6

At the recent St. Gallen Symposium, Tharman Shanmugaratnam, the Deputy Prime Minister of Singapore, mentioned in an interview that while China is not democratic, its leaders have a high sense of accountability. Like the interviewer, I am baffled by this statement.

In what ways do leaders in China have a high sense of accountability?

anon
  • 61
  • 1

1 Answers1

7

In the US, people in positions of political power seldom get put into prison. It's said that bringing legal accountability to acts committed during the Bush administration was impossible.

China, on the other hand, put Bo Xilai (who was minister of commerce and a member of its politburo) in prison for life.

In China, a politician having power doesn't mean that he keeps it. If a politician in China messes, up the Party is willing to punish him, and he won't advance in the Party ranks.

In democracies a politician can break all his election promises and be re-elected, so democracy doesn't automatically create accountability.

Steve Melnikoff
  • 12,135
  • 2
  • 44
  • 62
Christian
  • 2,087
  • 1
  • 15
  • 27
  • 2
    They're only accountable to the political party though, not to the people. Perhaps that's the difference. – PointlessSpike May 20 '15 at 08:23
  • "In democracies a politician can break all his election promises" - well I would not call such system a democracy then! – Anixx May 20 '15 at 08:29
  • 1
    It's not about formal accountability. It's about whether there's a culture of politicians being held to account. The main point that Tharman Shanmugaratnam makes in the interview is that in India the voters fail to hold politicians accountable. In the US you can also ask the question if a congress with a 10% to 15% approval rate has a reelection rate of 95%. Chinese political organs also have higher approval rates than that. That doesn't make China more of a democracy then the US. – Christian May 20 '15 at 08:52
  • Democracy is the rule by people and for the people. And not by politicians for themselves. Something utterly wrong with your definition of democracy! – Anixx May 20 '15 at 10:55
  • 1
    @Anixx : Are you arguing that China's higher approval rate for politician makes it more democratic than the US? Traditionally democracy is defined as people having the choice to select their leaders and not that they do a good job at it. "In a democracy people get the leaders they deserve." – Christian May 20 '15 at 11:11
  • "Traditionally democracy is defined as people having the choice to select their leaders" - no. It is your propaganda definition. The classical definition I have cited above. Also not that in socialist countries accountability of the officials before the people is valued more than the choice. Why you would need a big choice at the time of appointment if u can replace the ineffective official at any time? – Anixx May 20 '15 at 11:15
  • And yes, consistent high approval rating of the leaders (not a single leader) indicates that this country has more democratic system, regardless of whether it is based on choice or accountability or both. – Anixx May 20 '15 at 11:21
  • 1
    @Anixx For that measurement to work, there needs to be freedom of political expression. The primary cause of leaders' high approval ratings in China, for example, could well be that dissent is prohibited, and so people are not made to consider arguments for disapproval. – Publius May 20 '15 at 20:44
  • 2
    -1. Bo Xilai lost an intra-party dispute. Most people in power did the same things, he simply had his "bad" deeds used as an excuse to punish him. Also, "bringing accountability during Bush" is a nice canard... except (1) it applies MUCH more so to Obama and (2) Scooter Libby was convicted for something he ended up being innocent of. Bush did nothing to protect him. – user4012 May 21 '15 at 23:32