Perceptions of democracy in China are *higher* than in the US, the UK, and France : socialism

[-] limer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 4 months ago

Something not mentioned in the comments; In my experience Americans do not really understand democracy ; they understand voting. But ignore everything after they leave the voting booth, including how their votes are counted ( which in much of the USA are some private companies who hide their methods and do not allow recounts). Any United Nations method used to detect cheating shows massive amounts of ballot stuffing. This is ignored.

My point mentioning the above is that the United States is not a democracy by any metric, but pretends more than any other country that it is. And because the people of the USA fundamentally do not understand this, any improvement in the USA, improving quality of life, cannot be by democratic methods.

[-] ZeroHora@lemmy.ml 9 points 4 months ago

Something not mentioned in the comments; In my experience Americans do not really understand democracy ; they understand voting.

Debatable, they suck at voting.

[-] limer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 months ago

I think the national participation level is at a maximum possible. Many understand that voting is worthless and have disengaged; and there is no way to get those people to vote without making new and transparent ballot counting methods.

The USA is very complex and there are states which have honest voting. I think, but don’t know, that participation is higher in those states as a rule.

[-] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 22 points 4 months ago

That's because they're brainwashed by propaganda.

The US us not at all democratic.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 22 points 4 months ago

in fact there are studies showing this empirically

What do our findings say about democracy in America? They certainly constitute troubling news for advocates of “populistic” democracy, who want governments to respond primarily or exclusively to the policy preferences of their citizens. In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.

[-] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

This should be improved with adding more countries, like Russia, then comparing with other important data, like freedom of expression, to be somehow relevant to any discussion

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 16 points 4 months ago

Freedom of expression only matters when it translates into real-world action. Otherwise, it’s just a jester’s privilege, the freedom to scream into the void. In China, people enjoy genuine freedom to advance their material interests, reflected in their consistently rising standard of living and an economy that serves the majority. Meanwhile, the West claims abstract 'freedoms' while living standards crumble and working people are stripped of political power.

[-] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

In my country I could live without working and still be in pretty good health conditions after years, if I would like to.

Is that possible in China?

Because my country is the average "western" country and I consider it still pretty far from a democratic utopia.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 13 points 4 months ago

The average "western" country depends on the spoils of Imperialism to subsidize costs, ie social safety nets and lower prices of commodities through expropriating vast amounts of wealth from the Global South. China doesn't do that, its own development and safety nets come from their own labor and production. Very different circumstances.

[-] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 months ago

Lol that must be true for some country somewhere, but China is not it, no matter how much even I would like it to be true.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 14 points 4 months ago

It is true, though. The PRC's economy is extrenely industrialized and focused on exporting commodities, western countries use financial domination and strategic underdevelopment of the Global South to get cheap commodities. The West doesn't produce as much as it takes, China produces for itself and sells the excess to others.

[-] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 months ago

In my country we produce for ourselves and sell the excess too... Still not even close to a socialist utopia though...

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 13 points 4 months ago

Every country exports and imports, that's not what I'm talking about. Private monopoly Capital in western countries extends and carves out the value created in the Global South. The PRC is far more industrialized than any Western Country, it doesn't engage in Imperialism. Here's a good article on Imperialism.

Further, nobody said China was a Utopia. It's a developing Socialist country, Socialism isn't some holy status that makes all who live in it live magical lives, it's a mode of production. China has a long way to go, but Socialism is why it has had the success it has so far.

[-] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 months ago

I see, well, that means I must be already living in some kind of socialist utopia then. That's nice!

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 12 points 4 months ago

No, you don't, nobody does, there are no "utopias." Further, Socialism is not the absence of Imperialism, it's a mode of production where public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy, not private ownership. There are no Socialist western countries, and all countries we think of as the "west" participate in this system of Imperialism dominated by the US Empire.

[-] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 months ago

Well if China is a socialist developing country and the living conditions are inferior than what i have here, this must be an even more advanced socialist society, basically an utopi.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 10 points 4 months ago

Socialism doesn't mean "good living conditions," Socialism is a mode of production where public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy, not private ownership. Further, if you are living in a western country, you are living in a country that benefits from Imperialism, and has not had to liberate itself from colonialism and subjugation.

This is just silly, I really don't know what point you're trying to make other than being intentionally obtuse.

[-] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 months ago

Oh wow, so the Chinese people own the means of production?

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 4 months ago

The overwhelming majority of the large firms and key industries are publicly owned and planned, and hence is the principle aspect of the economy. Private ownership is typical of small and medium firms, and as these grow they are folded into the public sector with increasing control. There's also a substantial cooperative sector, like Huawei and commonly in collective farms.

[-] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 months ago

What do you own then? And how much have you earned from it?

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 4 months ago

What on Earth are you talking about? I live in the US, not the PRC, the US is Capitalist. What point are you trying to make?

[-] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 months ago

LMAO ok then

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 months ago

I genuinely don't understand what point you're trying to make. You call Socialist theory "propaganda" and then you ask how I earn money? What's going on?

[-] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 months ago

I thought i was talking with someone who knew first hand what they were taking about. Not a tankie.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 months ago

You're talking to a Marxist-Leninist, who knows what he's talking about because he spends a good deal of time reading Marxist theory and studying the various Marxist countries and their histories so as to better understand how to bring about Socialism in the US. Whining about Marxists on a Socialist comm using the hammer and sickle as an icon is silly behavior, you're going to find Socialists on a Socialist comm.

