Alamo (阿拉莫戈多), 信区: America
标 题: Re: (link) “美国民主”？一个弥天大谎！
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Tue Jun 17 21:44:27 2008)


不错，又看到些希望。LOL。要不要请几个过来？

【 在 magicfat (魔法胖子) 的大作中提到: 】
: Anybody watching this thread? OP is obviously
: almost boringly misinformed FUD, but some of the
: replies are actually pretty interesting.
: http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t1/ChinaNews/31611878_0_1.html

--

※ 来源:·WWW 未名空间站 海外: mitbbs.com 中国: mitbbs.cn·[FROM: 76.203.]

发信人: magicfat (魔法胖子), 信区: America
标 题: Re: (link) “美国民主”？一个弥天大谎！
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Jun 18 11:33:26 2008)


【 在 Alamo (阿拉莫戈多) 的大作中提到: 】
: 不错，又看到些希望。LOL。要不要请几个过来？

You bet. I'd love to see MetaCity in the
pit with these guys. ;-)

--

※ 来源:·WWW 未名空间站 海外: mitbbs.com 中国: mitbbs.cn·[FROM: 205.143.]

发信人: Alamo (阿拉莫戈多), 信区: America
标 题: Re: (link) “美国民主”？一个弥天大谎！
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Jun 18 15:14:36 2008)


Me 2, I invited 2 of them, hope they would like to join us
to have some fun.

【 在 magicfat (魔法胖子) 的大作中提到: 】
: You bet. I'd love to see MetaCity in the
: pit with these guys. ;-)

--
天地者 万物之逆旅
光阴者 百代之过客


※ 来源:·WWW 未名空间站 海外: mitbbs.com 中国: mitbbs.cn·[FROM: 159.53.]

发信人: coldstar (coldstar), 信区: America
标 题: Re: (link) “美国民主”？一个弥天大谎！
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Jun 19 21:26:55 2008)

Well, I haven't read the article yet; here I'm just gonna offer my two cents
.

First, apparently different people have distinctive definitions for "
democracy." I would say that having a democratic process does not
necessarily mean achieving the goals of a true democracy. Many countries in
today's world, including the United States, have constructed,and in some
cases, fought to construct a democratic process; but the ideal goals of a
true democracy has not been realized. Forces and groups compete and fought
within this democratic process, very often aiming to gain its own interests
and hurting that of others. So many democracies today, like the one we have
here and the one in Taiwan, are struggling.

I do not think it's constructive to say this is because "nothing is perfect.
" Apparently this democracy can be a "more perfect union." It's a shame to
not going forward and simply giving up after generations of affluent life.

Yes, it is true that many folks who believe in, or in support of
totalitarianism, be it for ideological or nationalistic reasons, selectively
pick out the imperfectness to criticize, for example, the American
democracy, not for the sake of advocating for a true democracy, but for
making America look bad and thus making themselves somehow look a bit (
pathetically) better (although I never could figure out how; well, that's
just me). Nevertheless, these criticism (if they deserve to be called even
as "criticism") does not have much value except that it can be used as a
reference to help a democracy to rationally think about the problems that do
exist here. It'd be too red neck to just emotionally react to these folks,
the kind of people who don't deserve constructive comments.

So I would leave the question of whether democracy suits China to these
folks and their wisdom. But if they criticize America's healthcare, stand on
climate change, expanding prisons, endless spending, and the fact that the
government is unable to be responsive to the voices of the American people,
I believe these are apparently true arguments you often hear on the dinner
table coast to coast. So what's the problem? What's wrong with these
statements? Why not just listening to these alternative opinions in a
selective way?




【 在 ayanami (螃蟹@FROSTSHOCK PWNS YOU!!11!) 的大作中提到: 】
: JJWW好长。
: 这个世界上只有中国人才会花这么长的时间和精力去讨论
: 民主是不是适合中国。
: 还写文章来掩饰。



--

※ 来源:·WWW 未名空间站 海外: mitbbs.com 中国: mitbbs.cn·[FROM: 67.183.]

发信人: coldstar (coldstar), 信区: America
标 题: Re: (link) “美国民主”？一个弥天大谎！
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Jun 19 21:42:26 2008)

Second, is a democracy supposed to be perfect? What is a democracy? voting?
checks and balances? America does have a democracy, but America is declining
nonetheless, declining sharply, irreversibly, and significantly.

For all the things democracy has promised, we are getting the opposite
results. I'm not questioning the fundamentals of democracy because I believe
that it is morally just to have a democracy. So that differentiates me from
those folks who believe in totalitarianism or feudalism.

But I do think that over the years, this American democracy has been used to
suit the needs of some but not all.

