Riots against Mainland China

[Catarinense1998]

Taiwan pretty much follows the Confucian model. So does Singapore btw. (both mixed with Western ideals). Now let's look at Communist China ? See the difference ? Essentially, the same model (just tweaked to suit South Korean and Japanese traditions and combined with Western principles) is also followed by Japan and South Korea. Red China only began to stop falling to pieces when Deng Xiaoping started using a form of neo-Confucianism. And now that China starts to abandon that model and return to hardline Maoism, we'll soon see China return to the days of the 1970s.

In other words: nationalists use traditional systems and merely modernise them (evolution). Leftists destroy traditional systems and blame others when things fall to pieces (revolution).

This comment doesn't have any sense. Maybe your logic fits to some contests, but it doesn't fit to others. Let's see, you can imagine a chinese nationalist from Qing dinasty, from later XIX century. This poor dude lives in a feudal nation, with a lot of foreign nations wanting to steal some of your territories. Your traditional system is based on a monarchy, with a corrupt elite, with old ways of production, and with a backward countryside. If you keep following the traditional, then your destiny is be ruled by others nations and backward to modern world. Your emperor is a manchu one, and he is not capable to change the situation. What can you do? Change the system is the only alternative. I did understand your logic, but I think it doesn't fit to all contexts.

[The Lawspeaker]

This comment doesn't have any sense. Maybe your logic fits to some contests, but it doesn't fit to others. Let's see, you can imagine a chinese nationalist from Qing dinasty, from later XIX century. This poor dude lives in a feudal nation, with a lot of foreign nations wanting to steal some of your territories. Your traditional system is based on a monarchy, with a corrupt elite, with old ways of production, and with a backward countryside. If you keep following the traditional, then your destiny is be ruled by others nations and backward to modern world. Your emperor is a manchu one, and he is not capable to change the situation. What can you do? Change the system is the only alternative. I did understand your logic, but I think it doesn't fit to all contexts.

It certainly does since there is more than just a monarch. The Confucian model was heavily based on a very professional civil servant class (which was highly meritocratic and was selected through the most stringent of exams and in theory the son of an illiterate peasant could, if he showed enough intelligence and due diligence, become a court administrator. Indeed, various Imperial professionals were indeed of very humble origins). A similar model can be seen in the British civil service as it was applied between the Victorian Era and the 1970s (but also, until recently, in former (white) British colonies, Prussia, West Germany, the Netherlands and much of Scandinavia). A well-functioning civil service and a strong meritocracy are the basis of a functioning society but under communism, civil servants are promoted on the base of party loyalty (a.k.a loyalty to the boss) which leads to genuine incompetents taking control (something seen in the USSR and in ALL other communist countries) which leads to corruption and thus to the slow collapse of society (in the West we can observe similar problems in, for instance, the United States and most Med. countries).

In other words: the Confucianist model (and the professional civil service model in the West) can be seen as a genuine meritocracy, whereas communism (and other corrupt systems with which it shares a lot in common) can be seen as the rule of the weak, the feeble and the corrupt. The revenge of the inept.

[Catarinense1998]

It certainly does since there is more than just a monarch. The Confucian model was heavily based on a very professional civil servant class (which was highly meritocratic and were selected through the most stringent of exams - in theory - the son of a peasant could, if he showed intelligence and diligence, became a court administrator and, indeed, various Imperial professionals were indeed of very humble origins). A similar model can be seen in the British civil service as it was applied between the Victorian Era and the 1970s (but also, until recently, in former (white) British colonies, Prussia, West Germany, the Netherlands and much of Scandinavia). A well-functioning civil service and a strong meritocracy are the basis of a functioning society but under communism, civil servants are promoted on the base of party loyalty (a.k.a loyalty to the boss) which leads to genuine incompetents taking control (something seen in the USSR and in ALL other communist countries) which leads to corruption and thus to the slow collapse of society (in the West we can observe similar problems in, for instance, the United States and most Med. countries)

Yes, I strongly agree. Your comment reminds me that democracy is a very bad system, because it is based on popular vote, and people (usally) don't necessarly vote for the smarter politcian, but for demogogues and sophists. But, the chinese emperors didn't know how to get along with europeans powers and Japan, and China turned into a wanted territory. Chinese elite used the obedience culture to keep people obeying. As you wrote, Sun Yat Sen were a nationalist, and he was one of the main revolutionaries behind the chinese revolution in 1911, where the manchu monarchy did fall. As you can see, being nationalist can vary according to the context and epoc. I need to take some coffe to keep writing here.

[The Lawspeaker]

Yes, I strongly agree. Your comment reminds me that democracy is a very bad system, because it is based on popular vote, and people (usally) don't necessarly vote for the smarter politcian, but for demogogues and sophists. But, the chinese emperors didn't know how to get along with europeans powers and Japan, and China turned into a wanted territory. Chinese elite used the obedience culture to keep people obeying. I need to take some coffe to keep writing here.

Democracy is actually a very good system if led by a patriotically motivated class of professional administrators. Compare it to a taxi ride: you tell the driver where to go and the driver takes you there. In other words: Parliament needs to be formed by elected politicians, whereas all cabinets are essentially business cabinets formed by professionals (a general as Minister of Defence, a judge as Minister of Justice etc). Preferably all politically independent.

[Catarinense1998]

Democracy is actually a very good system if led by a patriotically motivated class of professional administrators. Compare it to a taxi ride: you tell the driver where to go and the driver takes you there.

XD Very idealist ideia. There is always some people that destroy it.

[Catarinense1998]

I need to take my bus, so tomorrow we keep this discussion alive.

[The Lawspeaker]

XD Very idealist ideia. There is always some people that destroy it.

How would you destroy it if people are promoted to positions by their various offices ? They are appointed by their own department.

[kratz]

Interesting.

Just when China is about to overtake the US financially; now the all this chaos started happening. Anybody thinks that they are directly linked?

[The Lawspeaker]

China overtaking the U.S ? I want what you're having.

[kratz]

@thelawspeaker
The statistics say it'll happen on 2030.