> Maybe there's a third option aside from continue the state quo or convert fully into a democracy? Maybe the party can evolve into something that's more and more benevolent to the people it governs?
As one raised in a democracy (the UK) and thankful for that, taking a big step back I don't know if democracy is a more stable system than others. Or even better in terms of long-term results. I wonder if our democracy is mainly the result of cheap energy which removed the hardscrabble existence of our ancestors and will go when cheap energy finishes (if we don't pull our socks up).
It's a contentious point, I'm not sure it's right, and I'm not punting for china. Just raising a question.
NB my father was born and raised in a military country with an oppressive government. Hearing some stories from him is why I know how fortunate I am.
Democracy will never be as stable as a regime or dictator, but it can also survive a lot more chaos and instability while still protecting the rights of its people.
A stable system does not mean a robust one. A tea cup on a counter is stable, but easily broken. A spinning top is not very stable but can survive most falls.
> Democracy will never be as stable as a regime or dictator
Why never? While I'm not arguing that democracies are inherently super stable (that's empirically false), I don't think that democracies are inherently less stable than dictatorships.
I would think an system that peacefully transitions power with the consent of the governed on a regular basis would typically be more stable than a system where the transition of power is generally a once in a lifetime event dependent on whomever holds the most power in government during the transition.
I can understand the argument that transitioning power is less stable than maintaining existing power structures, but transitioning power is inevitable even if it's to an heir.
Dictatorships aren't stable, dictatorship is stable. Dictatorships involve bloody power strugges that ruin the country and kill people. Dictatorship usually remains, though, because the replacement government is usually another dictatorship - ensuring that when it in turn falls, even more people will die.
taking a big step back I don't know if democracy is a more stable system than others. Or even better in terms of long-term results
I wonder what sort of education you've had? I can easily and quickly think of dictatorships that killed or enslaved millions of their own citizens - it's practically a requirement to be a really good dictatorship, it seems. It's a struggle to think of any democracies which do that. Perhaps the Israel/Palestine conflict has shades of that, perhaps internment of Japanese in America during WW2 counts a bit, but it ended pretty fast and was due to a war.
I'm gonna take a wild guess that your current lack of faith in democracy is caused by Brexit. Am I right?
But yours a very good point! So what do I mean? It depends on the word 'better' and 'stable'.
'stable' is easily covered - chinese society has existed in a stable form for thousands of years. There's no evidence that any democracy has, because democracy as I know it is a relatively recent thing. Yeah, greeks and democracy, but they also kept slaves so no.
'better'? Well, what do you mean by that. I suppose on reflection I was equating that with stable, so if you accept that then I've already covered it, and feudalism/totalitarianism/authoritarianism is perhaps 'better'. A stable society at the cost of individual happiness.
You define 'better' as equivalent to human rights, which I agree with, however my point is, be clear with your definitions of pivotal words! That's all. And I should have been so as well.
To be clear I'm not advocating nor would wish to live under, such regimes.
(and the brexit shite is a train wreck, and I am losing some faith in people who voted for brexit based on xenophobia and ignorance. I've met both sorts so I know they exist).
> chinese society has existed in a stable form for thousands of years.
This is a patently false myth that the PRC promotes to legitimize its government. Never mind that the PRC is only 70 years old and radically different than the government that came before it, or the one 30 years before that, or 300 before that, or 200 before that...
Chinese language and culture has existed as long as all the others have. And furthermore, it has gone through just as many regime changes. Unless you're pretending each dynasty was a single government?
Well, how do you see that China has been stable? In the 20th century it's been conquered in an invasion, then went through a communist revolution and fought a civil war that split itself in two. The governments have been replaced repeatedly. It has such severe racial and civil unrest in its western regions the PRC built huge concentration camps and 'disappeared' millions of people into them as the only way to keep the peace. That doesn't sound very stable to me!
Compare that to Britain which has had continuous revolution-free government for hundreds of years, has not split, has had no civil wars for centuries and doesn't disappear its own citizens. It looks pretty stable in comparison.
I think maybe your view of China is coloured by PRC propaganda. They love to claim thousands of years of history, that the PRC is the source of all stability and harmony in China, etc. But a cold reading of history makes it look a bit different.
