If you brag about liberal democracy to Chinese people, you may hear: 'Are you still proud of your system, which has elected Mr Trump?' That was exactly the feeling I gained from dialogues with intellectuals in Seoul and Shanghai in August and September. It is not only the U.S. presidential election and the British national referendum about European Union membership. Policies on many other critical issues in liberal countries have shaken the premise that the Western system is far better than authoritarian ones at solving problems.

Compared to systems that cannot elect anyone? It’s not exactly a comparison is it?

Reminds me of an article I read about Chinese exchange students in western universities, demanding that opinions critical of the CCP not be mentioned.

Spot on. But neither the capitalist way or the communist way work. People suffer under both systems and the leaders still drag the people into the wake of their squabbles and schemes.

He misses the point. As Churchill said "Democaracy is the worst of all systems apart from all the rest". It doesn't pretend that it will get the right answer, but the people won't be sent to prison or put to death arbitrarily because of the whims or fears of a dictator. At the next election, you'll get a chance to remove Trump but no one gets a vote to remove a dictator. Hitler murdered 13 million of his people in the holocaust and was eventually stopped by the allies. Stalin was much the same. You can keep their so-called efficiency but they were deranged. Give me liberal democracy to live under any time.

So, lets ignore most of the EU countries, or Canada, or other places where democracy is working and flourishing, to only look at the US for an 8 month period with a reality show host as the leader.

This is a false argument, trying to extol the virtues of having a authoritarian system of government where if you step out of line, you disappear, are imprisoned or worse happens.

There are still about a billion Asians - mostly the smart well educated ones - who would love the chance to escape China to live in Trump's America or Brexit Britain.

Is Hiroki Sugita trying to soften up the public here for a more authoritarian regime under Abe?

So, lets ignore most of the EU countries, or Canada, or other places where democracy is working and flourishing, to only look at the US for an 8 month period with a reality show host as the leader.

This is a false argument, trying to extol the virtues of having a authoritarian system of government where if you step out of line, you disappear, are imprisoned or worse happens.

Exactly. I am syrian british. I have lived in both countries and other authoritarian countries as well as various democracies including the US. For all its problems, even in the US, the western system is STILL far better than authoritarian ones at solving problems. Sugita needs to experience living in constant fear or have family members disappear to fully appreciate what the western system is.

I think that what he's trying to say is that Western-style democracy isn't suited or 'good' for all nations/cultures as it often means more corruption and not necessarily more freedom. Been to such countries (Iran, Pakistan even Thailand after the coup(s)) and many/most locals felt that a military (or religious/clerical) regime was a better option. So called 'benevolent dictatorships' a la Singapore seem to work ok too.

It doesn't pretend that it will get the right answer, but the people won't be sent to prison or put to death arbitrarily because of the whims or fears of a dictator.

Corrupt or ineffective justice systems in democracies still send innocents to jail/death. Again as a westerner I do prefer our system but completely get that other nations & cultures feel differently about it.

I think it's wrong to generalize what America and Britain are doing as being the "Western" systems. I think there are far better countries that can represent that, like the Scandinavian countries. However, the US and the UK are two of the biggest advocates of their systems in the world stage, and they have a long history of forcefully imposing their ways on to others, militarily if need be. I don't think 2 of the biggest empires the modern world has seen can teach other countries the meaning of freedom.

It's not just about them having elections, as some here would like to defend. Look at the death and destruction caused by these 2 countries in the last several decades. Yeah, they're democracies, and you can elect a different person from time to time. But even Obama, who is an angel compared to Trump, is responsible for some of the worse war crimes through his drone strikes program. But he's immune from any kind of tribunal due to his American privilege. It's somehow not okay for countries to kill, imprison, or enslave their own people, but it's okay if they do it to other people in different countries? I never understood that as it seems to me it's actually worse. But then again, I don't have an American privilege of living in a bubble to be ignorant and smug enough to actually defend that system, and to only look at things domestically while being completely oblivious of the consequences in the world stage.

Trump or Abe didn't elect themselves. Each nation's public voted for them. Can they do that in China or N. Korea?

Apparently history has lost a leg.

USA and UK witht their flaws have spread democracy, including to Japan and SK.

Pfoof by facts : millions of Chinese flooding to Europe and elsewhere. Guess why ?

It's true that Farage and Trump have handed Beijing a childish propaganda talking point. But no regime is more terrified of its own population than the CCP. And for good reason.

However, the US and the UK are two of the biggest advocates of their systems in the world stage, and they have a long history of forcefully imposing their ways on to others, militarily if need be. I don't think 2 of the biggest empires the modern world has seen can teach other countries the meaning of freedom.

