Is China too big for a democracy? After speaking to some Chinese, their view is that the country is too populous, diverse and it would reduce economic progress and institutions to a crawl

I actually agree with Chinese people for this one. The problem with having a big populous diverse country while being a democracy is that you cannot possibly represent everyone with only two or three parties. In the USA this is particularly the case. Two parties representing 320+ million people. How is that possible? No wonder they bicker and argue all the time – and as a result nothing really gets done.

The US government is currently under a shut-down due to the inability of the politicians to compromise. That’s what happens when you have a few parties that tries to represent a large mass of people.

India’s population is on par with China’s now and they are also a democracy – but I would say China’s leadership has been more efficient than India’s as well.

One party leadership is undoubtedly more efficient: you don’t have to deal with lobbyists or corporations trying to influence your party, and you don’t have to deal with trying to compromise with the other party, and you don’t have to worry about being voted out by your constituents if they don’t like your plans (in a country of 1.3 billion it would be pretty much impossible to get a plan going that satisfies everyone), meaning the party can put forth their plan with little to no opposition. That’s why China can do things relatively quickly while the US might take years and years to do the same thing.

Now granted I’m not a big fan of the CCP or anything, I really hate how they have to censor things “for the sake of the country” when really its just limiting people’s freedoms, but I can’t disagree with how efficient the CCP is at getting stuff done.


Opinions on JFK shooting: Do you think it was a lone shooting?

Yes. After watching probably tens of documentaries and conspiracy videos and reading tons of conspiracy books as well, I’ve come to the Occam’s Razer conclusion that the simplest explanation is probably the most likely explanation. And why wouldn’t it be? President Garfield and President McKinley were assassinated by lone nuts. Why is it so hard to believe that JFK was killed by a single man? Yes President Lincoln was assassinated as the result of a conspiracy but in that case there was overwhelming evidence to believe so.

In JFK’s case, there are simply too many confounding theories with no theory that is unanimously agreed on. The CIA did it. The FBI did it. The Mafia did it. The Cubans or Soviets did it. LBJ did it. The Dallas Police department/Secret Service/Bethesda hospital were in on it. It was some clone / mind controlled version of Oswald. Some guys on the grassy knoll. Some nefarious combination of those mentioned did it. I’ve even heard the theory that the limo driver did it. All sorts of crazy stuff. All these conspiracy books got something to sell to you to make their money.

And then there’s the other thing. So called a bunch of assassination related witnesses died in short following years after the JFK assassination John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories – Wikipedia but the problem with this assertion is that literally hundreds of people with even the slightest connection to the assassination was included, and especially back then, people die from random stuff all the time. A lot of the modern safety mechanisms today like seatbelts, airbags, appliance saftey, vaccines for certain diseases etc that we have today back in the 60s wasn’t that common.

The so called 3 shots in 8 seconds thing from that distance with a tree in the way with a Lee-enfield has been re-enacted many times by modern Marines and is on Youtube. Oswald wasn’t some super sniper or something. There’s also lots of computer CG re-enactments of the ballistics as well that show exactly how and why JFK’s head can move backwards from a shot from the back (contrary to popular physics belief that the head can only move backward from a front shot)

The Warren commission did a terrible job of convincing people of this. There were many holes and inconsistencies (the magic bullet theory especially) with the report, and it failed to gain the public’s trust. That’s the real problem. Oswald was indeed the lone shooter, but because of the inconsistent way the Report was put together, many people had suspicions. This would have happened if you took some big event like 9/11 or the moon landing (I don’t believe in those conspiracies either FYI) but chances are if you had a group of government officials write a confusing inconsistent explanation of how 9/11 was done and the moon landing you would definitely get a lot of doubters. (And we do btw, the 9/11 conspiracies are especially popular).

In the end, I think it’s just hard to believe for a lot of people. It’s hard for them to believe that such a powerful man like JFK could be killed like that in broad daylight. There must be some military-industrial-complex machinations going on right? But unfortunately powerful men do die to nutcases. Heck, it happened to RFK and MLK Jr just 5 years later. Lone nutcases. John Lennon. Lone nutcase. Reagan had the good fortune of surviving his encounter else we would have to deal with those John Hinckley conspiracy theories as well. Heck even FDR, Teddy Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Gerald Ford, and Andrew Jackson all had assassination attempts and survived. All lone nutcases there too.

The Secret Service was incompetent that day. Government officials should not have distributed Kennedy’s motorcade path beforehand like that. Kennedy, who was a giant risk taker, chose not to use the bubble top on his convertible that day, and also ignored warnings not to go to Dallas from Adlai Stevenson. What happened after the assassination was really confusing. Contradictory eyewitness accounts. Inconsistencies from Parkland/Bethesda hospital doctors. A really inconsistent and hole-filled report by the Warren Commission. ‘Doctored’ Zapruder film footage.

And yet I have to believe that its not that this is all because of some massive cover up, but rather just because a bunch of people were just incompetent in handling the aftermath of the assassination. Oswald was the lone assassin. That’s the most believable theory because its one that has the most believers despite all these hundreds of conspiracy theories. The government just handled the assassination and aftermath in a really terrible and inconsistent way that ended up confusing the public, and honestly what do you really expect from the US Government? How did they handle the Vietnam War? The Iraq War? The 9/11 Commission? Is it so hard to believe that the US government is just bad at explaining stuff to the public? Of course not! The US government has always been terrible at it! That’s unfortunately the main impetus for all these conspiracy theories to exist, is simply the fact that on 11/22/1963 the US government f*cked up at protecting its leader, and then failed to explain it properly to its residents, that’s all. Don’t let that distract you from the fact that Oswald was the lone gunman.


Why do so many people love China’s government?

I think you gotta see it from Chinese point of view not from Westerner’s point of view.

For Chinese people, their lives improved dramatically from the Cultural Revolution days to now. My parents couldn’t go to university, couldn’t own a TV, had to carry red books with them all the time. That was the time that they grew up in.

Now, China is modernizing, just a few years ago they didn’t even have 3G networks now they have full LTE networks everywhere, bullet trains, skyscrapers everywhere, smartphones everywhere etc so the economy improved a lot for the middle class.

Now as Westerners think, there are problems with the Chinese government, mainly lack of freedom + censorship.

Here’s the thing: Chinese people don’t value freedom as much as Westerners do. They value stability more.
-We think not being able to access Facebook, Google, Youtube, Wikipedia etc is hard to live with. Chinese people don’t really miss it – they have their own domestic competitors WeChat, Baidu, Youku, Zhihu etc and since most Chinese cannot speak English well, its unlikely many Chinese would use foreign websites even if they had access to it. The Chinese that do speak English well, are usually tech savvy enough to use a VPN, so it’s not a problem for them.
-We think censoring sex/violence in entertainment is too extreme. Chinese people are fine living without a rating system because they think it will corrupt the youth (not saying this is true, but that’s what they believe)
-How about having political opinions online censored? Well there’s an easy solution, just don’t talk about politics. As far as I’ve noticed, talking about politics and religion almost always leads to fights and arguments in Western countries anyways.
-We put a huge premium on privacy online, as Facebook has gotten into troubles about these days. Chinese people don’t care – they know their government spies on them, but they don’t care. As long as you aren’t doing anything bad, you don’t have a problem.

So there you have it, Chinese people like the economic progress and they are fine with censorship in the name of stability.