You have to pass tests to become a Party member in the same way you need to pass tests to become a doctor or an engineer or a teacher. What's the problem with that? Are people here against having qualified professionals in important jobs that affect people's lives?
Yes, yes, I am quite familiar with how a petty official needs to often perform legislative bypass surgeries or calculate the drag on a court ruling. Absolute sophistry.
Licensure provides a basis for accountability defined by the government, whose legitimacy is founded on democratic input. Can you spot the contradiction in the government, whose legitimacy is founded on democratic input, handing out licenses that decide who democratic input is permitted to select?
The basis for accountability of an institution that is only legitimized by the popular mandate must also be democracy. The people can decide if their will is being carried out, and if it isn't they can pick someone else (preferably by recall if it's really a problem).
It's great how you left out the teacher example, as if people needing to take tests and get certified in knowledge to practice is only for the elites.
Massage therapists need certifications. Drivers need certifications. Why does the job of politician need to be accessible to literally any person at any time just because enough people want it to be so?
This is a Communist nation which is designed around Communist, materialist principles, founded in Marxism but applied to the conditions of China. Do you even know what those things mean? Do you have a firm grasp of dialectical materialism? Have you studied and internalized these concepts, the history, the ideology? Would you be able to go out into the world and represent it to people through practicing it?
If so, congratulations, you have done something that is inherently complicated and requiring of a lot of dedication. Most people on this website who claim to follow these things could not pass a test about them; they do not practice it in real life and have never seen it in person. It isn't something that any random person is going to be able to do and understand just because enough people say "sure you can be in charge of making sure our village is administered correctly." You have to be able to send useful information up the chain of people who are experts on these things and more, and be able to understand what comes back down. You have to bid for budgets from these bodies to be able to enact what are often large scale operations, an example of which is in OP's link. Do you think any person can manage these large projects with small teams and limited resources just because they are voted to do so and think "sure why not?" Or do you just assume that whatever is happening in these "petty" offices is catching stray cats?
Licensure provides a basis for accountability defined by the government, whose legitimacy is founded on democratic input. Can you spot the contradiction in the government, whose legitimacy is founded on democratic input, handing out licenses that decide who democratic input is permitted to select?
The basis for accountability of an institution that is only legitimized by the popular mandate must also be democracy. The people can decide if their will is being carried out, and if it isn't they can pick someone else (preferably by recall if it's really a problem).
You provided the answer to your own proposition. Recalls are possible, and the different candidates who are eligible to run can try it out. If the metric is the people deciding if their will is being carried out, the 75 years of the people recalling and replacing officials in this exact way and the CPC currently having over a 92% approval rating shows clearly that their design has worked better than any ever seen in the modern day for a functional democracy.
Just like I can pick my doctor, who teaches my kid, who I get a massage from, where I get my food from, who builds my house or paints my walls, I'd much prefer to be able to pick my elected officials from a pool of candidates who are qualified to do the job that I am trusting them to do. Every role in society now has standards on how things operate. Most things have certifications. It isn't just some elite thing for life saving doctors and lawyers, the very proposition that this is reasonable is honestly a joke, you should really reflect on this. They need to actually understand how the government works, how economies work, how to talk to and understand civil engineers, agronomists, or any other specialist that is required to operate a functional modern place, or at least be trained in how to get those skills, knowledge, etc rapidly. The CPC clearly gets input from everyone who wants to give it, and these people need to take that and work to develop an actual functional plan to solve everyone's problems- including being able to know what is incorrect and will actually derail the growth of the community.
You might think they are "petty" local offices but their system seems to be working better than any other example we've literally ever had so I'll trust the Chinese people to keep their democracy going, and correct it along the course as they have been doing for longer than anyone here has been alive.
You have to pass tests to become a Party member in the same way you need to pass tests to become a doctor or an engineer or a teacher. What's the problem with that? Are people here against having qualified professionals in important jobs that affect people's lives?
Yes, yes, I am quite familiar with how a petty official needs to often perform legislative bypass surgeries or calculate the drag on a court ruling. Absolute sophistry.
Licensure provides a basis for accountability defined by the government, whose legitimacy is founded on democratic input. Can you spot the contradiction in the government, whose legitimacy is founded on democratic input, handing out licenses that decide who democratic input is permitted to select?
The basis for accountability of an institution that is only legitimized by the popular mandate must also be democracy. The people can decide if their will is being carried out, and if it isn't they can pick someone else (preferably by recall if it's really a problem).
It's great how you left out the teacher example, as if people needing to take tests and get certified in knowledge to practice is only for the elites. Massage therapists need certifications. Drivers need certifications. Why does the job of politician need to be accessible to literally any person at any time just because enough people want it to be so? This is a Communist nation which is designed around Communist, materialist principles, founded in Marxism but applied to the conditions of China. Do you even know what those things mean? Do you have a firm grasp of dialectical materialism? Have you studied and internalized these concepts, the history, the ideology? Would you be able to go out into the world and represent it to people through practicing it?
If so, congratulations, you have done something that is inherently complicated and requiring of a lot of dedication. Most people on this website who claim to follow these things could not pass a test about them; they do not practice it in real life and have never seen it in person. It isn't something that any random person is going to be able to do and understand just because enough people say "sure you can be in charge of making sure our village is administered correctly." You have to be able to send useful information up the chain of people who are experts on these things and more, and be able to understand what comes back down. You have to bid for budgets from these bodies to be able to enact what are often large scale operations, an example of which is in OP's link. Do you think any person can manage these large projects with small teams and limited resources just because they are voted to do so and think "sure why not?" Or do you just assume that whatever is happening in these "petty" offices is catching stray cats?
You provided the answer to your own proposition. Recalls are possible, and the different candidates who are eligible to run can try it out. If the metric is the people deciding if their will is being carried out, the 75 years of the people recalling and replacing officials in this exact way and the CPC currently having over a 92% approval rating shows clearly that their design has worked better than any ever seen in the modern day for a functional democracy. Just like I can pick my doctor, who teaches my kid, who I get a massage from, where I get my food from, who builds my house or paints my walls, I'd much prefer to be able to pick my elected officials from a pool of candidates who are qualified to do the job that I am trusting them to do. Every role in society now has standards on how things operate. Most things have certifications. It isn't just some elite thing for life saving doctors and lawyers, the very proposition that this is reasonable is honestly a joke, you should really reflect on this. They need to actually understand how the government works, how economies work, how to talk to and understand civil engineers, agronomists, or any other specialist that is required to operate a functional modern place, or at least be trained in how to get those skills, knowledge, etc rapidly. The CPC clearly gets input from everyone who wants to give it, and these people need to take that and work to develop an actual functional plan to solve everyone's problems- including being able to know what is incorrect and will actually derail the growth of the community.
You might think they are "petty" local offices but their system seems to be working better than any other example we've literally ever had so I'll trust the Chinese people to keep their democracy going, and correct it along the course as they have been doing for longer than anyone here has been alive.