Western Democracy - Failures and Issues perhaps for people to improve Q Editor: I don’t like Communists nor Islamic fundamentalist rule in Afghanistan. But that’s not the point. I was shocked and surprised how fast the Afghan government collapsed even after 20 years of the involvement of the world’s wealthiest countries to support it. It cost billions of dollars and sacrifices of thousands of lives. It reminds me of the collapse of the Nationalist Chinese government in 1947. It took only two years after the Japanese surrender. It shows how little we learn from history, and how expensive it is to ignore lessons of history. https://lethbridgeherald.com/commentary/letters-to-the-editor/2021/09/11/why-has-western-democracy-failed-so-badly/ I wish someone good in historical analysis would tell me why Western Democracy failed so miserably in China in 1947, in Vietnam in 1975 and in Afghanistan in 2001. Tad Mitsui Lethbridge UQ
Currently I am still reading the search results of " western democracy failure" and " famous failures in western democracy". Q “民主” - 改善人民的生活为主! Democracy - Improving People"s Livelihood predominantly! "自由" - 优化自我控制的合理化水平！ Freedom/Liberty - Optimising Self-controlRationalisation level! UQ 我对西方民主制度的看法和转变[12345...35] (法国经济学家)皮凯蒂：西方应对中国崛起的最好方式，就是建设新社会主义 Perhaps, a 1Country4Systems structure in order to provide peace, tolerance and inclusiveness could be worth to consider, seriously, very seriously!!!
< “But I think it’s also a failure of our entire government. > Q A 74-year-old man is blocking Congress from providing American workers with paid family and medical leave, leaving the United States as the only industrialized nation without such a mandate. On Wednesday, Senate Democrats said they would have to drop the provision from their Build Back Better legislation because they were unable to convince Joe Manchin from West Virginia to get on board. 74-Year-Old Man Blocks Universal Paid Leave [ 链接：www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-manchin-paid-leave_n_6179c0c4e4b010d93319c8dc ] “I think it’s horrific that one white man can make this decision,” said Dawn Huckelbridge, director of Paid Leave for All. “But I think it’s also a failure of our entire government. This should have been a monumental legacy we could have left the American people in a time of need. And this could have been a cornerstone program that would have helped every working family in this country. And we’ve squandered that opportunity.” UQ
Let’s stop calling the American system democracy. It is an oligarchy with elements of democracy. Let’s also stop calling China’s system communist or dictatorship, it’s a meritocracy with elements of dictatorship
Q The troubling charts that show young people losing faith in democracy https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/12/charts-that-show-young-people-losing-faith-in-democracy/ Image: New York Times
UQ
Q Democracy is failing in the West, scientists warn Only 19% of young Americans think it''s wrong for the military to take over the government if it''s incompetent or doesn''t do it''s job. https://www.zmescience.com/science/news-science/democracy-failing-west-18092017/ The democratic West is crumbling, researchers from Harvard and the University of Melbourne warn. There’s less and less love for democracy to go around, a trend that seems to be sharpest among younger demographics. [ “Dictatorial democracy is were you have the freedom of speech but the administration doesn’t listen.” Anti-Bush protest written on a voting booth in 2003. Image credits The Prophet / Flickr. . [ 链]Image credits Foa and Mounk, 2017 People are still getting involved in politics as they age, but younger cohorts are starting from a much lower baseline than those before them. The political apathy gap between old and young Americans went from 10% (in 1990) to 26% (in 2010). Among European respondents, it has more than tripled between 1990 and 2010, from 4% to 14%. UQ
< 英國防大臣-台灣實際已被納入-一國兩制-框架下 > Q 據路透社周四（21日）報道，華禮仕在談及台灣時論及香港，認為兩地之間存有「相似之處」。華禮仕稱，英國十分擔心香港，因為台灣實際上已被納入「一國兩制」框架下，如果中國大陸摒棄了「一國兩制」，「這對台灣意味着什麼呢」？ https://www.hk01.com/即時中國/691871/ 台海局勢-英國防大臣-台灣實際已被納入-一國兩制-框架下 UQ Pragmatically, for the coming talk potentially between two Chinese leaders, I would think they should focus on the best feasible way for the Taiwan administration to really guanrantee and provide a 1Country2Systems structure for the livelihoods of people currently living in Taiwan. I guess both of the leaders would not want to see Taiwan in future would become just part of a 1C1S province through any means. My 2 cents! 务实地说，对于即将到来的两位中国领导人之间的谈话，我认为他们应该关注台湾政府真正保障和提供一国两制结构的最佳可行方式，以保障目前居住在台湾的人民的生计。 我想两位领导人都不想看到台湾将来以任何方式成为1C1S省的一部分。 我的2美分！
