- Wed
- Jun 19, 2013
- Updated: 2:44am
Trending topics
Jackie Chan: a buffoon with a point?
Is America "the most corrupt" country in the world?
This statement in the affirmative by action star Jackie Chan has started an online storm, sparking more than 250 readers' responses on the Post website and heated discussions elsewhere.
I am quite intrigued. In substance if not in style, what he said is very similar to a speech the main character made at the end of British comic star Sacha Baron Cohen's The Dictator: "Imagine if America was a dictatorship. You could let 1 per cent of the people have all the nation's wealth. You could help your rich friends get richer by cutting their taxes and bailing them out when they gamble and lose. You could ignore the needs of the poor for health care and education. Your media would appear free, but would secretly be controlled by one person and his family.
"You could wiretap phones. You could torture foreign prisoners. You could have rigged elections. You could lie about why you go to war. You could fill your prisons with one particular racial group and no one would complain. You could use the media to scare the people into supporting policies that are against their interests."
An exaggeration, but basically true! OK, Cohen has a special genius for playing various buffoons, while Chan is a buffoon. Maybe Cohen's dictatorial character didn't mean it. But what he said is readily acknowledged and recognised by many people.
Chan was wrong to say "the most corrupt", but if he had said "a most corrupt country", then that becomes eminently debatable.
Here is what Simon Johnson, an MIT professor and ex-IMF chief economist, wrote: "The fact that our American oligarchy operates not by bribery or blackmail, but by the soft power of access and ideology, makes it no less powerful. We may have the most advanced political system in the world, but we also have its most advanced oligarchy."
And, of course, no one denies China is terribly corrupt, not least its ruling elite. Different countries and systems are corrupt in different ways. To me, there is no question that the political systems of the world's two largest economies are corrupt. The real question is: which system is resilient enough to self-correct without collapsing?
After reading this article, people also read
9:42pm
Like so many things with Chimerica.
Corruption is more democratic in China, less so in the US.
Democracy vrs Corruption - they're inversely proportional. Corruption is ubiquitous & therefore ironically more democratic, piecemeal and demotically distributed in China - but more authoritarian, egregious and elitist in the US - two systems, same human nature expressed in different ways within the varying constraints of those cultures & systems.
Ordinary people can routinely bend the rules and participate in corruption in China, it's a given.
In the US, only the elite can subvert the laws, the silent majority have to toe the line and play by the rules.
So which system is least unfair?
To paraphrase Gore Vidal on the US:
There is only one party, the property party.
Funny how that works for both China and the USA too.
12:57pm
What I am trying to say is that you can argue HK is the most "corrupted" place in the world allowing this happening . Is our government not saying anything about this as not wanting to upset our developers? Should we argue this is a "corrupted government"? Legally they had not. But....
How about that if you want to twisted the definition of "corruption" vs. "corrupted government" argument?
12:07pm
But Jackie can comfortably critize US in mainland soil, can he dare to critize China in China soil (for things he dislike about China politics. Assumed he had protest in june 4 years ago, would he dare to speak up now about the incident in mainland soil?). You can argue US is most currupted place, but at least Jackie, Alex, and you, and me can speak up in US soil or any free countries about anything we want to speak about.
Do you think this is a good acid test for currupted government?
11:35am
11:54am
11:35am
11:48am
11:33am
Yes this is the root question.
And the answer is that Chinese system WILL survive because they do self-examine and self-correct . It takes time, but ultimately the Confucian values which the CCP has inherited influence political moves leading to corrections. Leaders of Western democratic parties lack these self-examination skills and have to wait until they are deposed before they reflect on "mistakes" . Even then, these are blamed on others within their party or because of having inherited a broken system from a previous administration.
11:36am
4:29pm
Pages
In Case You Missed It
Login
SCMP.com Account
or
Log in using a partner site
Log in using your Facebook account. What's this?
Don't have an SCMP.com account? Subscribe Now!















