• 小莱卡@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    And that is a problem to whom? Every single state is authoritarian, the question is whose interests are they protecting.

    China is clearly a dictatorship of the proletariat and they use authority to protect the interests of the proletariat. Yes, sometimes their policy is wrong and does harm but ultimately they work to improve their policies, governing is a learning experience after all.

    • TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s a problem because people don’t feel like stakeholders when they don’t have a say and can’t participate in their system of governance. This in turn means that they aren’t incentivized to willingly participate and have to be forced or indoctrinated, both of which are violations of human rights.

      • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Do you think people there don’t participate in elections? The party has literally 100 million members, people in China are politically involved.

            • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              And how many parties were they allowed to make selections from? Were there any candidates that weren’t pre-approved by the leading party?

              • purahna@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                One party where a basic platform is defined and differences are expressed vibrantly on top of that is better than two parties that brand themselves as different but only offer a couple of aesthetic differences and concessions to keep people mad at the opposing party and not the underlying structure

                • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  …You’re really saying that one party where you have no functional choice is better than a multi-party system, just because you think that Republicans and Dems are too alike, while ignoriing the plethora of other parties that not only actually exist in the US, but hold office at local and state level?

                  Shouldn’t expect any more from a tankie though.

                  • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    One party with multiple functional approaches that get whittled down through democratic consensus is more democratic than being told to pick between two relatively similar options. There is more of a gap between liberals and Maoists in the CPC, both of which hold power in office, than there are between the democrats and republicans.

      • 小莱卡@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        People that want to participate in politics can join the CPC, in fact it has more than 100m official members. Also inside the CPC there are several factions with differents views, so no its not a monolithic entity.