7 ms·

What’s the point of protesting when they don’t even have elections? Why can’t the government just ignore the protesters with no consequences?

by 3qz 4y ago

dontbenebby 4y ago
>What’s the point of protesting when they don’t even have elections? Because people who aren't sociopaths experience psychic distress at the idea of violence. (That's absolutely an Always Sunny reference, BTW.)
brundolf 4y ago
Even authoritarian regimes have to think about civil unrest. The people under them still have some power: they have the power to revolt. Dictators are terrified of this possibility. And a protest is a way of signaling "hey, the temperature is rising buddy". A democracy by comparison functions as a gradual release valve: smaller amounts of unrest can affect smaller changes, without overthrowing the entire system.
- alexvoda 4y ago
  The feedback loop is slightly more complex. Dictators are also afraid of betrayal. And rising temperature creates opportunities for underlings to decide betrayal is profitable.
- MuffinFlavored 4y ago
  what’s the smallest protest in china that would actually stand any kind of chance of successful revolt/revolution?
  - HWR_14 4y ago
    You really have to define successful. Get Xi to change a single policy? Get someone else to take over as Chairman of the CCP and Secretary General of the Politburo? Put a democracy in place? Those are all different goals. Similarly, and as an analog, concerning Russia some people talk about Russia pulling out of Ukraine, some people talk about a coup deposing Putin and some people talk about new, real, elections.
    - brundolf 4y ago
      Also, "revolt" doesn't have to mean "completely overthrowing the government". Social unrest can eg. make for a less-cohesive society, harder-to-govern citizens, less-effective economy, etc. These things are valuable to those in charge; a leader would have to be really dumb to not factor them in at all in their calculations. So it's all about tradeoffs: what it would take to appease people vs what would be the social costs if you don't. Finally- protests signal to fellow citizens too, not just the people in charge. They can be contagious. All of which is just to say their impact is never zero, even if it's small
  - thot_experiment 4y ago
    AIUI, and i'm no expert, it would have to be absolutely massive. When someone put up a banner and burned some tires in Beijing the other day the CCP was blocking the word "beijing" itself on social media for a time. Their level of control is unrivaled.
    - origin_path 4y ago
      Is that evidence of awesome control or lack of it? Seems like blocking a word like Beijing because of a single event is over-blocking on a staggering scale; it communicates absolute terror of the populace that results in astonishingly over the top decisions.
      - katari_v 4y ago
A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
<< What’s the point of protesting when they don’t even have elections? Huh? Elections just happened. They were not direct elections, but within the party system they were elections. If I were to compare Chinese elections, I would maybe compare them to UK House of Lords. As to your general point, "why do anything when you have no right to do it"? Well, we are humans. Not all of us just roll over when we are told to.
- matthewmacleod 4y ago
  If I were to compare Chinese elections, I would maybe compare them to UK House of Lords. … the UK House of Lords which is famously unelected?
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    I think we are arguing over semantics here[1]: colloquial elected vs appointed. define - assign a job or role to (someone). elect - choose (someone) to hold public office or some other position by voting I chuckle at the very notion that any power circle would allow election of a power to a position as influential as HoL without some sort of quiet approval vote taking place by 'appropriate decision makers'[2]. You say it is not elected. I am saying it is elected by a very small group of people. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords [2]https://www.parliament.uk/business/lords/whos-in-the-house-of-lords/members-and-their-roles/how-members-are-appointed/ https://www.parliament.uk/business/lords/whos-in-the-house-o...
    - matthewmacleod 4y ago
      It is not semantics. The House of Lords is not elected - there is no voting process, which is a necessary prerequisite for an “election”. It is not “elected by a very small group of people” - it is explicitly appointed, with terrible appointees frequently being rewarded for personally closeness to the prime minister. Several of the positions are literally hereditary.
      - 4y ago
rasz 4y ago
>Why can’t the government just ignore the protesters with no consequences? Worked for Macron in France.