Under this democracy, jobs are gone;
Under this democracy, wars are on;
Under this democracy, the powerless are left alone;

Yes, maybe things are tentative; some things will get fixed; but the
dominant trend, the trend of the good old USA, the American power, the
American middle class, and the American Dream declining is real and imminent
. They have not been fixed and I'm not sure if they are even fixable.

Yes, blame the right wingers, blame the radical leftists; thing is, it doesn
't make a difference except that it'll make this society more divided.






【 在 ayanami (螃蟹@FROSTSHOCK PWNS YOU!!11!) 的大作中提到: 】
: JJWW好长。
: 这个世界上只有中国人才会花这么长的时间和精力去讨论
: 民主是不是适合中国。
: 还写文章来掩饰。



--

※ 来源:·WWW 未名空间站 海外: mitbbs.com 中国: mitbbs.cn·[FROM: 67.183.]

发信人: coldstar (coldstar), 信区: America
标 题: Re: (link) “美国民主”？一个弥天大谎！
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Jun 19 21:54:05 2008)

To some extent, I think the P.R.C. is smart. China is trying to hold on its
society as tight as possible and for as long as possible. China has suffered
from so much pain and humiliation in the past two hundred years; China
knows that it is important to have a powerful economy and a powerful
military. With that, there comes a powerful empire and a powerful global
order, and maybe a powerful middle class and nationalistic pride.

For the Chinese people, this may not be the best option of all, but it's the
best China has achieved in its own history; it's the best China can do
right now. It, at the very least, makes China and the Chinese people secure
from foreign invasions. From that perspective, many Chinese would not feel
dissatisfied.

The West has both security and freedom; China used to have none; Now China
has one of them. It is a step forward from the Chinese perspective. And the
Chinese know that without security, where can you find freedom?

Being a collective society and an undemocratic society, China has been
efficient. Here in the democratic US of A, things are pluralistic and
inefficient, and nothing gets down. How does this democracy respond to
people's need?

I'm not advocating for the China model (if there is one) and I personally
would not like to live in that model. But I'm pointing out that a democracy
is sometimes both inefficient and unresponsive. One may say "efficiency is
not the goal;" fair enough, then what about "responding to people's need"? is
that something a democracy should have?






【 在 ayanami (螃蟹@FROSTSHOCK PWNS YOU!!11!) 的大作中提到: 】
: JJWW好长。
: 这个世界上只有中国人才会花这么长的时间和精力去讨论
: 民主是不是适合中国。
: 还写文章来掩饰。




--
※ 修改:·coldstar 於 Jun 19 22:33:20 2008 修改本文·[FROM: 67.183.]

发信人: Alamo (阿拉莫戈多), 信区: America
标 题: Re: (link) “美国民主”？一个弥天大谎！
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Jun 19 23:40:34 2008)


本来想等两位新来的批判你，可是那两位似乎对俱乐部很生疏，偶狠怀疑还
没找到门在哪里。:)

【 在 coldstar (coldstar) 的大作中提到: 】
: To some extent, I think the P.R.C. is smart. China is trying to hold on
its
: society as tight as possible and for as long as possible. China has
suffered
: from so much pain and humiliation in the past two hundred years; China
: knows that it is important to have a powerful economy and a powerful
: military. With that, there comes a powerful empire and a powerful global
: order, and maybe a powerful middle class and nationalistic pride.

如果使用"To some extent"，许多论断是狠弱的。比方偶也可以这么认为，如果
内战蒋匪打败了腊肉，中国势必成为冷战的前哨，地位或与日本相当或甚至强于
日本，那样即使是依附了美帝，也不妨碍有"powerful economy and a powerful
military"，那PRC聪明又体现在哪里，他们都自杀了不是对国家民族更有利？

当然，历史不能假设，但是PRC浪费了许多年的时间连它自己都承认，凭什么因
为它现在聪明了偶得相信它呢？再说，它现在聪明得拥有如此强大的国力/资
源居然在西人眼里不如达赖老和尚受尊重，弄个火炬传递象过街老鼠----据说
什么东西都是用钱买的，那它聪明得把钱都花什么地方去了？起码看起来它并不
乐意看到这幅景象。

: For the Chinese people, this may not be the best option of all, but it's
the
: best China has achieved in its own history; it's the best China can do
: right now. It, at the very least, makes China and the Chinese people
secure
: from foreign invasions. From that perspective, many Chinese would not feel
: dissatisfied.

: The West has both security and freedom; China used to have none; Now China
: has one of them. It is a step forward from the Chinese perspective. And
the
: Chinese know that without security, where can you find freedom?

