I was just thinking, "Man, I never took any courses on China. I'd love to understand them better." Then I realized I could probably find one online. And here we are! Thank you so much for sharing this!
I wonder about the simplistic definition of democracy, is that really how US political theory defines it: free and fair elections? In Switzerland we start at "rule by the people", in the extreme form of basis democracy people would debate and decide everything together, without delegation of power to a parliament. And the Chinese democracy focuses on having the government work for the people, rather than debating, how that goal is achieved.
Then, you neglect a whole lot of things which I conclude that you don't seem to understand democracy yourself. All government, even tyrannical ones all think they are achieving the goals for the people. Every single one of them. So, how can you use that as a basis.
@@emmanuel8310 that's historically not correct at all. The idea that "the people" are the source of legitimacy for a government was very revolutionary at the time. In between there were long periods in antiquity and the medieval age where it was self-understood that the legitimacy comes from god or gods, and the people were merely tools or resources of the king to achieve a godly mission.
@@HaraldinChina Yeah, no doubt, but , that wasn't called democracy. And...it depends on the society, not all believed that they were "tools" of the gods. Maybe to some extent the Greeks. But, interesting some for of democracy also started with them. Also, democracy is older than you thought. Some form of it was practiced by the Greeks. And in fact, Socrates made some criticism of it. So, the idea is not that "young". But, the modern one is much more different though, but, not very new.
@@emmanuel8310 You shouldn't assume what I thought. Of course I'm aware of the Greek criticism of democracy as rule of demagogues. Greeks idealized the rule of the Philosopher King. If democracy wasn't a concept from ancient Greece, we probably wouldn't use a Greek word to describe the system. Also, surprisingly, the Ancient Chinese had dynasties in which locals would select a delegate to the emperor, like electing regional leaders. What medieval indentured farmers really thought, is a very interesting question which is explored much too little. Movies like Braveheart portray them as modern individualistic citizens longing for self-determination, completely capable of understanding the entire world they live in from a modern perspective. I find such movies very detrimental to the understanding of how that time really worked. And also to understanding how very different human societies can be.
problem with corruption perception index: it's perception according to local expectation. US is hugely corrupt in form of revolving door and lobbying (especially pharma and arms industry) but people seem to somehow shrug it off as "legal". China has a problem with insider trading, but overall corruption is hardly worse than in Europe or the US, IMHO.
19:00 I disagree with the definition of capitalism purely on ownership of means of production. in China the capital owners can't use their wealth to influence politics. That's the difference to capitalism
Great, as a Chinese, I’ve never really known what 人民民主专制 means, and I believe most people in China have never known. Now, China is neither 人民专制 nor 人民民主, but 人民的敌人专制.
as a Chinese citizen, you should know 人民民主专政 not 专制 is part of our constitution, it explains what does 人民民主专政 mean. Apparently, you are not a Chinese citizen or never wanted to be a Chinese citizen. You are just like Gorden Chang, a joke on youtube.
@@rickdong7441 You are a joke, go back to Chinese Internet and enjoy yourself. 1.专制or专政 doesn't really matter, because 2. constitution doesn't explain what it is at all, so 3.it should be interpreted by people 4.not the government, which is 5.trying to cover the meaning.
@@Minato-xu3si I don't really care if I am a joke or not, I am enjoying the mainland internet social media and my channel is running well there. 1. 专制 is autocracy, 专政 is dictatorship, it does matter in both Chinese and English. The work 专政 is from народник, this group interpreted демократическая диктатура народа. 2. in RPC's constitution preface it says: "工人阶级领导的、以工农联盟为基础的人民民主专政，实质上即无产阶级专政，得到巩固和发展" it does interpret what is 人民民主专政 3. so far as I learned, no significant definition has been interpreted by people, and what is your definition of "people" 4&5. it is not the Chinese government, but the PC and CPPCC defining the meaning of 人民民主专政 one suggestion, you should go back to mainland internet and refresh your mind there
There is a huge difference between leaking tons of government documents and getting in legal trouble for that in the US, and getting jailed or killed just for your political opinions in China.
I was actually disappointed. The reason is that the lecturer seems to over-simplify a giant and complex China by simply labeling it "authoritarian". I know China is authoritarian already but also know that China is the least authoritarian in its long history of 2000 years. An American friend also asked me if Chinese has more freedom now than 30 years ago. My answer is probably yes, as 30 years ago most Chinese could not to travel abroad but they do it routinely now (and most of them happily go home).
It is still authoritarian despite it being more authoritarian in the past. Also, with Xi is power China is only getting more authoritarian, so at this point China is getting more authoritarian than it was a few years ago.
