Posted on 12/02/2019 6:22:14 PM PST by MNJohnnie
An interview Michael Bloomberg did with Firing Line in September is getting renewed attention this week, given his getting into the 2020 Democratic presidential primary race.
Margaret Hoover said, “The United States currently accounts for about 15 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. China accounts for roughly 30 percent… Even if we get to net zero, how do you get China, India, and the other countries to be good partners?”
Bloomberg said that China “is doing a lot” now and said, “The communist party wants to stay in power in China, and they listen to the public. When the public says ‘I can’t breathe the air’ — Xi Jinping is not a dictator. He has to satisfy his constituents or he’s not going to survive.”
Hoover asked, “He’s not a dictator?”
“No, he has a constituency to answer to,” Bloomberg said.
As they went back and forth, Hoover expressed skepticism of the idea that the Chinese government would listen to the people like that, bringing up the protests in Hong Kong.
The interview has spread around online recently, with Bloomberg facing serious criticisms for offering that defense of China
(Excerpt) Read more at mediaite.com ...
He does not fit the definition of a dictator. We have to stop stretching definitions to political ends. It has gotten way out of hand. And because I seek to keep language accurate and not hyperbole makes me exactly suited for this site.
Go to China and say bad things about him.
We hate to tell you this, but you didn't understand your letter grade in civics.
Bloomberg will definitely cozy up to China.
“...Yeah the Left loves China. They lust after having that sort of power....”
Libs cried when the Soviet Union went away.
They cry now because it’s Hard to have power over people who can - and will - hunt you down and shoot back.
That does not mean he is a dictator but you are correct political protest is not allowed. Surprisingly, though, they will tolerate a pretty heavy dose of economic inspired protest. Some things the Central Committee realizes are more powerful: A group of Chinese upset over a money issue.
Mr. Doomberg:
“China is not a democracy, and its citizens have no right to vote, assemble, or speak freely,” the commission said in its annual report. “Giving General Secretary Xi the unearned title of ‘president’ lends a veneer of democratic legitimacy to the [Communist Party] and Xi’s authoritarian rule.”
The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission
> “Surprisingly, though, they will tolerate a pretty heavy dose of economic inspired protest. Some things the Central Committee realizes are more powerful: A group of Chinese upset over a money issue.”
Not true at all.
Here is how they typically handle ‘Chinese upset over a money issue’ - people who lost their life savings in the recent P2P lender collapse:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-lenders-p2p-insight-idUSKBN1KX077
The only protests the CCP will allow are those sanctioned and instigated by the CCP itself for political reasons. Past examples include: Protests/boycotts against French businesses (Carrefour); against Japanese businesses during Island disputes; against South Korean Lotte for THAAD defense.
” ...reading comprehension was [is] the challenging subject? “
SO true.
And if they don’t like what the public is saying they send them to a labor and re-education camp. Bloomberg talks like there is some other political party in China for the common man to vote for. Like any other communist country there is only one party. There are only Communist candidates chosen by the Communist Party.
Hoover asked, “He’s not a dictator?” … “No, he has a constituency to answer to,” Bloomberg said.
Xi’s constituency is the Communist Party. Yes Xi and the Communist Party want to stay and power and like all dictatorships they know the way to stay in power is intimidation and fear.
Bloomberg thinks we’re all fools and idiots. Considering that he got elected mayor of NYC I suppose he might have good reason to think so.
You know, I been there, seen them. Maybe you have lived there also, I don’t know. But if not and you want to believe Reuters or CNN on the subject, I’m sure they are happy to have you as one of their misinformation devotees.
That is not allowed. But that does not mean the system of government in China is that of a dictator.
"A dictatorship is a government or a social situation where one person makes all the rules and decisions without input from anyone else. Dictatorship implies absolute power — one person who takes control — of a political situation."
What happens to anyone else who says bad things about him?
> “You know, I been there, seen them.”
Then you should simply tell us what protests you saw, instead of resorting to denying the media reports using thinly-veiled ad hominem. And please don’t pretend you don’t know there are countless similar reports besides Reuters’ and CNN’s.
Taxi strike. The local government imposed new rules that shortened the time a taxi cab owner could have a car, mandating they must get a new car more often. They blocked the roads. The policy was reversed.
Political protest is not allowed, if that is what has you confused.
There is only one reason a local government under the CCP would fold - when suppressing the protest is not in the party’s best interest. It occurs only rarely and doesn’t mean the leopard has changed its spots.
In the taxi drivers’ case, assuming it was just as you described, it could be they were using their collective leverage by threatening to quit, or, more likely, there was concern the protest could inspire other groups of people to join, etc. Whatever it was, it does not change the fact that to the CCP, maintaining stability, i.e, suppressing any unrest and preventing its spread, is always the number one priority at a huge financial cost to them.
> “Political protest is not allowed, if that is what has you confused.”
All protests that manifest in China are necessarily non-political in nature, since any attempt to protest against the reign of the CCP is nipped in the bud and the suspects summarily and harshly dealt with, which is after all the point of their tight control on everything. Only people who are confused would even try to make the differentiation.
If you meant to further say that non-political protests are allowed, then the CCP’s reaction to the p2p protests is a direct and strong refutation of your point, and such behavior is par for the course for the CCP.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.