这段非常勉强，中国在历史上地位恐怕有过高得多的时候，不论是人均还是总
量。此外，二战之后，不论原因如何，大国之间没有爆发全面战争，偶也不信
有任何国家认真地考虑过入侵中国的问题，讨论些个不存在的东西有多大意义？
从现在公布的资料看，韩战美国没有入侵中国的计划，即使是知道中国人和苏
联人都卷入了战争，难道偶们要相信越南人曾计划入侵导致"自卫反击"？

二战之后没有发生大规模战争的国家遍地都是，它们都不安全，还是安全？

: Being a collective society and an undemocratic society, China has been
: efficient. Here in the democratic US of A, things are pluralistic and
: inefficient, and nothing gets down. How does this democracy respond to
: people's need?

: I'm not advocating for the China model (if there is one) and I personally
: would not like to live in that model. But I'm pointing out that a
democracy
: is sometimes both inefficient and unresponsive. One may say "efficiency is
: not the goal;" fair enough, then what about "responding to people's need"?
is
: that something a democracy should have?

怎么定义效率的，又怎么定义最佳效率的？据说PRC拥有中国历史上最高的官民
比例，贪污腐败大概都不算新闻，你是怎么得出现在是有效率或者高效的结论的？

民主制度"效率低"是众所周知的，因为要花费时间金钱在讨价还价上。你难道真
以为糊瘟在中国说什么就是什么了，那他们用得上跑到地震现场去亲自喊话，这
么个制度怎么是高效率的偶不明白。

"responding to people's need"到底是个虾米概念？上次小不死分明获得了多数
选票，你可以不满意，不过一定要说"not responding to people's need"那等你
赞同的人得势的时候别人一样拿那个东西说你的。

你在前面也谈到建设性的意见，你这些东西偶就没看到什么建设性的。其实建设性
的意见就是改革现有制度的意见，对哪个国家都一样，你的观点似乎是中国那种烂
制度值得保留的地方更多，而米国这种有自我改进机制的制度反而"not responding
to people's need"。

Honestly, I say "where and where"。

--
天地者 万物之逆旅
光阴者 百代之过客


※ 来源:·WWW 未名空间站 海外: mitbbs.com 中国: mitbbs.cn·[FROM: 76.203.]

发信人: coldstar (coldstar), 信区: America
标 题: Re: (link) “美国民主”？一个弥天大谎！
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Jun 20 13:45:06 2008)

My responses below:

如果使用"To some extent"，许多论断是狠弱的。比方偶也可以这么认为，如果
内战蒋匪打败了腊肉，中国势必成为冷战的前哨，地位或与日本相当或甚至强于
日本，那样即使是依附了美帝，也不妨碍有"powerful economy and a powerful
military"，那PRC聪明又体现在哪里，他们都自杀了不是对国家民族更有利？

当然，历史不能假设，但是PRC浪费了许多年的时间连它自己都承认，凭什么因
为它现在聪明了偶得相信它呢？再说，它现在聪明得拥有如此强大的国力/资
源居然在西人眼里不如达赖老和尚受尊重，弄个火炬传递象过街老鼠----据说
什么东西都是用钱买的，那它聪明得把钱都花什么地方去了？起码看起来它并不
乐意看到这幅景象。

I said "to some extent" because it means China is only smart in one aspect.
I said the PRC is smart in developing economy and the middle class, whereas
in the past the PRC has always focused on political movements that led to
civic self-destruction. I'm not saying that the PRC is smart in other
aspects. Even for the economy part, there are indeed many problems not
addressed and many voices not heard. But these issues do not impede China's
rise into a regional power and maybe later a superpower in the foreseeable
future. Its efficiency is at the cost of many of its own citizens. But from
what I can see, many young Chinese are nationalistic enough to support its
government's approach on "bringing the country up and then worry about
anything else." I can hardly agree with these people. But they are now the
backbone of the Chinese state, thus will influence China's global strategy.
I'm afraid that we are going to see more of that coming.

China is smart because it has basically said to the world "screw you, we are
going to do what benefits us, it's our turn. History is wide open, anyone
can write the next chapter; history starts today!" And by the time China
emerges on the horizon on the pacific, it'd be the time when the world, and
indeed the United States, has to accept and compromise. If China is not
efficient, if the Chinese efficiency has no value, then why is such a
significant transformation happening?

