Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Achilles heel of all whataboutism is assuming someone can't consistently criticize the new thing in addition to the original thing.
It's not whataboutism if you point out question was naive. (answer is the same everywhere and has always been the same) Inner circle leadership won't be prosecuted anywhere as long as their group holds some power. So, then, question is, how can this be improved?, can it be improved?
China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes
71–80 of 523 posts
Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes
#72I sometimes see people "celebrate" this, with the rationale that China is cracking down on white-collar crimes and handing out sentences unheard of in the west. But, are these sort of things just examples of selective prosecution? Would the inner circle members of CCP leadership realistically face the same prosecution and sentencing, if they were to be caught doing the same?
Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes
#73Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes
#74What happens to the money in these cases? I could imagine the official taking solace knowing the money he amassed over the years would eventually go his family.
Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Killing people in any context is barbaric because it is not possible to bring someone back from the dead. I’m not a law expert but it seems pretty basic that there shouldn’t be irreversible punishment. Also there should be equity which means everyone that does the same crime should face the same consequence, which doesn’t happen anywhere in the world as far as I can understand. So harsher punishment means people with…
> there shouldn’t be irreversible punishment I am not convinced. "You can no longer hold office" is a permanent punishment. Why should that not be allowed? > Also there should be equity which means everyone that does the same crime should face the same consequence I am also unconvinced. I don't think it is fair to treat a child like an adult and I think those in power should have more stringent standards and larger c…
Let's say that some new evidence comes out that exonerates the person. You can indeed reverse the "no longer hold office" punishment. You can't bring someone back from the dead.
Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes
#76I sometimes see people "celebrate" this, with the rationale that China is cracking down on white-collar crimes and handing out sentences unheard of in the west. But, are these sort of things just examples of selective prosecution? Would the inner circle members of CCP leadership realistically face the same prosecution and sentencing, if they were to be caught doing the same?
While I'm sure he doesn't catch all corruption and the CCP overall has selective enforcement, the reason they do have measures like this is in large part because of Xi Jinping's specific reputation and positioning.
Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes
#77I sometimes see people "celebrate" this, with the rationale that China is cracking down on white-collar crimes and handing out sentences unheard of in the west. But, are these sort of things just examples of selective prosecution? Would the inner circle members of CCP leadership realistically face the same prosecution and sentencing, if they were to be caught doing the same?
>Would the inner circle members of CCP leadership realistically face the same prosecution and sentencing no need to speculate, it's already happened. Zhou Yongkang who was a member of the Politburo Standing Committee (the highest governing body in Chinese politics) was prosecuted, and up until that point people at the top were considered relatively untouchable. Xi also axed the last to vice chairmen of the central mi…
Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes
#78I sometimes see people "celebrate" this, with the rationale that China is cracking down on white-collar crimes and handing out sentences unheard of in the west. But, are these sort of things just examples of selective prosecution? Would the inner circle members of CCP leadership realistically face the same prosecution and sentencing, if they were to be caught doing the same?
He sees it as a challenge to his legitimacy and China’s power, which, as you’d expect are the most important things to him; even if you take the most cynical view.
Another timely example, because it is the World Cup, is the Chinese football programs. They’ve been decimated because of corruption prosecutions, both executives and players. It’s a major reason why China isn’t competitive on the global stage, which much smaller countries with significantly smaller budgets can compete. And, yes, Xi does care about competing in the World Cup. Prestige is very important to his concept of China’s honor and global standing.
Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
Killing people in any context is barbaric because it is not possible to bring someone back from the dead. I’m not a law expert but it seems pretty basic that there shouldn’t be irreversible punishment. Also there should be equity which means everyone that does the same crime should face the same consequence, which doesn’t happen anywhere in the world as far as I can understand. So harsher punishment means people with…
barbaric is society which has half of the worlwide population living with less than 6 USD per day in borderline slavery
Re: China sentences official to death for taking $325M in bribes
#80I sometimes see people "celebrate" this, with the rationale that China is cracking down on white-collar crimes and handing out sentences unheard of in the west. But, are these sort of things just examples of selective prosecution? Would the inner circle members of CCP leadership realistically face the same prosecution and sentencing, if they were to be caught doing the same?
Killing people in any context is barbaric because it is not possible to bring someone back from the dead. I’m not a law expert but it seems pretty basic that there shouldn’t be irreversible punishment. Also there should be equity which means everyone that does the same crime should face the same consequence, which doesn’t happen anywhere in the world as far as I can understand. So harsher punishment means people with…
Of course, attempts are made to "reverse" even after someone had been put to death. Posthumous pardons are a thing. It may not bring anything to the person who has passed, but it could give somewhat similar benefits to living descendants.
It's just to say we shouldn't undermine how impactful something like incarceration is on the theory that it is "reversible". Evidence suggests such experiences mess people up in pretty severe ways. Lets also remember thinking of death in these distinct terms may be very cultural. Few penal systems escape barbarity. There are worse things than death. There are many instances or societies were it is preferable or expected people kill themselves rather than go through something like the ignominy of incarceration.
As to the last line, I'm also not sure. Brutal societies have a way of turning on themselves. Nations that accord more protections to their people are generally a better place for their rulers, even if the reverse is not always true. Personally I would love a legal system that baked into its norms higher punishments for people with more power. I think these have existed in the past, even if enforced through less modern mechanisms.
It is also the case that people in power do things that people with less power are incapable of. Getting rid of notions of executive privilege or qualified immunity would be a good start. The way the law is written currently, people in power won't simply not be punished - they won't even be charged. Take George Bush. Did he ever even just have to testify under oath about the rationale for the Iraq War once? Would the United States really descend into a banana republic if he had been charged for perjury or war crimes? It seems like the push in that direction can instead trace its genesis to the fact that in America, we evidently make our leaders untouchable.