^ This.

And as for people quoting Churchill? It seems he is above criticism which is a shame because when you study his long political career before and after WW2 and his belief system... you learn more than the caricature you see cropping up in various movies and soundbytes.

I'd link you to relevant information but when it comes to Winston, that just doesn't seem to go down well.

Liberal democracy is just a watered down version of the authoritarian claptrap that the dictators adhere to, albeit it in a softer more palatable guise. As PBot says; it's the Scandi countries that seem to do it better when it comes to capitalism and democracy. But mention to the boggle eyed "better dead than red" types that socialism can work in some cases, or at least socialist models... well, you can guess the reply.

But millions have died and suffered under rampant capitalism and twisted communism. There is no doubt. But the latter (referring to Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Kim) is not true communism. Or even socialism.

I think some people misunderstood the quote. He is not saying that dictatorship is better than democracy.

He is saying that the election of Trump and decisions like Brexit have not been good PR for democracy in the rest of the world.

But the latter (referring to Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Kim) is not true communism. 

And what is this "true" communism that people go on about? It's like believing in unicorns, as it never appears. The sad fact is that true communism is exactly what we have seen. It's what happens when you take pristine theory out of Marxist textbooks and apply it in real life. In fact, the worst atrocities in history tend to occur when an idealistic leader insists on trying to twist society to fit a utopian fantasy.

And this is why we need democracy. At least when things get really bad, we will know that the people brought it on themselves for the most part. Of course, the dissenters don't deserve what happens, but dissenters suffer under either system.

The real problem is that the nation state is obsolete, and completely the wrong fit for the modern world. Thus, states will resort to ever more extreme measures to try to feign relevance.

Democracy?

Where on this planet is there a real democracy?

There are many countries that would have you think that they are democratic, but that are in fact ruled by a few, usually hidden people. Oligarchy.

The majority vote according to the information they are given and the information they are given comes though the media. Since the media is controlled by the Oligarchy, the result could hardly be called "democracy, government by the people," could it?

How can the analysis and comments be made by “intellectuals” when the analysis is so unintelligent. Just the fact that a ridiculous celebrity got to be president kinda proves the entire point of American Democracy doesn’t it? If it were someone the Chinese respected, the exact same scenario and comment would not make sense.

IshiwaraToday  02:41 pm JST

I think some people misunderstood the quote. He is not saying that dictatorship is better than democracy.

He is saying that the election of Trump and decisions like Brexit have not been good PR for democracy in the rest of the world.

Exactly!

And I think more to the point, it is sheer arrogance for people to, as some have reacted to this comment, just spout of shallow, empty-headed pro-democracy slogans and demand everyone else in the world buy into them.

The world is a marketplace of ideas, and a random commentator can think their own political system is best, but if they want someone else to adopt it, they have to prove it works. Self-absorbed partisan wankery on message boards doesn't cut it. You have to sell it, and slick ads will only get you so far when the actual results spout incoherently onto Twitter every night at 3AM for all the world to covfefe.

Aly RustomToday  10:13 am JST

Is Hiroki Sugita trying to soften up the public here for a more authoritarian regime under Abe?

I doubt it, but you know who does want to get the world more comfortable with authoritarian regimes?

Putin.

it is sheer arrogance for people to, as some have reacted to this comment, just spout of shallow, empty-headed pro-democracy slogans and demand everyone else in the world buy into them.

Punches the air

Yes! Democracy is a great idea but it doesn't exist or work in the pure form. Same as communism.

There must be a middle ground, at the very least.

Toasted HereticToday  08:44 pm JST

it is sheer arrogance for people to, as some have reacted to this comment, just spout of shallow, empty-headed pro-democracy slogans and demand everyone else in the world buy into them.

Punches the air

Yes! Democracy is a great idea but it doesn't exist or work in the pure form. Same as communism.

There must be a middle ground, at the very least.

With respect, I think you're misappropriating my comment. I don't buy the concept that democracy doesn't work, or even that any political system can be said to "work" or "not work". Political systems are just different ways of organizing people - the operative variable that matters in the end is the people in the system, not the system itself. Personally, I prefer democratic systems, but I'd drop the democracy I share with other people in a heartbeat if I could get a dictatorship led by an omniscient immortal benevolent God-king. Since Shai-hulud is imaginary however, I'll stick with democracies or representative democracies populated by mostly educated, well-meaning people.

