We're way off on some of these concepts. As I mentioned earlier, Eastern politics and Western politics are not the same thing in terms of the understanding and application of political parties and constitutions.
If we summarize history, we will find such a pattern:
The top-level political structure of China in all periods is a triangular structure. There is a spiritual leader at the top, and some substantive officials below.
The spiritual leader is the symbol of spiritual cohesion of the whole group, and he needs to be recognized by the whole group. It has nothing to do with the way he gets the seat. If he fails to gain the recognition of the majority, he will be overthrown by the others. Therefore, how to gain majority recognition is the most important thing for him. He did not deal with any practical matters directly, he was only responsible for regulating the balance between these practical officials below him.
Substantive officials are the officials who control and execute all specific affairs of the state. They are the ones who are actually in power. But behind them are different political groups. These different political groups have always been in a state of mutual supervision and constraint. In Chinese history, this is called “party struggle”.
When the spiritual leaders are able to balance the different political groups well, China will enter a period of prosperity.
When the spiritual leaders are unable to balance the different political groups, China will begin to decline. When a political group grows too strong, The leader of this political group will become the new “spiritual leader” of the country. The political group will re-divide into different political groups, thus forming a new triangular structure.When the spiritual leader completely loses control over the various political groups, causing them to enter into a disorderly struggle, China will experience a foreign invasion or civil uprising.
The mechanism of supervision and control between these political groups is essentially a “democratic” mechanism. This structure is exactly the same as the structure of the Western societies of the past and the modern Western societies. There are just a few differences in how they are called. In the modern Western socio-political structure, the “spiritual leader”, who acts as a political balancing act, usually does things behind the scenes. Of course, there are also some “spiritual leaders” who are on the stage.
In the modern Western socio-political structure:
If there is no “spiritual leader” and the political groups are evenly matched, the country is in chaos. There are many examples of such countries in the world today. When the various factions in a country do not agree, there is a constant struggle within the country. The extent and manner of the internal struggle depends on the specifics of the country, such as its economic strength and cultural education. When one political group grows strong enough to suppress the others, it becomes the new “spiritual leader”. The country then begins to enter a period of stabilization.
If this “triangular structure” of a country is solid, the country will develop well.
For the enemies of the country, destroying the “triangular structure” of the other side is one of the best means. For example: to support a certain force through money and weapons; to influence a certain force through the dissemination of tendentious public opinion. ................ These phenomena are very common in international diplomacy.
The struggle between CCP and KMT during the ROC period (before the PRC) fits this pattern perfectly. When Mr. Sun was still alive, these two political forces did not fight. Mr. Sun was the “spiritual leader” at that time. When Mr. Sun died, the balance was upset and the struggle began.
After CCP defeated KMT and PRC replaced ROC, Mr. Mao became the new “spiritual leader” and the struggle between the various factions within CCP began. When Mr. Mao was still able to balance these struggles, they did not affect the lives of ordinary people, they were confined to a certain area, and the country was not greatly affected by these struggles. When Mr. Mao was unable (for medical reasons) to balance these struggles, they were expanded, culminating in the Cultural Revolution and the “Gang of Four” movement. In the end, the political group represented by Marshal Ye Jianying was victorious, Deng Xiaoping became the new “spiritual leader” and the country began to develop smoothly. However, in the later years of Deng Xiaoping, for the same reason, this kind of struggle arose again in China, resulting in the June Fourth Movement. These phenomena have been analyzed and summarized by modern Chinese politicians, who have made adjustments to the system in an attempt to end this vicious circle. Of course, these political reforms are exploratory and we have to take some risks.
All in all, I think that Western-style democracy and Eastern-style democracy are, in essence, completely the same, they are just differently formulated.