How China and Africa Are Reshaping Their Future Together - FOCAC Summary

[@guens01]

China has given Africa a giant gift, but I fear many leaders might squander it through incompetence, corruption, and greed. I'm hoping real and sincere leaders will stand up and take advantage of this opportunity.

[@lonecandle5786]

The international system helped China become extremely powerful and raise much of their population out of poverty. It was investment and trade through that system that helped China rise.

[@morrisdyer9560]

Thanks 🙏

[@lonecandle5786]

Every rich country was once poor.

[@pennicky8069]

How may reach out?

[@lonecandle5786]

China's personal paths to democracy includes just staying authoritarian and calling yourself a democracy.

[@albback8176]

Authoritarian under what standards? The west? Western democracy is not the only form of democracy. Objective observation would indicate that the PRC government has been focused and proactive in improving the quality of life of the people in every respect, including education, infrastructure, peaceful relations, public safety, healthcare, scientific innovation, reduction of homelessness, environmental protection and reforestation, rekindling of connectivity with other nations through BRI, sovereignty of information space, crackdowns on corruption, disaster management, etc. This sounds like democracy to me.

[@lonecandle5786]

@@albback8176 Words have meaning. You can't just get in an air plane, have it fly you some place, and say, "it got me from point A to point B, it has wheels, that sounds like a car to me." The best authoritarian government in the world that brought its people great prosperity is still not a democracy. Authoritarian just means the people don't have a say through a fair and free election as to who leads them, and that certain rights like free speech and free media are not guaranteed. You can argue that an authoritarian government that brings great prosperity is better than democracy, but it's silly to pretend democracy means something other than what it does.

[@albback8176]

@@lonecandle5786 the government works for the people by implementing policies that benefit them, and there is no question that the PRC government has done this by vastly improving quality of life. Also, The people are consulted on proposed policies through outreach processes conducted by the CPPCC arm of government. In terms of elections, the people elect local representatives that serve them in the NPC. These elected delegates then elect representatives serving above them in the standing committee.. The difference is that the people elect local delegates rather than the highest officials. Again, there are multiple ways to conduct a democracy. That is not to say that the Chinese system its perfect, but to dismiss it just because it is different is not appropriate. To be honest, western democratic governments frequently do not act in the best interests of their people, and democracy is limited mainly to voting in delegates to lead the country.

[@lonecandle5786]

@@albback8176 Democracy is not defined as whether the government works for the people. That’s just not what it means. It’s about voting and the rule of law. You’re arguing why democracy isn’t necessary if the authoritarian government governs well for the people. That’s a different argument than saying a government without free and fair elections, free media, and free speech is a democracy. The Chinese system doesn’t have a direct chain of voting from free and fair elections to who leads them. Their leaders are chosen by the party in party congregations. There is some democracy at the local level, but the people don’t choose policies or who leads them at the national level, the party does. They are also not free to say what they want without punishment, their information environment is heavily censored by the government, and leaders use the courts to punish threats to its power-either political or from the business world. I’m not dismissing the Chinese system. I’m saying it’s not a democracy. Defending the Chinese system by falsely claiming it’s a democracy, by redefining a term that already has a different meaning, isn’t a straightforward and honest way to have a conversation. It’s more a method of propaganda or simply confusion. Authoritarians around the globe often falsely claim they are democracies; we shouldn’t give in to that. If we think a particular authoritarian system is actually better than democracy, then just argue that.

[@albback8176]

@@lonecandle5786 Disagree. While one can argue that the Chinese government is not a full democracy, western governments are not full democracies either. In the US, for example, only candidates with financial resources or the support financially rich individuals can succeed in elections. The government is ruled by a dominant duopoly of parties that does not allow room for third parties or candidates to succeed. Once in power, they do not rule in the interest of their constituency, but rather their own personal gain. Free speech and rule of law has not changed the fact that leadership does not act on the interest of the people. Over the course of 50 years, China has risen from among the poorest of nations to among the wealthiest. This is not a result of fluke or incompetence, but rather of leadership that achieves results for its people. It should also be recognized, however, that the citizenry cannot be given overpowering authority to control a country. There is a saying that there are "too many chiefs, and not enough Indians". While the people can have authority determine their government, there is no such thing as full democracy, or for that matter, autocracy.