这段非常勉强，中国在历史上地位恐怕有过高得多的时候，不论是人均还是总
量。此外，二战之后，不论原因如何，大国之间没有爆发全面战争，偶也不信
有任何国家认真地考虑过入侵中国的问题，讨论些个不存在的东西有多大意义？
从现在公布的资料看，韩战美国没有入侵中国的计划，即使是知道中国人和苏
联人都卷入了战争，难道偶们要相信越南人曾计划入侵导致"自卫反击"？

二战之后没有发生大规模战争的国家遍地都是，它们都不安全，还是安全？

China has been a superpower in the past, but the Chinese has never had a
democracy or a modern constitutional republic. Even when the Chinese state
was a powerful dynasty, its citizens did not have adequate civil liberty and
freedom. But Chinese people always remember the pain more than the good old
days. It might has to do with the way Chinese children are educated; but
recent history does make China a victim. It was in this chaotic time when
China adopted the most radical Western ideology—communism, when many
Chinese chose something different than the Chiang Regime. Many Chinese, for
nationalism, put the rise of China's power as a priority even if it means
sacrificing one's own civil liberty and that of other fellow Chinese. And I
have to admit that many Chinese don't care about other Chinese, making it
harder to foster a civil society in China. It's like you haven't had food
for three days, all you want now is food, not a luxurious lakehouse. On top
of that, an undemocratic system needs to have enemies. No wonder we are
seeing the exhibition of nationalism. I'm not saying this is right, but it
exist and it is flourishing.


怎么定义效率的，又怎么定义最佳效率的？据说PRC拥有中国历史上最高的官民
比例，贪污腐败大概都不算新闻，你是怎么得出现在是有效率或者高效的结论的？

民主制度"效率低"是众所周知的，因为要花费时间金钱在讨价还价上。你难道真
以为糊瘟在中国说什么就是什么了，那他们用得上跑到地震现场去亲自喊话，这
么个制度怎么是高效率的偶不明白。

"responding to people's need"到底是个虾米概念？上次小不死分明获得了多数
选票，你可以不满意，不过一定要说"not responding to people's need"那等你
赞同的人得势的时候别人一样拿那个东西说你的。

你在前面也谈到建设性的意见，你这些东西偶就没看到什么建设性的。其实建设性
的意见就是改革现有制度的意见，对哪个国家都一样，你的观点似乎是中国那种烂
制度值得保留的地方更多，而米国这种有自我改进机制的制度反而"not responding
to people's need"。

Honestly, I say "where and where"。


I have explained why China is efficient. Look at the new UPO-like terminal
in Beijing; look at the world's longest bridge east of Shanghai; look at the
development of its military capabilities; look at its future aircraft
carriers; look at its spidernet freeway system. Just when the U.S. is "
exporting freedom" to the suffering Iraqi people, China (American banker) is
on its way to replace the U.S; Just when Corporate America is bankrupting
the American middle class, China is built a fresh new and more magnificent
middle class; Just when America is fingerpointing at every country, the PRC
is establishing non-intervention harmonious relations with neighbors.

Yet, the PRC is still undemocratic. Is the United States making itself
better prepared to engage in the Chinese era? No. Kids don't know the world;
teenagers don't want to learn foreign languages; congress has no way to
secure the borders; and the U.S. is still in Iraq, borrowing money from
future competitors and dump that money into the troubled waters where
America's current enemies have been fishing. How smart is that? How
constructive is that?







--

※ 来源:·WWW 未名空间站 海外: mitbbs.com 中国: mitbbs.cn·[FROM: 67.183.]

发信人: ayanami (螃蟹@FROSTSHOCK PWNS YOU!!11!), 信区: America
标 题: Re: (link) “美国民主”？一个弥天大谎！
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Jun 20 14:07:25 2008), 转信

It is good that America is a Republic, meaning the minority's interest also
gets protected. Have you ever been on the end of the short stick? You would
love the "inefficiency".

【 在 coldstar (coldstar) 的大作中提到: 】
: To some extent, I think the P.R.C. is smart. China is trying to hold on
its
: society as tight as possible and for as long as possible. China has
suffered
: from so much pain and humiliation in the past two hundred years; China
: knows that it is important to have a powerful economy and a powerful
: military. With that, there comes a powerful empire and a powerful global
: order, and maybe a powerful middle class and nationalistic pride.
: For the Chinese people, this may not be the best option of all, but it's
the
: best China has achieved in its own history; it's the best China can do
: right now. It, at the very least, makes China and the Chinese people
secure
: from foreign invasions. From that perspective, many Chinese would not feel
: ...................


--

※ 来源:·BBS 未名空间站 海外: mitbbs.com 中国: mitbbs.cn·[FROM: 96.56.]

发信人: magicfat (魔法胖子), 信区: America
标 题: Re: (link) “美国民主”？一个弥天大谎！
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Jun 20 14:16:24 2008)


【 在 coldstar (coldstar) 的大作中提到: 】
: The West has both security and freedom; China used to have none; Now China
: has one of them. It is a step forward from the Chinese perspective. And
the
: Chinese know that without security, where can you find freedom?

This probably has been quoted to death, but
it's so appropriate a response here that I
am almost feeling obligated:

"Those who would give up essential liberty to
purchase a little temporary safety, deserve
neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

--

※ 来源:·WWW 未名空间站 海外: mitbbs.com 中国: mitbbs.cn·[FROM: 205.143.]