771
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
771 points (94.5% liked)
World News
32282 readers
700 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Okay but what meaningful influence does the average Chinese person have on who is chosen as Paramount Leader.
Enough for them to believe that they live in a democracy, it seems (and I don't say that sarcastically).
It's not like people in liberal democracies have more influence. We can't choose who runs, and each individual's vote is negligible. I don't know the specifics of China's government, but I suspect they value being able to influence local policy and higher official elections via the Communist Party more than a direct vote on its leader -- I would too, honestly.
A fair bit, actually. China's political system is basically a popularity system from bottom to top. At the lowest level, politicians only stay in power if their population is happy. This trickles up to the provincial level, where politicians again only stay in power if their population is happy. At a national level, the national leaders stay in power by building, essentially, large cabinets out of different provincial and regional leaders - thus, their entire position relies on keeping the provinces happy.
It's not the perfect system, but Chinese citizens can fairly easily impact local and even provincial policy and, by extension, influence national policy (recently, by repealing the COVID lockdowns with mass protests).
The CCP isn't an absolute monarchy or something. At the end of the day, it serves it's people. The power of the Chinese economy is in its industrial capacity, after all, not in its wealth: the needs of the people need to be addressed to keep the country stable.
The same as the average western person.. So probably very little.
don't make conflations with the USA and other liberal democracies. There are plenty of transparent, effective democracies where popular votes matter massively, and saying because the USA is electorally broken that everywhere is only serves the narrative that true liberal democracy "isn't possible" i.e., exactly what China and Russia suggest.