Why do you think China is less authoritarian today than the past? Consider this: Past China could not control how people talk, could not use surveillance camera to observe and punish people who behave badly. I don't think the fact that chinese people can travel more easily today play any significant role in assessing China's authoritarianness.
It’s a shame that this guy is teaching a political science class since he apparently doesn’t know the difference between socialism and communism. A number of European countries, especially Scandinavian countries, have a high degree of socialism without government ownership of the means of production, which would be communism.
@@limi. Other forms of government like despotism makes a man the king pin above law and communism breaks every person against the regime and capitalism has lobbies to protect rich men's interest.
Superb lecture; I hope you get to post an updated course in 2023. A lot has happened since 2018 - an update would be highly appreciated.
Thank you for putting this up online. I never went to college, it wasn't until later in life that I learned the value of education.
I was just thinking, "Man, I never took any courses on China. I'd love to understand them better." Then I realized I could probably find one online. And here we are! Thank you so much for sharing this!
Professor, you are so generous to give so many As.
Thank you for uploading this lecture!
this is gonna be really funny to watch in 20 years
To be fair, he didn't make any predictions.
I wonder about the simplistic definition of democracy, is that really how US political theory defines it: free and fair elections? In Switzerland we start at "rule by the people", in the extreme form of basis democracy people would debate and decide everything together, without delegation of power to a parliament. And the Chinese democracy focuses on having the government work for the people, rather than debating, how that goal is achieved.
Well, which people??
That itself is very sloppy.
There's no government in this world that's not ruled by people.
Then, you neglect a whole lot of things which I conclude that you don't seem to understand democracy yourself.
All government, even tyrannical ones all think they are achieving the goals for the people.
Every single one of them.
So, how can you use that as a basis.
@@emmanuel8310 that's historically not correct at all. The idea that "the people" are the source of legitimacy for a government was very revolutionary at the time. In between there were long periods in antiquity and the medieval age where it was self-understood that the legitimacy comes from god or gods, and the people were merely tools or resources of the king to achieve a godly mission.
@@HaraldinChina
Yeah, no doubt, but , that wasn't called democracy.
And...it depends on the society, not all believed that they were "tools" of the gods.
Maybe to some extent the Greeks. But, interesting some for of democracy also started with them.
Also, democracy is older than you thought.
Some form of it was practiced by the Greeks.
And in fact, Socrates made some criticism of it.
So, the idea is not that "young".
But, the modern one is much more different though, but, not very new.
@@emmanuel8310 You shouldn't assume what I thought. Of course I'm aware of the Greek criticism of democracy as rule of demagogues. Greeks idealized the rule of the Philosopher King. If democracy wasn't a concept from ancient Greece, we probably wouldn't use a Greek word to describe the system.
Also, surprisingly, the Ancient Chinese had dynasties in which locals would select a delegate to the emperor, like electing regional leaders.
What medieval indentured farmers really thought, is a very interesting question which is explored much too little. Movies like Braveheart portray them as modern individualistic citizens longing for self-determination, completely capable of understanding the entire world they live in from a modern perspective. I find such movies very detrimental to the understanding of how that time really worked. And also to understanding how very different human societies can be.
problem with corruption perception index: it's perception according to local expectation. US is hugely corrupt in form of revolving door and lobbying (especially pharma and arms industry) but people seem to somehow shrug it off as "legal". China has a problem with insider trading, but overall corruption is hardly worse than in Europe or the US, IMHO.
:-D
19:00 I disagree with the definition of capitalism purely on ownership of means of production. in China the capital owners can't use their wealth to influence politics. That's the difference to capitalism
Not long after you arrive in China
fantastic series! shame u don't have all the episodes!
What percentage of Truax's Princeton student are PRC nationals?
挺客观易懂了 内容都比较熟但出于人可爱声音好听竟看完了😅理清了一些概念的英文说法 几堂特邀嘉宾的没有录很遗憾啊😞
这种教学资源评论还是关了好 本来都是菩萨行为就没必要听狗叫 有些人既然根本没有抱着学习的心态为什么还偏要来这听美帝国主义反动言论给自己找不痛快 在b站看新闻联播不香了吗
哈哈哈哈
I used to come to this class stoned and it was the best shit ever.
Does democracy means free from problems?
If everyone gets an A whats the motivation to work harder?
Is democracy alone needed for reducing inequality anywhere.
Good information Doctor ....
Is china not capitalist country as well?
Does Rory Truex speak Chinese?
In lecture 6, Rory spoke in Mandarin 我们已经老了.
