Ain't No Half Steppin', continued

"Stop Your Messing Around" is a good choice. I like that. Love the lyric.

I can understand why "Keep Calm and Carry On" is coming back to fashion in the UK at moment. But I'm not inclined to use it as an equivalent translation for 不折腾. It is just far too British. It won't even work in the US or in Australia. The US equivalent, as I noticed when watching the Obama inauguration, seems to be: "Yes I Can." In Australia, we prefer to say, "Chill out. Have another cold one."

In the PRC, there seems to be a lack of consensus as to what kind of slogan serves China better in times of crisis. Zhongnanhai's preference(不动摇、不懈怠、不折腾) doesn't seem to have struck a chord with public opinion. While at the other extreme 政治改革、言论自由、保障民权 (political reform, freedom of speech, protection of civil rights) is considered far too ambitious at this point in time. My suggestion is: how about taking a lesson from the emperors of the early Han Dynasty and embrace the Yellow Emperor Daoism motto of 轻徭薄赋、与民休息 (adopting a non-interference policy so that people can have freedom to pursue a more enjoyable life).

Why everyone here is dancing to the dictator's tune? Have you got five jiao from the CCP?

与民休息 ? You've got to be kidding. 民 is for 折腾. What applies to government officials don't apply to the people. The Chinese people must earn the trust of the government first. The US government must earn the trust of the people. That's the difference.

民 is for 折腾. Hu Jintao can fulfill his promise of 不折腾 if and only if 民 is 折腾ed.
The same applies to 和谐 (harmony). Hu's vision of a harmonious society is built on the foundation of harmonising public opinion. In Australia, public opinion is something for the government to ignore. In the US, the Obama administration is trying hard to influence public opinion. In China, the Chinese government is public opinion. That's the difference.

Like what I said before, ignorance can be cured by the willingness to learn, but for stupidity.........I truly believe ones shouldn't take pride in their inability of not being able to think on their own heads, such as johnsmith..........

C.A.Yueng, you seem to be one of the more reasonalbe posters out here. But I think that you have missed the point here. Who and what defines public opinions? For public opinion can be easily manipulated, easily bought. And most people only care about their own short term gains. How many people in OZ are going to forgo their private cars for the inefficient, overcrowded public transport, just in order to reduce Australia's carbon footprints?

In a functioning democracy, such as Australia, public opinion takes many forms, some are more influential than others. There are many ways large corporations, major lobby groups and even governments at different levels can manipulate and guide public opinion. But ultimately it comes down to one person one vote. It is up to the political parties contesting for the governments to define who and what constitute public opinion. If they misjudge public sentiment or, more often, choose to ignore it, then they do it at their own peril.

There is nothing wrong with individuals caring only about their short term gains. The legal and political system of a functioning democracy is supposed to have been designed to protect the rights of individuals to pursue their own interests.

"How many people in OZ are going to forgo their private cars for the inefficient, overcrowded public transport, just in order to reduce Australia's carbon footprints?" I don't know about other people, but I have done so. Public transport is not over-crowded at all in most major cities here. The efficiency of public transport systems can only be improved if more commuters choose to use them on a regular basis. There is also a need to curb the urban sprawl.

If you guys out there want to say good things about my comments, could you please use words such as cool, awesome, funny, witty, provocative or confrontational instead. I won't object to 很牛 or 2009年最牛的. It's boring to be “reasonable”.

C.A. Yeung:
You must be dreaming, stating that actual public opinion really matters in formulating public policy.
Look at the most unpopular war in human history in Iraq and how it was formulated. In the so-called functioning democracy, spin doctors and lobbyists with deep pocket dominate.
You are such a idealist. You do not know what reality is. Sad, sad and really sad.

What the CCP said about democracy - especially US style democracy, human rights and one party rule - OR what not to say when you are in power:

http://www.cdjp.org/academy/ref/books/china/lsdxs/lsdxs00.htm

rgr101: Thanks for the name calling. That means I am absolutely right.

sing666, I'm not an idealist. I just don't easily subscribe to conspiracy theory. You, sing666, on the contrary, are more of an idealist (and possibly a propagandist) than I do. You believe that ordinary citizens are innocent and powerless, and they are the victims of some greedy and powerful corporations. I, on the other hand, hold a more realistic view of human nature. Most importantly, I believe that most people deserve the government that they have. If you think that GW Bush acts against public opinion to wage the most unpopular war in human history, then you know practically nothing about the dark side of American culture, which is described by the historian John Lukacs as military populism. The war in Iraq only turned unpopular when it was clear to most Americans that they were LOSING the war. The other manifestations of this culture is a common belief in American exceptionalism and in the myth about USA being the last frontier of civilisation. This is the kind of mirage cum vision that most people in countries like the UK and Australia also share. Hence our governments support the war in Iraq.
Your theory about "the powerful spin doctors and lobbyists with deep pocket" is complete BS. It shows that you've never been involved in political activism of any kind. Where I am, it is more than possible to do some powerful lobbying with a shoe string budget.

johnsmith987: Thanks for your recommendation. Now maybe I need to update the knowledges about you.

The CCP was versed in democracy theories since long long ago when they were still "lumpen-proletarians". But knowing something is easier than distorting such thing.

The five-jiao-party knows the truths as well as the CCP knows the modern democratic systems and theories.