What’s the point of protesting when they don’t even have elections? Why can’t the government just ignore the protesters with no consequences?

by 3qz 4y ago

What’s the point of protesting when they don’t even have elections? Why can’t the government just ignore the protesters with no consequences?

dontbenebby 4y ago

>What’s the point of protesting when they don’t even have elections? Because people who aren't sociopaths experience psychic distress at the idea of violence. (That's absolutely an Always Sunny reference, BTW.)

brundolf 4y ago

Even authoritarian regimes have to think about civil unrest. The people under them still have some power: they have the power to revolt. Dictators are terrified of this possibility. And a protest is a way of signaling "hey, the temperature is rising buddy". A democracy by comparison functions as a gradual release valve: smaller amounts of unrest can affect smaller changes, without overthrowing the entire system.

alexvoda 4y ago
The feedback loop is slightly more complex. Dictators are also afraid of betrayal. And rising temperature creates opportunities for underlings to decide betrayal is profitable.
MuffinFlavored 4y ago
what’s the smallest protest in china that would actually stand any kind of chance of successful revolt/revolution?
- HWR_14 4y ago
  You really have to define successful. Get Xi to change a single policy? Get someone else to take over as Chairman of the CCP and Secretary General of the Politburo? Put a democracy in place? Those are all different goals. Similarly, and as an analog, concerning Russia some people talk about Russia pulling out of Ukraine, some people talk about a coup deposing Putin and some people talk about new, real, elections.
  - brundolf 4y ago
    Also, "revolt" doesn't have to mean "completely overthrowing the government". Social unrest can eg. make for a less-cohesive society, harder-to-govern citizens, less-effective economy, etc. These things are valuable to those in charge; a leader would have to be really dumb to not factor them in at all in their calculations. So it's all about tradeoffs: what it would take to appease people vs what would be the social costs if you don't. Finally- protests signal to fellow citizens too, not just the people in charge. They can be contagious. All of which is just to say their impact is never zero, even if it's small
- thot_experiment 4y ago
  AIUI, and i'm no expert, it would have to be absolutely massive. When someone put up a banner and burned some tires in Beijing the other day the CCP was blocking the word "beijing" itself on social media for a time. Their level of control is unrivaled.
  - origin_path 4y ago
    Is that evidence of awesome control or lack of it? Seems like blocking a word like Beijing because of a single event is over-blocking on a staggering scale; it communicates absolute terror of the populace that results in astonishingly over the top decisions.
    - katari_v 4y ago

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago

<< What’s the point of protesting when they don’t even have elections? Huh? Elections just happened. They were not direct elections, but within the party system they were elections. If I were to compare Chinese elections, I would maybe compare them to UK House of Lords. As to your general point, "why do anything when you have no right to do it"? Well, we are humans. Not all of us just roll over when we are told to.

matthewmacleod 4y ago
If I were to compare Chinese elections, I would maybe compare them to UK House of Lords. … the UK House of Lords which is famously unelected?
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  I think we are arguing over semantics here[1]: colloquial elected vs appointed. define - assign a job or role to (someone). elect - choose (someone) to hold public office or some other position by voting I chuckle at the very notion that any power circle would allow election of a power to a position as influential as HoL without some sort of quiet approval vote taking place by 'appropriate decision makers'[2]. You say it is not elected. I am saying it is elected by a very small group of people. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords [2]https://www.parliament.uk/business/lords/whos-in-the-house-of-lords/members-and-their-roles/how-members-are-appointed/ https://www.parliament.uk/business/lords/whos-in-the-house-o...
  - matthewmacleod 4y ago
    It is not semantics. The House of Lords is not elected - there is no voting process, which is a necessary prerequisite for an “election”. It is not “elected by a very small group of people” - it is explicitly appointed, with terrible appointees frequently being rewarded for personally closeness to the prime minister. Several of the positions are literally hereditary.
    - 4y ago

rasz 4y ago

>Why can’t the government just ignore the protesters with no consequences? Worked for Macron in France.