China and the United States are about to choose new leaders via very different methods. But is a candidate voted for by millions a more legitimate choice than one anointed by a select few, asks Martin Jacques.
He answers, "no." Because Chinese people express satisfaction with their government, we're not allowed to judge China based on objective measures of democracy and rule of law.
So subject people happy with their oppressive government based on factors that have nothing to do with freedom have a government with legitimacy and a free people unhappy with their government based on factors that have nothing to do with freedom have a government with less legitimacy.
Which makes the concept of legitimacy meaningless.
Ask a stupid question. Get a stupid answer. With stupid reasoning in between.
Ah, the Beeb.
UPDATE: It seems that many Chinese disagree with Mr. Jacques:
In a political cartoon circulated online, an American voter covers his ears as the candidates verbally attack each other, while a Chinese man struggles to hear anything from Beijing's party congress, taking place behind closed doors.
Yeah, no difference legitimacy-wise there, eh?
UPDATE: Thanks to Pseudo-Polymath for the link.