[-] dessalines@lemmy.ml 9 points 4 months ago

If you're not working to support your life, then someone else is.

[-] kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 months ago

Yes?

[-] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

[-] isolatedscotch@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 4 months ago

this is giving off
vibes

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 10 points 4 months ago

accurate description of how surveys are conducted in fascist states like the US, UK, and France

[-] Schmuppes@lemmy.today 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

lol, why did you throw in France specifically?

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 months ago

since it was part of the survey

[-] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 10 points 4 months ago

At least you're honest about your politics being vibes based

[-] isolatedscotch@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 4 months ago

ok

[-] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 months ago

That's literally UK

[-] rustyfemboy 6 points 4 months ago

Damn evil CCP brainwashing their people to think that democracy is important /s

[+] hispa@social.hispa.net 3 points 4 months ago

[deleted]

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 months ago

Unironically correct. What's there to complain about?

90% of families in the country own their home giving China one of the highest home ownership rates in the world. What’s more is that 80% of these homes are owned outright, without mortgages or any other leans. https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/03/30/how-people-in-china-afford-their-outrageously-expensive-homes

Chinese household savings hit another record high in 2024 https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-jones-bank-earnings-01-12-2024/card/chinese-household-savings-hit-another-record-high-xqyky00IsIe357rtJb4j

People in China enjoy high levels of social mobility https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/18/world/asia/china-social-mobility.html

The typical Chinese adult is now richer than the typical European adult https://www.businessinsider.com/typical-chinese-adult-now-richer-than-europeans-wealth-report-finds-2022-9

Real wage (i.e. the wage adjusted for the prices you pay) has gone up 4x in the past 25 years, more than any other country. This is staggering considering it's the most populous country on the planet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw8SvK0E5dI

The real (inflation-adjusted) incomes of the poorest half of the Chinese population increased by more than four hundred percent from 1978 to 2015, while real incomes of the poorest half of the US population actually declined during the same time period. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w23119/w23119.pdf

From 1978 to 2000, the number of people in China living on under $1/day fell by 300 million, reversing a global trend of rising poverty that had lasted half a century (i.e. if China were excluded, the world’s total poverty population would have risen) https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/China%E2%80%99s-Economic-Growth-and-Poverty-Reduction-Angang-Linlin/c883fc7496aa1b920b05dc2546b880f54b9c77a4

From 2010 to 2019 (the most recent period for which uninterrupted data is available), the income of the poorest 20% in China increased even as a share of total income. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.DST.FRST.20?end=2019&amp%3Blocations=CN&amp%3Bstart=2008

By the end of 2020, extreme poverty, defined as living on under a threshold of around $2 per day, had been eliminated in China. According to the World Bank, the Chinese government had spent $700 billion on poverty alleviation since 2014. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/31/world/asia/china-poverty-xi-jinping.html

Over the past 40 years, the number of people in China with incomes below $1.90 per day – the International Poverty Line as defined by the World Bank to track global extreme poverty– has fallen by close to 800 million. With this, China has contributed close to three-quarters of the global reduction in the number of people living in extreme poverty. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2022/04/01/lifting-800-million-people-out-of-poverty-new-report-looks-at-lessons-from-china-s-experience

None of these things happen in capitalist states, and we can make a direct comparison with India which follows capitalist path of development. In fact, without China there practically would be no poverty reduction happening in the world.

If we take just one country, China, out of the global poverty equation, then even under the $1.90 poverty standard we find that the extreme poverty headcount is the exact same as it was in 1981.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/07/5-myths-about-global-poverty

The $1.90/day (2011 PPP) line is not an adequate or in any way satisfactory level of consumption; it is explicitly an extreme measure. Some analysts suggest that around $7.40/day is the minimum necessary to achieve good nutrition and normal life expectancy, while others propose we use the US poverty line, which is $15.

https://www.cgdev.org/blog/12-things-we-can-agree-about-global-poverty

[-] korsystems@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago

Democracies have never been anything other than disguised oligarchies. As good old Blanqui said: "What is a democrat, I pray you? It is a vague, banal word, without precise meaning, a rubber word. Everyone claims to be a democrat."

[-] bobbyfiend@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago

Assuming this is a reasonable representation of public opinion in the two countries (and I don't yet have reason to assume otherwise, despite the neoliberal position of the founders of the institute commissioning the survey), I now think it would be interesting to see a breakdown, country by country, of the discrepancy between public perception of democracy and independent observers' ratings of democracy in those same countries.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 8 points 4 months ago

The perception of democracy by a country's own people is likely the strongest indicator of its health. After all, what could be more relevant than the lived experience of the populace? If people don't feel that their government serves them, then external ratings showing otherwise, however meticulously compiled, miss the core reality of the situation.

Furthermore, coming up with a truly comprehensive and universally agreed-upon rating system for democracy is itself a non-trivial challenge. Would such a rating heavily weigh material conditions, levels of inequality, access to public services, or more abstract freedoms like speech and assembly? And crucially, who decides which of these aspects are the most important or hold the greatest weight in determining a nation's democratic standing?

[-] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 months ago

independent observers

How are you determining "independent"?