Let’s stop calling the American system democracy. It is an oligarchy with elements of democracy. Let’s also stop calling China’s system communist or dictatorship, it’s a meritocracy with elements of dictatorship pilingjushi 发表于 2021-10-28 23:12
It seems to me the US system is originally designed to perform capitalism economics, which is good mainly for the capitalists (while slaves offering cheap labour were still alive and plenty those days for this great American experiment). However, that could be called simply a sub-optimisation, for the gain by one being the loss of others! A good system must have a system goal (such as the livelihood of people) and the system must be goal seeking and goal oriented dynamically, with continuous improvements both gradually and transformationally. Obviously, a one-party system has been effective in implementing improvements especially transformation (i.e. revolution), while the capitalists/elites when legally protected by a two-party system usually want to maintain their status/power/money (unless willing to follow the advice of Jesus)! 在我看来，美国的制度最初是为执行资本主义经济学而设计的，这主要对资本家有利（而提供廉价劳动力的奴隶还活着，而且那些日子里有很多时间进行这项伟大的美国实验）。 但是，这可以简单地称为子优化，因为一个人的收益就是其他人的损失！ 一个好的制度必须有制度目标（如民生），制度必须是动态的、有目标的、以目标为导向的，有渐进式和转型式的持续改进。 显然，一党制在实施改进尤其是变革（即革命）方面是有效的，而受到两党制法律保护的资本家/精英通常希望保持他们的地位/权力/金钱（除非愿意遵循 耶稣的忠告）！ Again 2 cents! 再次2美分！
Q Types of democracy refers to pluralism of governing structures such as governments and other constructs like workplaces, families, community associations, and so forth. Types of democracy can cluster around values. Wikipedia [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy ] Contents 1 Direct democracy [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Direct_democracy ] 2 Representative democracies [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Representative_democracies ] 3 Types based on location [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Types_based_on_location ] 4 Types based on level of freedom [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Types_based_on_level_of_freedom ] 5 Types based on ethnic influence [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Types_based_on_ethnic_influence ] 6 Religious democracies [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Religious_democracies ] 7 Other types of democracy [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Other_types_of_democracy ] 8 See also [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#See_also ]8.1 Further types [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Further_types ] 9 Bibliography [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Bibliography ] 10 References [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#References ] UQ
Q Editor: I don’t like Communists nor Islamic fundamentalist rule in Afghanistan. But that’s not the point. I was shocked and surprised how fast the Afghan government collapsed even after 20 years of the involvement of the world’s wealthiest countries to support it. It cost billions of dollars and sacrifices of thousands of lives. It reminds me of the collapse of the Nationalist Chinese government in 1947. It took only two years after the Japanese surrender. It shows how little we learn from history, and how expensive it is to ignore lessons of history.
https://lethbridgeherald.com/commentary/letters-to-the-editor/2021/09/11/why-has-western-democracy-failed-so-badly/
I wish someone good in historical analysis would tell me why Western Democracy failed so miserably in China in 1947, in Vietnam in 1975 and in Afghanistan in 2001. Tad Mitsui Lethbridge UQ
Q “民主” - 改善人民的生活为主! Democracy - Improving People"s Livelihood predominantly!
"自由" - 优化自我控制的合理化水平！ Freedom/Liberty - Optimising Self-control Rationalisation level! UQ
我对西方民主制度的看法和转变
(法国经济学家)皮凯蒂：西方应对中国崛起的最好方式，就是建设新社会主义
Perhaps, a 1Country4Systems structure in order to provide peace, tolerance and inclusiveness could be worth to consider, seriously, very seriously!!!
Q
A 74-year-old man is blocking Congress from providing American workers with paid family and medical leave, leaving the United States as the only industrialized nation without such a mandate.
