how does china's system of governance differ from India's? Explain
Answers
China’s democratic system is one that is unified under the leadership of the Communist Party in their role as the representative of the working class people. Chinese people have a strong anarchist tendency and at the village level strongly resist outside influence. When the impositions of government become too great they rebel in a way given approval by the great Confucianist Mencius in the 3rd century BC. Local officials are aware of this and are under pressure for Beijing to ensure it doesn't happen.
Despite all efforts at subtlety however over 100,000 such incidents occur every year in this huge country. It was always this. Such incidents are not so common in the cities except by village construction workers. For some reason China never seems to develop a professional cohort of construction workers and every site is filled with fresh, unskilled workers from the countryside. Once they are skilled they demand wages too high for the construction firms and they are dismissed.
In China a great deal of rhetoric is given to the Rule of Law, but the concept that the constitution and the legal system prevails over all is missing. In China the party rules over all. As we see in the present round up of human rights lawyers, the Chinese CCP prevails over both the constitution and the laws. They are simply tools of rule. A better translation would be rule by law. But in the Chinese sense that the law can be ignored so long as you do not offend the party leaders at any level or embarrass the country. Then the laws will be used to punish you.
While China has all the institutions of a democracy: a parliament of appointed representatives, the National People's Congress; a highly qualified and competant civil service which answers to the NPC; a legal court system which answers to the NPC formally; and a military which answered to the national military commission.
Above all this, of course amid the CCP which runs everything rigorously and mirrors every civil function with a party equivalent which can override it. It's a bit like the ancient Censorate which reported to the Emperor everything that occurred and enabled a good emperor to keep a tight hand on the empire which is generally centrifugal and prefers to ignore Brijing if they can get away with it.
Now with India you have a federation based on British democratic principles albeit without the unifying factor of the Monarchy. India does not have a traditional sense of moire to call on. At least not a native Hindu one. So rule of law is again a foreign concept which doesn't really apply in the sense people feel they should obey the law.
The idea of a government in New Delhi running local affairs is foreign and seems to work badly. While in China an instruction from Beijing can be received with a degree of fear, in India one gets the impression it is left aside for consideration. The local government and legal systems have no sense of urgency and legal cases which take just day in China can take years in India. India beats China at anarchy hands down.
Until recent years India was known for the Hindu rate of growth, but the strategic imperative of the China Dragon threat changed that and new the Indian Elephant now trumpets its GDP growth rate in the region. Still Modiji struggles to get all provinces into gear and foreign investment does better in some places than in others.
The future of Asia, with two economic giants facing off over the Himalayas seems secure despite their many differences.
Answer:
:hina’s democratic system is one that is unified under the leadership of the Communist Party in their role as the representative of the working class people. Chinese people have a strong anarchist tendency and at the village level strongly resist outside influence. When the impositions of government become too great they rebel in a way given approval by the great Confucianist Mencius in the 3rd century BC. Local officials are aware of this and are under pressure for Beijing to ensure it doesn't happen.