• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Real Democracy Ensures Citizens Have Good Char Kway Teow and More!

Asterix

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset

In my humble opinion Sinkieland is suffering
From common disease of Mee Siam Mai Hum
To put it simply case of Bad Emperors syndrome
One turned bad is all but dead if not for machine
His son never had qualities needed to succeed
Sinkieland does not have progressive professionals
Those remaining like useless bums at Law Society
Are regressive good for nothing except carry balls
Smart Unsinkified ones left for greener pastures


Democracy is best way for Hong Kong to avoid a 'bad emperor'
Wilson Leung says that while democracy is indigestible for many, it is the best system for Hong Kong society to progress as a whole

You can't eat democracy." This is the attitude - sometimes expressed, but usually lurking beneath the surface - held by many of those in Hong Kong who are indifferent to the current debate on the chief executive electoral reforms.

This is a vital issue that must be addressed by those who are calling for greater democracy in Hong Kong. Democracy advocates have a responsibility to answer the question posed by the ordinary man or woman on the street: "What does democracy have to do with me?"

One of the most important features of democracy is accountable government. When free and fair elections are in place, those in government know that, unless they are responsive to the needs and wishes of the people, they will be voted out in the next election. Thus, a study in Brazil conducted in 2010 showed that mayors looking for re-election became significantly less corrupt (in other words, less likely to steal from their constituents).

But elections are only part of the equation. Other ingredients are also essential, most notably, human rights (including freedom of the press and freedom of political participation), the rule of law and an independent judiciary. These elements act as a check against the excesses of the government, even one which is elected by a majority.

In the same way that companies in a capitalist system have an economic incentive to keep their customers satisfied, decision-makers in a democratic system have a political incentive to take into account the needs, interests and opinions of most people in society. If they fail to do so, they will be criticised in the press, probed by civil society groups, sued in the courts - or given the ultimate sanction of being ejected from office.

The Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen has pointed out that no substantial famine has ever occurred in an independent country with a democratic form of government and a free press. In his words, "A responsive government intervenes to help alleviate hunger." By contrast, Sen cites numerous examples of famines occurring in non-democratic countries, where disastrous government policies went unchecked because there was no opposition party, no free press, and no multiparty elections (for example, the Soviet Union in the 1930s, China's Great Leap Forward in 1958-61, and Sudan in 1998). In a similar vein, political scientists Matthew Baum and David Lake have found that democracies are markedly superior to authoritarian countries in providing public services such as health and education.

Among other things, democratisation in developing countries increased female life expectancy, while enhancing democracy in more developed economies improved female secondary school enrolment rates.

Those who are unenthusiastic about democracy often argue that it produces gridlock. They point to examples such as Thailand or the Philippines (or even the United States), and argue that a dose of dictatorship is what is needed to get things done. That argument may be right - but only to a limited extent. Where there is a benevolent and wise dictator, the system works reasonably well. The government can do things relatively quickly, such as building a new airport or reallocating resources to different sectors of the economy. However, the overriding problem is that if you have a dictator who is incompetent or malevolent (or both), there is little to stop him from adopting catastrophic policies.

This "bad emperor" problem has been examined by political science scholars such as Francis Fukuyama, who observes that imperial China was governed by a centralised bureaucracy grounded in the Confucian moral system. This worked reasonably well when there was a wise and benevolent ruler - but, periodically, the country would be plunged into chaos and unspeakable suffering whenever a terrible monarch emerged. Democratic accountability is the best - and perhaps only - way to curb the bad emperor problem.

It should also be remembered that the pressing question at hand is which political system is best for Hong Kong.

As Fareed Zakaria pointed out in his essay, "The Rise of Illiberal Democracy", many so-called democracies fail because they lack a liberal system - the rule of law, separation of powers and basic liberties such as the freedom of speech, assembly and property. This causes elected leaders to fall into the same rabbit hole as dictatorships: ignoring constitutional limits on their powers, denying citizens their rights and freedoms, and so on.

Hong Kong, however, is different. We have the rule of law, a robust judiciary, and a mini-constitution which expressly protects the rights and freedoms of its residents. The city also has a highly educated population and keen levels of participation in the (limited) elections which do exist. Indeed, Zakaria (writing in 1997) cited Hong Kong as an example of one of a handful of curiously "liberal non-democracies" in the world.

Therefore, when we ask, "which system would be the best for Hong Kong?", the clear and obvious answer is democracy. Democracy is not only likely to succeed here; it is also the only natural progression for us as a society.

It is true that one cannot eat democracy. But democracy - genuine democracy that offers a free choice of leaders and protection for the rights of citizens - allows the common man's voice to be heard, and thus the best chance of ensuring that he has plenty to eat.

