If the Tiananmen Sqaure protests had have resulted in the installation of a democratic government...?

“Today, the People's Republic of China is an extremely well run country”


I puked at this sentence and couldn't help to write an answer.

You mean Tibet protest proved China is an extremely well run country?

or Milk powder contamination?

People still live in tents of Sichuan quake areas.

Communists high ranking officers go in and out of casinos of Las Vegas?

GDP per capita at 3000 US dollars after 30 years "reform and open up"?

Riots on and on.

Sweat shops in Guangdong province that every worker works 14 hours per day,only get 600 yuan per month?

Are those you called "extremely well run"?

i agree with your statement "the Chinese government have their peoples best interests at heart"...
this is what i see, being in China...

the US would help China more if it was a western political system?

are u kidding me?

the US would come in grab our resources & benefit itself from a unstable social environment. They would probably even set up military bases in China, and what would happen then?

the economy is strong is b/c the social stability, did the west help out Russia after USSR? No

Again, student protests did not only happen in China, they got killed in the US too. Why is that people only talk about Tiananmen but not the Kent State Massacre?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_Killings

Seriously think about that you have said.

We don't have a magical time machine to prove nor disprove what people have written or said on the subject.

I have seen a well written documentary that says what you are suggesting the riots of 1989 bought about 2 choices. (Sorry I can't find the link at the moment). One the political door, or door 2 the economical door.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/video/flv/generic.html?s=frol02p7b

Part 4, first 5 minutes

The unwritten deal the documentary says you can be wealthy however you will have to put up with our rules. Door 1 and you will have to fight us all the way. The ones who are getting the better end of the deal are kind of people who protested at the riots.

Another reason or part reason is that in the Gulf wars, the Chinese military saw the USA fight against the Iraqi army. The Iraqi army was using a lot of Chinese technology. Seeing that how quickly the USA and there technology overcame the Iraqi forces, the Chinese government saw that it needed to "upgrade itself" and modernise itself fearing that a USA-China confrontation will come one day.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east/03/24/willy.column/

As for for the Chinese having the best interests that is debatable, who is growing richer the people. The change has bought about raw capitalism which is unregulated, and has led to a series of scandals, growing environmental problems etc....

The government knows that one day they will have to give up, being nice to the people when its needed only slows down the process.

But think... There the reforms that made China as it is today
1979 decollectivization:- state run farms, targets are abolish allowing people to work freely on there land and production has increase.

Post-1989 Government introduces business plans in which, they give tax breaks to foreign businessm change laws to make China more open in which has lead the way for more money to flow through its treasury by

a) Selling its goods on a foreign market.
b) Getting foreign companies to invest its money in China.

The above have one thing in common they let the Chinese business person run there business with better freedom than before and with a bigger market now. Its rather clever in that way, most of its investment for modernisation has come from foreign sources and not the government helping its people directly.

However modernisation is not always right for everyone as shown in the later half of this youtude clip.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR5e4XJ-ll0

Is he right, would they be better working a 9-5 job in an office building?

Personally I believe more countries like the USA would help China more if China had a Western style government. And would probably push Taiwan to rejoin rather than pulling them away.

first, they set up a gathering with scholar leaders to communicate their demands after that, issues did no longer turn too properly from there, the two the government officals and the scholar leaders have been to conceited to incredibly communicate correct to the undertaking, so the government ignored the protests and arranged for the crowds to disband by the years interior the month that the "protest/insurrection" happened, the fringe of government officals who supported demorcractic reform in China became politically overwhelmed by skill of the different facet, with the aid of fact the stduents tousled badly. (they did no longer comprehend whilst to end, and the protest sort switched over right into a insurrection) the government have been given impatient, and desperate to us protection stress stress topersistent off the protesters who have been nevertheless on the sq. bacially, the scholars bogged down the demorcratic reform technique in China by skill of being stupid.

CNN showed students getting hurt at Tiananmen Square in the name of democracy, but if you do talk to people in Beijing at that time, both in the protest and bystanders, you'll know that it's not that simple. From what I've gathered, the Chinese government was fed up with the "prince" companies, companies ran by relatives of corrupted government officials. These companies claim the government for all their expenses...they were stealing from the government and creating an unfair business market for the many smaller businesses in China. The "prince" companies knew that they were in trouble so they used students as a tool to distract the Chinese government's attention/buy time. That's how it all started...at least that's how students began assembling outside Tiananmen Square.

So, by eliminating these "prince" companies, the Chinese government has created a more fair business market for the local small businesses as well as investors from overseas. This then brought about healthy economic growth. If you look back, oversea companies didn't start building offices in China until after 1989.

The student-led protests were not well organized, so it would have probably been quite a mess had they been successful. But it`s possible that China is currently making a slower transition to a democratic government however, no one really knows China`s future. Actually, if you look at the West`s past predictions for Asia, they were nearly ALWAYS wrong.

The Chinese government wants to remain in power. Does that mean it has the people`s best interest at heart? Hmm... Even if they claim to be thinking about "the people", it doesn`t mean that they will make decisions that please the people. Often only certain people are pleased, and China`s size and diversity tends to ALWAYS leave large groups of people unhappy. Everyone of course can point to Tibet and Xinjiang Provinces. There is also city versus farmer issues which are linked to rich versus poor issues. The Chinese government has a lot of work to do, even if they are trying to make things right.

You say the debt "turns the tables", but I don`t believe that it does. China has interests in maintaining a strong dollar, so the nations are somewhat interdependent. Actually, many nations have interest in keeping the dollar valuable and stable.

The rise of China does not have to mean that America (or Europe or Japan) must fall. That sort of thinking I think is outdated. The age of single superpower may be coming to an end, so wealth is likely to be spread a bit more in the world, but America`s status will not fall too far. There is room for China to rise without crushing everyone else, and I honestly am not sure that the Chinese government would even want to be the single world power. The Chinese government tends to be internal, but if there`s a single world power, then that nation needs to have a vision for where they want to take the world. I just don`t think China is thinking about such things. You can`t lead without a leader, and I just don`t know if China wants to be the world leader.