I voted for Brexit, because the best countries are universally the most democratic countries. That's how I guessed your poor view of democracy might be related to it. We can say these views are stereotypes, but I met a lot of Brexit voters who just didn't like the EU institutions or the way they treat the country, and none (so far) that didn't like immigrants. I'm sure such people do exist, they just don't seem to be prevalent in the circles I move in. Unfortunately I have met a lot of Remain voters who seem unfortunately keen on dictatorship - I guess that's why Leave arguments about democracy are only ever met with irrelevant counterarguments like "racism! xenophobia!". The lack of democracy in the EU is one of the things that appeals to them about it!
> Well, how do you see that China has been stable?
Hard to say. China's society has been around since after the unification, 221BC (post-waring-states, the qin dynasty). It may have gone back further, to the shang dynasty (~1500 BC) but that was probably a period of conflict throughout. But does conflict in itself negate continuity of society?
But a) my knowledge of chinese history is minimal, and b) most important, how do you measure a society. The UK of now is different from the UK of 1980, how does one measure the continuation of a society? By culture? The Shang dynasty oracle bones have script that may be the precursor of chinese writing. Han period statuary is very reminiscent of modern chinese stuff.
Britain was likely pre-literate before the romans arrived (50BC IIRC) and the art was very different then, such as it was.
I don't know, how should we measure this? I mention art and writing as a proxy for culture as a proxy for society, but what should it be? We can't debate without agreeing basic terms.
> In the 20th century it's been conquered in an invasion
I think you mean the opium wars. I mention this in another post here. But they survived as a culture (arguably). "went through a communist revolution" - ditto survived (I might argue).
> PRC built huge concentration camps and 'disappeared' millions of people into them as
Yesss, I mention this in another post here. That is one way to have stability albeit an horrific one.
Compared to this, the UK was invaded repeatedly within the last 1000 years, the language was changed, the genetics were changed, the art changed... but what is a culture/society? These things? Other? Tell me.
> I think maybe your view of China is coloured by PRC propaganda
No. Please my other posts here. And stability and harmony are a matter of definition. I am sure my and your vision of it is something far nicer than china's crushing 'pacification' but unless we define things, we're spinning our wheels.
Also this thread is not about brexit and in this context I'm not willing to discuss it. I don't know why you're bringing it up.
China has probably had a somewhat more stable writing system and gene pool compared to Britain, that's true. I suspect with more knowledge there'd turn out to be pretty large differences over time too. For instance medieval Britain used the Latin alphabet/writing system. The language has changed enormously since that time, but still uses that script. Probably Chinese is the same.
Getting back to the original point (and I'll drop Brexit), your original question was whether democratic systems are really more stable than others. With my definition of stability as avoiding civil wars, revolutions, and other violent transfers of governmental power, I feel pretty sure they are more stable. If you define it as absence of change in art or other forms of culture, I'd concede the point - I'd expect a dictatorship to have less change in art and language, simply because culture benefits from free expression and some of the most creative people in society are often rebellious, which doesn't fit well with such societies.
However, I quite enjoy unstable (or dynamic) culture paired with stable (or peaceful) constitutional change. That seems like a good mix, and it also seems to require democracy.
Pinning anything down is a bugger but I'll accept your definition of "without [civil] wars or non-peaceful transfers of governmental power". It's pretty good. (just to be a complete bastard, do 'the troubles' of northern ireland count as civil war?)
My knowledge of chinese history is an illusion. I've always found the culture interesting and the 2D & 3D art/sculpture much more elegant than a lot of western stuff. Can't say the same about the music... I picked up a remaindered book on the oracle bones <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_bone>. Regarding the art, I was leafing through a book on ancient chinese artefacts. But the more I know, the less I know. And yes, [edit: ancient] chinese script is doubtless as legible to a modern person as anglo-saxon is to us, likely even less so.
I'll read up on your manchuria link, thanks - I wasn't aware it was that it was so extensive. I recall loadsa abominations by the japanese etc etc so it goes.
I understand where you're coming from, thanks again!
The Troubles certainly got pretty close and are the best rebuttal to the idea of British stability, yes. And that unfortunate partition of India thing.
As one raised in a democracy (the UK) and thankful for that, taking a big step back I don't know if democracy is a more stable system than others. Or even better in terms of long-term results. I wonder if our democracy is mainly the result of cheap energy which removed the hardscrabble existence of our ancestors and will go when cheap energy finishes (if we don't pull our socks up).
It's a contentious point, I'm not sure it's right, and I'm not punting for china. Just raising a question.
NB my father was born and raised in a military country with an oppressive government. Hearing some stories from him is why I know how fortunate I am.