Wilson Leung is a barrister and convenor of the Progressive Lawyers Group

http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight...emocracy-best-way-hong-kong-avoid-bad-emperor
 

Domino

Alfrescian
Loyal


Eh where are the so called 'Chinese Supremacists' of this forum? :rolleyes:

Wait... i know... it's because they are Hongkies. But aren't Hongkies and Taiwanese Chinese? :rolleyes:

BTW for Hongkies and Taiwanese, PAP IB won't show support or don't give a damn :biggrin:

LOL what a joke when almost everyone in this forum are anonymous posting under clones, online persona except for a few that had their identities exposed or made known. :biggrin:
 

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
Why should the Chinese adopt an Ang Moh concept?

Chinese should run their societies the Chinese way instead of adopting Ang Moh systems.
 

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Singapore's democracy is the probably the best Asian version of democracy for the past few decades. We have free elections where even the ruling party accepts defeat, median income of the electorate has risen sharply since 1965, living standards and healthcare has improved, stable environment from the 1970s, racial and religious harmony amongst all the major races. You can't even find that in neighbouring Malaysia.
 

Asterix

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Why should the Chinese adopt an Ang Moh concept?

Then why is the communist party ruling China? Marxism is an Ang Moh concept you twit!

Chinese should run their societies the Chinese way instead of adopting Ang Moh systems.

Mainland Chinese do not understand democracy because they have not experienced it. What they know about it is through the Communist Party propaganda machine. In other words, they are like the other type of Chinks - Sinkie ones who read and believe the Shit Times. It's like asking someone who hasn't eaten crabs before (maybe he spent all of his life in the Sahara) whether he prefers chilli crab or pepper crab or crab porridge in claypot.

The Chinks in this video have lived in Western liberal democracies and they know that it is better than Confucian bullshit because they have experienced it instead of having simply heard about it from the Communist propaganda machine or Shit Times or through the mouth of a Kempeitei "translator".

[video=youtube;ofrdAUmRDHo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofrdAUmRDHo[/video]
 

Cosmos10

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset



Ok, all my smart brothers in SBF, please look at the diagram below and discuss....
our dear Singapore government resembles which one of these governments stated below hah? :smile::confused::*:

Since it is hard to find cows in Singapore, please substitute the two cows with two plates of char kway teow!

govts.gif
 
Last edited:

po2wq

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Ok, all my smart brothers in SBF, please look at the diagram below and discuss....
our dear Singapore government resembles which one of these governments stated below hah? :smile::confused::*:
none of ze above la ...

iz cow bear cow bull la ...​
 

Emmanuel

Alfrescian
Loyal
ppl need to be given the respect to see how they run their society seen?

The people have a right to select how they want to govern themselves and not follow another country/society and rae rae all these tings. Seen?
 

LionJah

Alfrescian
Loyal
ppl need to be given the respect to see how they run their society seen?

The people have a right to select how they want to govern themselves and not follow another country/society and rae rae all these tings. Seen?

Seen. Praise to the most high selassie jah rastafari !!!
 

Asterix

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Singapore's democracy is the probably the best Asian version of democracy for the past few decades. We have free elections where even the ruling party accepts defeat, median income of the electorate has risen sharply since 1965, living standards and healthcare has improved, stable environment from the 1970s, racial and religious harmony amongst all the major races. You can't even find that in neighbouring Malaysia.

If Lightning accepts defeat then it wouldn't have to waste so much time and public resources on fulfilling its promise to FIX the Opposition you twit.

[video=youtube;a1WhJKsYb50]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1WhJKsYb50[/video]

Comparisons should only be made with countries in the same stage of development. We were already miles ahead of Malaysia even before we kicked out of it! If you want to you this type of comparisons then please ask Farticulus Harilee Maximus to change the title of one of his books from "Third World to First World" to "Henta Kaki" or better still "Kebalakang Pusing"!

Compare with Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, et cetera and remember to take into account the fact that MiniSTARS in Sinkieland are paid many times more than those in these truly First World countries yet they can't even make the MRT work without frequent breakdowns and this is only one of many problems.
 

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
If Lightning accepts defeat then it wouldn't have to waste so much time and public resources on fulfilling its promise to FIX the Opposition you twit.

I agree that the opposition should be fixed as they waste a lot of valuable time in parliament asking dumb questions.
 

Asterix

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
I agree that the opposition should be fixed as they waste a lot of valuable time in parliament asking dumb questions.

Define "dumb". Just because the MiniSTAR cannot answer a question in a manner that satisfies the citizens who are watching the live debate doesn't mean the question is "dumb". On the contrary, it shows that the MiniSTAR is dumb.
 
Top