He does speak Chinese. Très bien, félicitations.
A free market not regulated by government can causes monopoly.
Great, as a Chinese, I’ve never really known what 人民民主专制 means, and I believe most people in China have never known. Now, China is neither 人民专制 nor 人民民主, but 人民的敌人专制.
as a Chinese citizen, you should know 人民民主专政 not 专制 is part of our constitution, it explains what does 人民民主专政 mean. Apparently, you are not a Chinese citizen or never wanted to be a Chinese citizen. You are just like Gorden Chang, a joke on youtube.
@@rickdong7441 You are a joke, go back to Chinese Internet and enjoy yourself. 1.专制or专政 doesn't really matter, because 2. constitution doesn't explain what it is at all, so 3.it should be interpreted by people 4.not the government, which is 5.trying to cover the meaning.
@@Minato-xu3si I don't really care if I am a joke or not, I am enjoying the mainland internet social media and my channel is running well there.
1. 专制 is autocracy, 专政 is dictatorship, it does matter in both Chinese and English. The work 专政 is from народник, this group interpreted демократическая диктатура народа.
2. in RPC's constitution preface it says: "工人阶级领导的、以工农联盟为基础的人民民主专政，实质上即无产阶级专政，得到巩固和发展" it does interpret what is 人民民主专政
3. so far as I learned, no significant definition has been interpreted by people, and what is your definition of "people"
4&5. it is not the Chinese government, but the PC and CPPCC defining the meaning of 人民民主专政
one suggestion, you should go back to mainland internet and refresh your mind there
People are coming back to home countries. Is it a threat to usa and Europe.
Is the US democratic？Is manipulative democratic by monopolies still democratic?
Why is 1percent of rich own 99percent of wealth in usa.
Rory Truex, this is what you so-called freedom of speech, I am very impressed
30:00 dissidents, should invite Edward Snowden
I hope they pay Western wumaos more than they pay the Chinese ones, cause you selling your soul to the Chinese Communist Party is pathetic lmao
There is a huge difference between leaking tons of government documents and getting in legal trouble for that in the US, and getting jailed or killed just for your political opinions in China.
@@Olav3D yes: the leaking was both legal and in line with what they proclaim is our political ideal. The dissidents are neither
@@Olav3D you hope they pay the Western wumaos? why would you hope that? What does your belief in a sould have to do with my political opinion?
I say Julian Assange
😭😭😭希望这辈子能看到中国真正民主
it's impossible
I hear many opionion in American news channel that creats conflict of interest between china and India.
Thank you
precept is like tutorial in hku
Freedom of thought can be a hallmark of democracy. Neutrality while debating is cornerstone of democracy.
Please have another lectures after talking about China “ US is falling’ 😂
Opinion matters a lot in democracy. Goal and objectives takes a back seat
so princeton had a propaganda department
Yep, repeating the mainstream narrative. You can learn more about China from any youtuber travel to and live in China.
Capitalism encourages competition. Communism talks rights of peaseants and labours. Socialism is mid way and balance between competition and ethics.
有意思
I was actually disappointed. The reason is that the lecturer seems to over-simplify a giant and complex China by simply labeling it "authoritarian". I know China is authoritarian already but also know that China is the least authoritarian in its long history of 2000 years. An American friend also asked me if Chinese has more freedom now than 30 years ago. My answer is probably yes, as 30 years ago most Chinese could not to travel abroad but they do it routinely now (and most of them happily go home).
It is still authoritarian despite it being more authoritarian in the past. Also, with Xi is power China is only getting more authoritarian, so at this point China is getting more authoritarian than it was a few years ago.
@@Olav3D I guarantee you Joe Biden is more authoritarian than Xi.... Americans are very comfortable with labels and clueless of the outside world.
Why do you think China is less authoritarian today than the past? Consider this: Past China could not control how people talk, could not use surveillance camera to observe and punish people who behave badly. I don't think the fact that chinese people can travel more easily today play any significant role in assessing China's authoritarianness.
@helloworld0609 did you see lecture nr 2? There he goes closer into the definitions of authoritarianism
It’s a shame that this guy is teaching a political science class since he apparently doesn’t know the difference between socialism and communism. A number of European countries, especially Scandinavian countries, have a high degree of socialism without government ownership of the means of production, which would be communism.
Corruption and democracy can never be seperated
That applies to all the other forms of regime not just democracy alone.
@@limi. Other forms of government like despotism makes a man the king pin above law and communism breaks every person against the regime and capitalism has lobbies to protect rich men's interest.
Religion has no.place in capitalism.