Obviously I am not advocating ‘democratic centralism’, a concept that is, in fact, remarkably similar to the controversial ‘unitary executive’ doctrine: you are given a chance to elect your leader, but once it’s done – shut up and follow. So it’s not really that different from the modern political thought in the western liberal democracies. Or some of them, at least.

abb1 remains my favorite commenter here but that doesn’t change the fact that he’s still essentially an intellectual charlatan.

I had never really believed that activism around the olympics could make a difference. I don’t know how much difference educating 2 ordinary Japanese people about Indigenous history is, but it seems like something. So maybe these protests do have some benefit (though in this case I’m not sure that the protests are actually giving a truthful message – but that is a different issue).

I didn’t want to go out on a limb, since I don’t know the current state of scholarship on the somewhat mythical Xia dynasty, or also whether it is or is not appropriate to regard pre-Shang settlements as part of the continuous civilization we call “Chinese”.

…We have combined, by a freely adopted decision, for the purpose of fighting the enemy, and not of retreating into the neighbouring marsh, the inhabitants of which, from the very outset, have reproached us with having separated ourselves into an exclusive group and with having chosen the path of struggle instead of the path of conciliation. And now some among us begin to cry out: Let us go into the marsh! And when we begin to shame them, they retort: What backward people you are! Are you not ashamed to deny us the liberty to invite you to take a better road! Oh, yes, gentlemen! You are free not only to invite us, but to go yourselves wherever you will, even into the marsh. In fact, we think that the marsh is your proper place, and we are prepared to render you every assistance to get there. Only let go of our hands, don’t clutch at us and don’t besmirch the grand word freedom, for we too are “free” to go where we please, free to fight not only against the marsh, but also against those who are turning towards the marsh!

Enthusiasm, possibly, but if you look back at history you’ll find that very few dictatorships have ever hosted the games. The only ones, I think, have been Berlin (1936) and Moscow (1980).

Many commentators have talked about the general detestable character of the Chinese Regime, like Cafferty who is amply criticized on youtube by Chinese goons and thugs working for the Party.

Or, in other words, some book says that what the CCP allows peasants to do [which is, from that brief summary, no more than, say, the absolute monarchs of C18 France ‘allowed’ their peasants to do, self-organise to meet immediate material needs and the external demands of the state] might, in the future, potentially, become a way of letting those same peasants have real power [which would, therefore, negate the current real power of the CCP]. The end point sounds fine, but I think the road-map for getting there is a tad optimistic. Local autogestion is meaningless in political terms if it continues to operate sous tutelle of a one-party state.