送交者: 吴礼 于 2006-2-03, 17:16:58:
回答: The article 由 mangolasi 于 2006-2-03, 14:47:47:
I have no problem with Google's choice. It is not a hero, and it is not supposed to. If it does its best to adhere to the Western principle (such as making clear that the content was censored), it’s OK with me. Of course, I’d like it better if Google boycotts the Chinese market for the lack of freedom. But it will only be effective if all other foreign IT service providers follow suite. And this won’t happen even in my wildest dreams.
The author’s view on democracy is, in my view, totally unfunded. It is based on a bunch of wrong assumptions and wrong claims. One problem with articles like this is that there are so many false statements you won’t know where to begin. Let me just give you two examples.
Quote: “Will the U.S. be democratic in 50 years? History will tell.”
Well, nobody is as wise as the history. While we don’t have the crystal ball to look forward, we can look back to 50 years ago. In 1960s, U.S. faced many challenges as well: scandals at the very top of the government (Watergate and FBI’s secrete files), wide-spread anti-government sentiment (Vietnam War), failing economy (due to energy crisis), expanding Soviet threads, etc. Did that make the democracy fail? Or we can even look at the 40s. The Great Depression, active communist and labor movements at home, poor people at the verge of starvation, devastating defeat at Perl Harbor. Did the democracy fail? So why would it fail in 50 years because of the problems we are facing today?
Quote: “So, what is a Chinese leader dedicated to the welfare of the people to do?”
I admit that a good dictatorship is better than democracy. However, the problem is that it does not exist. “Chinese leader dedicated to the welfare of the people”? If we believe in that, of course we won’t need democracy. This guy should go back to political science 101: the whole idea of democracy is assuming that people in power won’t be “dedicated to our welfare”.
The argument about democracy will lead to mob ruling is not new at all. It was, if not earlier, the basic difference between the Federalist and the Republican 200 years ago in the U. S. And I think the history of the United States has provided a clear enough answer. Yes, I know about Hitler. But how many countries adopted democracy, and how many Hitler emerged? Also, Hitler was not the product of democracy. In the process of getting in power, Hitler broke countless previsions in the German law. The problem was that the German people did not oppose strongly. The reason was that the German people believed that a strong man would be more effective than a democratic institution. I guess they learned the hard way.
Yes, I believe China has a choice. It does not have to adopt the Western style democracy. But so far I have not seen any proposal that is convincingly better, and that is compatible with a market economy, to which China has committed itself.
Actually, I will be happy enough if we can discuss and debate these proposals freely in China.