21–30 of 30 posts
I don't know if WaPo changed the headline or if this was an attempt to shorten it for HN, but the article currently has "could rule for life" rather than "to rule for life." The latter may well happen, but at least for now, it's only the former.
Submitted title here was "With a dash of Putin and an echo of Mao, China’s Xi to rule for life".
Once again it seems to me that Ai Wei Wei's quote about China is pertinent: “Can China be a global power? I don’t think so. It can gain an advantage, that’s true. But it doesn’t have soul. It doesn’t have heart. It doesn’t trust its own people. So it has no self-identity in the sense that it has never accepted human rights as common values. No freedom of speech, no independent judicial system. If those don’t exist, h…
> Can China be a global power? I don’t think so. China arguably is a global power today . I think what Ai Weiwei means is if China can be a long-lasting empire like the Roman or the British Empire. Also, this reminds me of the classic Upton Sinclair quote: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." The man being Weiwei in this case.
Once again it seems to me that Ai Wei Wei's quote about China is pertinent: “Can China be a global power? I don’t think so. It can gain an advantage, that’s true. But it doesn’t have soul. It doesn’t have heart. It doesn’t trust its own people. So it has no self-identity in the sense that it has never accepted human rights as common values. No freedom of speech, no independent judicial system. If those don’t exist, h…
"It doesn’t have heart. It doesn’t trust its own people. So it has no self-identity in the sense that it has never accepted human rights as common values. No freedom of speech, no independent judicial system." All of this was true of the USSR and yet it was a global super-power for half a century.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It doesn’t have heart. It doesn’t trust its own people. So it has no self-identity in the sense that it has never accepted human rights as common values. No freedom of speech, no independent judicial system." All of this was true of the USSR and yet it was a global super-power for half a century.
It was a military super-power, yes, but that was about it. With the possible exception of having some great classical-style composers, it otherwise was not an inspiring country. You sided with them to have big weapons on your side, not for any other reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We really won’t know until Xi dies in office. We would also know if he is replaced 5-10 years down the line while still very much alive.
Sure, I was talking about the if true happens case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It doesn’t have heart. It doesn’t trust its own people. So it has no self-identity in the sense that it has never accepted human rights as common values. No freedom of speech, no independent judicial system." All of this was true of the USSR and yet it was a global super-power for half a century.
China is and will be a super power but the point is it won’t have deep roots in culture and time unless it becomes driven by a wider base.
I don't really understand why power obsessed people don't seem to recognize that at some point retirement is graceful. (Thinking of Robert Mugabe, for example.)
"Power obsessed" is the answer to your own question, I think. And it's not just because they enjoy power. It's more like riding a tiger. There is no time, ever, when it is safe to get off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It doesn’t have heart. It doesn’t trust its own people. So it has no self-identity in the sense that it has never accepted human rights as common values. No freedom of speech, no independent judicial system." All of this was true of the USSR and yet it was a global super-power for half a century.
It was a military super-power, yes, but that was about it. With the possible exception of having some great classical-style composers, it otherwise was not an inspiring country. You sided with them to have big weapons on your side, not for any other reason.
Classical composers as you mentioned, literature (Russian realism), opera & ballet. Russian academies in those areas are still considered the best in the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was a military super-power, yes, but that was about it. With the possible exception of having some great classical-style composers, it otherwise was not an inspiring country. You sided with them to have big weapons on your side, not for any other reason.
It also inspired half of the world and had a massive cultural, artistic and sports influence across the whole world. Space program that was well ahead of the US for a good period time. Classical composers as you mentioned, literature (Russian realism), opera & ballet. Russian academies in those areas are still considered the best in the world.