>>14073107>human rightSure, but why not response to the other argument? There are multiple democratically elected socialist leader, but they were force to step down due to America involvement. You can't ask a country to suddenly have human right when human right is a tool to destablize country.
>expansionist againThey have historical claim over these area as they simply took over what the kmt already have. I disagree with China action in scs. Apparently they been in talk for 10 years but it is unlikely to be resolve because members in asean are still a bit too divided.
>doesnt understanding the relationI'm surprise how you still don't get it. Chinese firms must have a position for party member but the government are more like representative for working class. Now, I argue that is counter productive because yes, the government aren't truly democratically elected. I heard they are moving to moving to it to city level election, but it is unlikely for them to move into democratic system as outline above.
I think the worker should elect the one in that position instead, but we can't have nice things.
Here is my rebuttal to your argument, the government are beholden to the people. While ccp might look like it on the surface, most of their action are either a) trying to stabilize country from external threat b) improve life of regular people as seen by recent social reform.
Here is how you can spot separation between government and enterprise, the enterprise chase after profit. This is the case for most enterprise in China. That is why you see headline saying china trying to kill its golden goose.
China is in a weird position. They are not truly socialist as the worker have little power, but they aren't true fascist as there is still separation between business and state. Basically, they are practicing socialism with Chinese characteristic. Kek, as you can see, i have a love hate relationship with china. i can rant more on that if you like.
