[ruggeri]

> So was everything with Taiwan hunky dory when they were a murderous military dictatorship for all those decades[1]?

It's good to remember that Taiwan's adoption of multiparty democracy is very recent, and that a one-party dictatorship preceded it.

And of course the PRC has always had lots of reasons to want to take back Taiwan, regardless whether it fears that mainland Chinese might see the Taiwanese system as preferable to their own.

But the gp's statement that Taiwan's example today threatens the raison d'être of PRC authoritarianism is also quite valid. PRC's authority does not rest alone on a monopoly of force and surveillance, but also reputation for stability and for organizing economic growth. Now PRC population is aging, growth is slowing and suffering from serious structural problems, economic management is becoming more centralized/ideological/less effective.

A successful, freer counter-example of what a Chinese nation might look like is actually quite dangerous to the PRC. Likewise, I think this is exactly why the PRC has kneecapped democracy in Hong Kong.

[powerapple]

Hong Kong was set as an example how Taiwan can be integrated as a separate economy, separate government and separate everything as long as it is part of China. The reason why it happened in Hong Kong was that the political movement was out of control, you have some members of the parliament saying "fuck China" when they swear to service during the ceremony. It is more about how Hong Kong sees China, not how China sees Hong Kong. China would be very happy to see Hong Kong works in the two system model. How China is thinking now is that, giving Hong Kong the freedom to operate does not work, the same apply to Taiwan. Most Chinese people have negative views on politicians, the multiparty democracy system in Taiwan is not seen as a positive thing to be honest.

[dagenleg]

This is straight up the official CCP party line you're repeating here. How Chinese people are somehow uniquely unsuited for democracy.

The "multiparty democracy system in Taiwan is not seen as a positive thing" by whom? The Taiwanese? The election results from that country have shown quite the opposite.

[Brybry]

Because I was curious I looked up some election numbers.

Taiwan's population is ~23.4 million.

In 2020 there were ~19.3 million registered voters with 74.9% turnout. [1]

In 2024 there were ~19.5 million registered voters with 71.86% turnout. [2]

Note that voter registration appears to be automatic[3] so I believe turnout also represents the percentage of all people 20 years and older who voted.

[1] https://www.cec.gov.tw/english/cms/pe/32471

[2] https://www.cec.gov.tw/english/cms/pe/41582

[3] https://web.cec.gov.tw/english/cms/FAQS/26147

[powerapple]

I didn't say how Chinese are unsuited for democracy. You are making up words I didn't say.

Westerners need to go out of their comfort zone, and realize that maybe other people don't envy the western political system, just think about the possibility.

you see what's going on in the last few years, westerners are still living like nothing has changed. The ordinary people outside the west sees hypocrisy of your political system, it is a very different time.

[maxglute]

Many mainlanders see shitshow of TW legislature brawls and think no thanks. They'd prefer quiet CCDI purges etc, not sarcasm. Like most of the PRC disaphora who moves abroad in advanced economies think democratic voting / political process is a joke after a few election cycles.

I don't know where this idea that CCP thinks Chinese people are unsuitable for democracy comes from except for repeating LIO autocracy vs democracy propaganda that insist so. CCP advertises itself as whole process democracy even, because it likes the idea of having democratic processes. If anything CCP already thinks itself democratic, more/better than 1 person 1 vote. CCP also doesn't give a shit what model is on TW, they once offered TW 1country2systems+ model where TW got to keep their political system AND military in exchange for on paper reuninfication and some foreign policy concessions (security). It matters little how TWnese conduct themselves, PRC wants political reuninfication foremost. It's about land, and always has been.

[ruggeri]

First, I believe you are right that the CCP believes that "giving Hong Kong the freedom to operate does not work." I believe you are right that the CCP believes that "the same applies to Taiwan." I believe you are right that the CCP does not see the multiparty democratic system in Taiwan as a positive thing.

If Taiwanese people really care about retaining multiparty democracy, then everything you said is a good reason for Taiwan to be wary of PRC attempts to gain more control over Taiwan.

--

Second, I don't know what the average person on the street in mainland China thinks about the HK protest movement or Taiwanese democracy. Today, when the successes of the PRC are more salient to most people than its failures, the average person in mainland China may well look down on the perceived disorder of democracy.

What comes up may come down. Mainland China has had some incredible decades as it industrialized and caught up. That is a typical phenomenon (not a uniquely Chinese one) when an authoritarian country introduces liberalization to their economy. It is harder for authoritarian countries to maintain growth when they are already mostly caught up with peers, because decentralized economic decision making becomes much more effective than centralized decision making. Decentralized economic decision making is a form of decentralized political power, and the authoritarian country is eventually forced to choose between maintaining a monopoly of authority or pursuing further growth.

At least, that's the thesis of economists like Daron Acemoglu. And the PRC is currently trending away from economic decentralization and toward a re-centralization of decision making.

Mainland China now faces some severe economic and geopolitical headwinds; maybe the PRC will navigate them wisely and earn yet more prestige. Or maybe the PRC will fail to respond adequately to new challenges because of the weaknesses of its authoritarian model. And since the PRC's authoritarian system relies almost solely on efficacy as a source of legitimacy, its legitimacy may prove extremely fragile in the face of a downturn in fortune.

Whatever comes to pass, it will not be a result of a Chinese exceptionalism. Perhaps centralized, one-party states without elections and with limited free speech will prove the dominant governmental model in the next era of history. But, historically, states like that seem to have been mostly outlasted by more liberal peers.