On Wednesday, Senate Democrats said they would have to drop the provision from their Build Back Better legislation because they were unable to convince Joe Manchin from West Virginia to get on board.
“I think it’s horrific that one white man can make this decision,” said Dawn Huckelbridge, director of Paid Leave for All. “But I think it’s also a failure of our entire government. This should have been a monumental legacy we could have left the American people in a time of need. And this could have been a cornerstone program that would have helped every working family in this country. And we’ve squandered that opportunity.” UQ
UQ
Q Democracy is failing in the West, scientists warn
Only 19% of young Americans think it''s wrong for the military to take over the government if it''s incompetent or doesn''t do it''s job. https://www.zmescience.com/science/news-science/democracy-failing-west-18092017/
The democratic West is crumbling, researchers from Harvard and the University of Melbourne warn. There’s less and less love for democracy to go around, a trend that seems to be sharpest among younger demographics.
.
[ 链]Image credits Foa and Mounk, 2017
People are still getting involved in politics as they age, but younger cohorts are starting from a much lower baseline than those before them. The political apathy gap between old and young Americans went from 10% (in 1990) to 26% (in 2010). Among European respondents, it has more than tripled between 1990 and 2010, from 4% to 14%.
UQ
< 英國防大臣-台灣實際已被納入-一國兩制-框架下 > Q 據路透社周四（21日）報道，華禮仕在談及台灣時論及香港，認為兩地之間存有「相似之處」。華禮仕稱，英國十分擔心香港，因為台灣實際上已被納入「一國兩制」框架下，如果中國大陸摒棄了「一國兩制」，「這對台灣意味着什麼呢」？
https://www.hk01.com/即時中國/691871/ 台海局勢-英國防大臣-台灣實際已被納入-一國兩制-框架下 UQ
Pragmatically, for the coming talk potentially between two Chinese leaders, I would think they should focus on the best feasible way for the Taiwan administration to really guanrantee and provide a 1Country2Systems structure for the livelihoods of people currently living in Taiwan.
I guess both of the leaders would not want to see Taiwan in future would become just part of a 1C1S province through any means.
My 2 cents! 务实地说，对于即将到来的两位中国领导人之间的谈话，我认为他们应该关注台湾政府真正保障和提供一国两制结构的最佳可行方式，以保障目前居住在台湾的人民的生计。 我想两位领导人都不想看到台湾将来以任何方式成为1C1S省的一部分。 我的2美分！
It seems to me the US system is originally designed to perform capitalism economics, which is good mainly for the capitalists (while slaves offering cheap labour were still alive and plenty those days for this great American experiment). However, that could be called simply a sub-optimisation, for the gain by one being the loss of others!
A good system must have a system goal (such as the livelihood of people) and the system must be goal seeking and goal oriented dynamically, with continuous improvements both gradually and transformationally.
Obviously, a one-party system has been effective in implementing improvements especially transformation (i.e. revolution), while the capitalists/elites when legally protected by a two-party system usually want to maintain their status/power/money (unless willing to follow the advice of Jesus)! 在我看来，美国的制度最初是为执行资本主义经济学而设计的，这主要对资本家有利（而提供廉价劳动力的奴隶还活着，而且那些日子里有很多时间进行这项伟大的美国实验）。 但是，这可以简单地称为子优化，因为一个人的收益就是其他人的损失！ 一个好的制度必须有制度目标（如民生），制度必须是动态的、有目标的、以目标为导向的，有渐进式和转型式的持续改进。 显然，一党制在实施改进尤其是变革（即革命）方面是有效的，而受到两党制法律保护的资本家/精英通常希望保持他们的地位/权力/金钱（除非愿意遵循 耶稣的忠告）！
Again 2 cents! 再次2美分！
Contents 1 Direct democracy [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Direct_democracy ] 2 Representative democracies [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Representative_democracies ] 3 Types based on location [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Types_based_on_location ] 4 Types based on level of freedom [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Types_based_on_level_of_freedom ] 5 Types based on ethnic influence [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Types_based_on_ethnic_influence ] 6 Religious democracies [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Religious_democracies ] 7 Other types of democracy [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Other_types_of_democracy ] 8 See also [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#See_also ]8.1 Further types [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Further_types ] 9 Bibliography [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#Bibliography ] 10 References [ 链接：en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy#References ] UQ