What my post is meant to get at is that if people here genuinely want to spread the idea of democracy, then shouting their outrage online that someone has dissed it isn't going to accomplish anything. If you want to spread democracy, you have to make it appealing to others by showing it works, and if you want to show it works you have to live the virtues that make democracy possible. Spending one's entire work day bitching online about the "unhinged liberals" or the "loony left" isn't participating in democracy, it's a shallow, selfish attempt at point-scoring that as this election cycle has shown, is easily exploitable by nefarious actors who want to discredit the very idea of democratic limited government.

If one really wants people to believe democracy is best, they shouldn't have a conniption because someone online said it wasn't. Don't insult them or accuse them of being a Stalinist just because you can't handle a difference of opinion. Go read a book with some depth; attend a local town hall meeting and raise questions with your local politicians that are worthy, thought-provoking, and respectful of your fellow citizens; vote to reduce corporate corruption in your country or run for office on a platform of doing the same. People will believe your system of government is best when you live its ideals in an unimpeachable way.

@katsu78

Agreed with your post. Not erudite enough to reply in detail but thanks for the detail.

Always enjoy your comments.

As quoted earlier, I think Churchill got it right about democracy being the worst form of government apart from all the others.

The same rank snob also had an undisguised disdain for the average voter. He wasn't and isn't alone among past and present leaders.

Dicatorship or democracy, the view of the great unwashed doesn't change much from the elites. Overall, democracies have done a better job in massacring less of these pesky people.

So, yeah, democracy.

Democracy and/or any other ruling system works based on the majority who controls it.

In democracy, if the populous is rash and demands quick fix for their own benefit without thinking about consequences then they will obtain all the consequences without achieving their goal.

Same with monarch, if the ruling elite only seeks their own benefit in the long run the society suffers as a whole including the ruling elite.

At the end all political systems are only good as the ruling denominator. If the ruling denominator is thinking about the whole then the whole will flourish if not then they will suffer.

Of course I am proud of the system, and that Trump was elected shows that the system works. Trump, a non-politician, and complete outsider was able to win, just as Obama, a black man, was able to win. Trump will eveuntually be defeated and replaced, the people have that power. Such is not the case in China, or even Japan.

Are the Chinese proud of a system which gives the people no choice at all in who leads the country? A system which routinely punishes or “disappears” those who disagree with it?

Are the Japanese proud of their “democracy”, which allows a single political party to rig the system to give a minority of the voters a majority of the votes, and then buy these votes using money coerced from the majority of the people? Or to be able to call snap elections at almost anytime in order to hold onto to their majority, and thus maintain a virtual monopoly on power for more than seven decades?

Both China and Japan have far more serious political and economic problems to solve than America, and these arise chiefly as a result of their cronyist political systems.

For these of you who dislike, criticize or oppose the democracy, you are free to do so only in the democratic nations. As for the N. Korean threat, the biggest threat to Japan are these so called "Heiwabokes."

Can they do that in China or N. Korea?

No national elections, but there seems a big difference between China and N. Korea. China could be described as a meritocracy. Join the party, and if you're smart and tough enough, you can perhaps get to the top. North Korea is a classic dictatorship and quite different.

BertieWooster. In old days, the presidential candidates spoke on radios, and traveled on a train to different locations to appeal to the public. They were able to reach only a handful of the public then. Now we have TV debates, TV ads and the other communication devices that enable them to reach the great majority of the public. Isn't this what we need to form a democratic government?

No surprise at all that Chinese communists see great propaganda value in pointing to Donald Trump's being inaugurated as U.S. president as evidence that democracy is flawed and doesn't work as well as an authoritarian system. But what this typical Chinese communist analysis misses is that people who wish to defend Japan are just as inclined to point to Trump as evidence that Japan's democratic, multiparty political system is just as good as if not better than America's political system.

In other words, for a lot of people Trump's presidency is not evidence that democracy itself is flawed and ought to be junked in favor of one-party rule. Rather, Trump's presidency is evidence that there is something deeply wrong with how the United States governs itself.

Rather, Trump's presidency is evidence that there is something deeply wrong with how the United States governs itself.

I couldn't disagree with you more. Deficits, money printing infinitety, CDS's, wars, proxy wars, weapons sales, coups, false flags, MSM brianwashing, and the biggest one, massive over use of cologne and perfumes. And this is all Trumps fault?

I say, democracy has finally worked for once and denied the elites their so called money driven scam in Hillary.

But the latter (referring to Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Kim) is not true communism. Or even socialism.

Glad you said this. These labels are used by governments and media, and especially banksters because they are cut out from the scam. That all should just be called criminals and assholes.

I say, democracy has finally worked for once and denied the elites their so called money driven scam in Hillary

You mean democracy finally worked in the sense of the person with fewer votes winning the election?

Unless of course your sites tell us this is in fact another MSM lie.