"our shallow, opportunistic governing class thinks purely in transactional terms: we have our legislative agenda, we have the parliamentary votes; public sentiments be damned. “Democracy” is purely a matter of process for them; the means justify the ends. They view the citizenry with a mixture of fear and contempt"?
That's true of almost all Western governments, and for the same reason: they're not democracies and never have been. Electorates elect absolute monarchs every few years and they do as they see fit. As Lincoln’s Secretary of State, William Henry Seward, observed, “We elect a king for four years and give him absolute power within certain limits which, after all, he can interpret for himself”.
Not so the Chinese. Despite the propaganda, Xi is the least powerful – though most influential – national leader in the world with the possible exception of Singapore.
The quote from Seward reminds me of a moment twenty years ago, February 2003, when the US was gearing up to invade Iraq. There were massive protests worldwide, the collectively the largest in modern history, including many protests in the US. When asked about the latter, George W Bush -- or perhaps his spokesperson, don't remember now -- the response was: Americans have the opportunity to speak up every four years. In other words, you had your chance to vote, so shut up. In the aftermath of that disastrous decision, there was endless discussion about why the Bush admin so desperately wanted to invade Iraq; he never adequately explained or justified the decision; he was in effect simply exercising that absolute power Seward spoke of. Bush is now treated like a cuddly village elder by the bien pensant; he's never suffered the any personal consequences for his grave crimes. As debased as the political culture in the UK may be, Tony Blair cannot appear in public without protesters shouting at him that he is a war criminal. That hasn't stopped him from stuffing his pockets with tens of millions in shady deals with the rich and powerful in the world, but his reputation is permanently sullied. At least they separate the ceremonial head of state in the UK from the political leadership; in the US the occupant of the White House is treated like royalty, making the whole system that much more dysfunctional.
The actual power of both Xi and Putin is continually exaggerated in the West, as was, I believe, that of Mao and Stalin before them.
"our shallow, opportunistic governing class thinks purely in transactional terms: we have our legislative agenda, we have the parliamentary votes; public sentiments be damned. “Democracy” is purely a matter of process for them; the means justify the ends. They view the citizenry with a mixture of fear and contempt"?
That's true of almost all Western governments, and for the same reason: they're not democracies and never have been. Electorates elect absolute monarchs every few years and they do as they see fit. As Lincoln’s Secretary of State, William Henry Seward, observed, “We elect a king for four years and give him absolute power within certain limits which, after all, he can interpret for himself”.
Not so the Chinese. Despite the propaganda, Xi is the least powerful – though most influential – national leader in the world with the possible exception of Singapore.
The quote from Seward reminds me of a moment twenty years ago, February 2003, when the US was gearing up to invade Iraq. There were massive protests worldwide, the collectively the largest in modern history, including many protests in the US. When asked about the latter, George W Bush -- or perhaps his spokesperson, don't remember now -- the response was: Americans have the opportunity to speak up every four years. In other words, you had your chance to vote, so shut up. In the aftermath of that disastrous decision, there was endless discussion about why the Bush admin so desperately wanted to invade Iraq; he never adequately explained or justified the decision; he was in effect simply exercising that absolute power Seward spoke of. Bush is now treated like a cuddly village elder by the bien pensant; he's never suffered the any personal consequences for his grave crimes. As debased as the political culture in the UK may be, Tony Blair cannot appear in public without protesters shouting at him that he is a war criminal. That hasn't stopped him from stuffing his pockets with tens of millions in shady deals with the rich and powerful in the world, but his reputation is permanently sullied. At least they separate the ceremonial head of state in the UK from the political leadership; in the US the occupant of the White House is treated like royalty, making the whole system that much more dysfunctional.
The actual power of both Xi and Putin is continually exaggerated in the West, as was, I believe, that of Mao and Stalin before them.