> The more I study, the more I realize that the western view of CCP is... not exactly wrong, but very very problematic
What's problematic to me is that a government censors information that could change people's minds. How can we call "legitimate" a government that is not allowing those who are supposed to be the source of its legitimacy, to access opinions and ideas that could influence their choice of which party they would legitimise?
Of course it would be hypocritical to say that our western governments don't try to do the same. But at least they are forced to limit the scope of their control to information that can somewhat fit under the umbrella of "National Security" -and at least their propaganda is forced to compete with everything else out there. Censoring by force books, websites and public media that express vastly opposing ideas is out of the question -as it should be -don't you agree?
There is an alternative perspective wrt what generates legitimacy. It is improving people's livelihood. Food, health, security, education, economic prosperity. Given the huge number of low income people in China, China is still very much a developing country. And China HAS made lots of progress in those fronts, much more than any other country.
As for disallowing criticism: nowadays it's not as bad as you think. Check my other threads.
Why should this progress in economic development be enough to make it legitimate? I mean, even if we assumed that the end justifies the means and that all that matters is economic prosperity, they didn't even have to do a lot of things right -just less badly than before (which admittedly wasn't that hard when someone looks at how bad they were).
And if this progress happened to coincide with loosening up the restrictions of personal freedoms and the censorship that you mention, perhaps the case is that a government that allowed more freedoms might had facilitated even more progress.
There is no proof that your latter claim is true. South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan were all authoritarian before they got economically prosperous. Only after that did they become democratic.
The states in the middle east, which had democracy forced upon them, aren't doing that well either.
It takes a while to get there, and not all stages of development of a country is a good match for democracy.
And you say that it is not that hard to do things less badly than before. I disagree. The CCP is literally the first functional and competent government they've had in 150 years. I think you are massively underestimating how difficult it is to develop China.
I am not saying economic concerns should forever be their number one priority. At some point that has to change. But is democracy really the best path for China right now? Do they deserve no credit for what they have already achieved?
Ok, I suppose we all have our priorities and biases. I can see how being able to feed for one's family can feel more urgent than being able to exercise their freedoms.
Perhaps the (late) CCP deserves credit for improving economy, infrastructure, efficiency and quality of life, to the extent that it did. And for being less cruel than its predecessors.
It is just that from the perspective of westerners, it is hard to judge positively a government that still has no respect for individual freedoms and private aspects of people's lives -i.e. looking the social score system, it is a step to the wrong direction.
My worry is that if the Chinese people become complacent and just feel grateful that they have more prosperity than before, the day where they are able to enjoy the freedoms that every person deserves will be far. And that, if they are not used to having free access to information and being in control, it will be more likely for someone less peaceful than the current CCP leadership in the future to start a war or something.
It's not as good as the west, censorship exists. But gone are the days where your neighbors report you for every little thing you may say wrong. You can file complaints against the government, and they do look into those without punishing you. You can even file lawsuits against the government (admittedly, not very effect yet, with a success rate of 30%, but not nothing).
Does China have problems? Yes, many. But my point is rather that it's not the hellhole many people think it is.
What's problematic to me is that a government censors information that could change people's minds. How can we call "legitimate" a government that is not allowing those who are supposed to be the source of its legitimacy, to access opinions and ideas that could influence their choice of which party they would legitimise?
Of course it would be hypocritical to say that our western governments don't try to do the same. But at least they are forced to limit the scope of their control to information that can somewhat fit under the umbrella of "National Security" -and at least their propaganda is forced to compete with everything else out there. Censoring by force books, websites and public media that express vastly opposing ideas is out of the question -as it should be -don't you agree?