China has lashed out at Germany after its foreign minister called Xi Jinping a “dictator” and summoned Berlin’s ambassador for a dressing down, in the latest flaring of tensions with a western democratic power over how the Chinese leader is described overseas.
China has lashed out at Germany after its foreign minister called Xi Jinping a “dictator” and summoned Berlin’s ambassador for a dressing down, in the latest flaring of tensions with a western democratic power over how the Chinese leader is described overseas.
I'm an American so I can answer this question sincerely. When you are already the one winning, you work as hard as ever to keep winning. You innovate more. This is the American way. It's why we're the most advanced country on the planet, and it's how we maintain that lead. Building off of the work of previous generations who made and did amazing things. That's our approach and it works fucking awesome.
Well you can fuck right off! The same person *supposedly upset about the KKK just discriminated against 330,000,000 people from every country on Earth in the very next breath. You're worse than racist.
Hitler obviously wasn't a dictator as he was democratically elected by a majority (after competing parties were banned) and then -just out of situational necessity of course- got a lot of extra powers to ignore laws and constitution.
Most dictators haven't gone by that term, preferring instead some other executive role like chairman, supreme leader, or president. If Xi doesn't want to be called a dictator, maybe China should start holding open elections, see how popular the CCP really is.
The CCP has higher approval rates than western governments and the vast majority of Chinese believe they are living in a democracy. This is confirmed by western studies; latest one I've seen was from Harvard.
Most forced elections haven't gone by that term, preferring instead some other description like people's elections, free elections, or secured elections. Made up words but you get the idea.
Yeah, our elections suck. They should be more open and should be ranked choice. Likewise, the Electoral College is complete bullshit. Even still, Xi is a dictator and China is not a democracy. Multiple things can be true.
Dictator is the better word because it implies a choice by the people. It's the reason why Octavian is the first Roman emperor but every ruler wants to be a Caesar.
In a way, calling Xi a dictator recognizes his legitimization. I am sure that was not intended.
Obviously he's not a "dictator", and that foreign minister should be sacked. Because Xi is a "supreme almighty emperor whose words are worth to be enforced or else..." A bit of background knowledge is never a bad thing.
Plenty of people would raise their eyebrows on you for mentioning the US, but you would not exactly be wrong. China and Russia are authoritarian. However, the US is a highly flawed democracy with extremely flawed and abusive foreign policy. Putin's invasion of Ukraine has had recent precedence, with US invading Iraq out of trumped up charges. In Putin's mind, he must have thought "if the Americans did it, why can't I"? This is why I believe in a multipolar world.
Best take I've seen here. The big countries in the world have way too much power. Problem is, if any one country has this amount of power, it automatically makes it so that other countries will also want to match that level of power.
The only empire is the US empire and the way they talk about themselves as an empire, they're proud of it too. Yell one-word feel-good slogans at them like "CHANGE", "FREEDOM", or "DEMOCRACY" and all the citizens shout and cheer because that's what they've always been told to do.
Try sitting during the pledge, the singing of the national anthem, or insulting the military. The US empire will have none of that. Truly the land of the free.
She's not exactly known for being a smart person in Germany. Whoever thought she had what it takes to be a diplomat was clearly deluded. She only got the job as foreign minister because of proportional representation.
In China, the people directly elect local council (e.g. village or town level) representatives. Those local council members than select who among themselves to send to represent them at the next level above. This continues all the way the National People's Congress and the Standing Committee.
This sort of organizational structure is more-or-less how political parties in Germany also work; so by that logic the Green party itself would presumably be an undemocratic institution.
OK, but the CPC can control who is allowed to run in elections, right? Well, Germany banned its communist party: In Germany, any organization (and their members) that wants to abolish the liberal order, capitalism, private property and so on is subject to repression, surveillance and outright bans, and this is enshrined in the constitution. So no fundamental difference there either: In Germany the liberal institutions decide who can and cannot run, and they have decided the commies are out.
Empirically, the Chinese government enjoys way better approval rating than any Western government, Chinese people believe themselves to be living in a democracy, and the Chinese administration seems way more responsive to the actual needs of the people, what with the poverty reduction and all. How is this possible if they're so much more undemocratic than Western liberal democracies?
Well I think the issue is the people in China haven't experienced the democracy in US so the comparison would be hard to measure.
As funny as it gets the people in the US can laugh at Joe Biden but not those in China that could laugh at president Xi.
A note accompanying the poll results offers a disclaimer, stating that "in authoritarian countries, positive perceptions might result from different conceptions of democracy, high levels of government satisfaction, or fear of speaking out against the government."
This is kind of my point. Western liberals claim their representative type of democracy is the only correct way to have democracy. But in their version of democracy, economic power allows oligarchs and corporations to own and control the media, there are countless legal (and illegal) ways to influence policy and bribe politicians, and the police and courts routinely suppress anti-capitalist and other emancipatory movements, organizations and individuals.
Giving lectures about democracy when you're at the helm of a country that is actually ruled by the capitalist class is hypocritical.
“The remarks made by Germany are extremely absurd, seriously infringe on China’s political dignity, and are an open political provocation,” Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said at a regular news briefing on Monday.
Because everybody thinks this is because she called Xi a Dictator - is there any proof, that this is really the case? I searched everywhere, but I couldn't find anything. I think the problem is her whole statement and not just calling Xi a dictator. I would be very very happy if anybody can give me a source for this. I would like to read the whole context and not just one sentence with nothing in it.
When asked about Russia’s war on Ukraine, she said: “If Putin were to win this war, what sign would that be for other dictators in the world, like Xi, like the Chinese president?”
Thx, maybe it helps other people to understand that this statement is implying that China would like to invade Taiwan. It implies that China wants to act like russia acted with ukraine. If you are following china's international politics and diplomacy you should understand that this is the bigger problem. They don't care about this dictator-shit. If they really care about the word dictator: PLS! PLS! PLS! Give me a source for it.
I actually agree with this, it's counterproductive, but Germany is a little sensitive right now because their car industry can't compete with subsidized Chinese electric cars (dumping actually), so :3