Is democracy essentially the same as democracy?

To consider these things, we must first know history, and this history is all led by Confucianism, and there is a certain reason why Confucianism has been able to stand firm for two thousand years, first of all, it does have the advantage of maintaining its original religion with the changes of the times.

How to rule interests, otherwise China would not be so big now, this is all from 2,000 years ago, and now Western democracy is from the Greek era in the final analysis from the Council of Elders, and then reformed, which is conducive to the spread of Western culture. Especially humanism.

It symbolizes freedom, but China is not, China is people-oriented, people-oriented, people-oriented, and the people are noble. The Son of Heaven is guilty of the same crime as the common people. This was the initial sample of China, but over time, China's interest in the natural sciences was neglected.

Led to a change. The people-oriented way of thinking has become the divine right of kings. Demonstrate for the Son of Heaven, who has the greatest power.

Thinking about it again, Greek political thought was influenced by Egypt, for example, the philosophers of ancient Greece went to the Library of Alexandria in Egypt to study and communicate.

As for Confucius, he himself could not form a family of words, if he said that it was purely his own doctrine, it was impossible, no one could establish a thought alone, he was the absolute study of the saints, that is, the doctrine advocated by the sages of ancient times, and he did receive very good benefits in advocating it.

Therefore, there is a correlation between democracy and people-oriented in the initial state of development, but due to later historical reasons. There has been a shift.

I believe that the most important thing for the growth of a country today is to attach importance to the natural sciences.

Allow for academic research discussions. Now the West dominates the world with science and technology and makes a fortune by selling. He does not like peace and is despised by the people of the world.

The Chinese, on the other hand, are both peace-loving and creative. If these two kinds are perfectly combined, democracy itself is an exchange that regulates the interests of all parties.

The exploration of new things often yields unexpected gains, and the 1.3 billion Chinese people are unable to produce a few famous teachers.

They are lagging behind in education across the board. Moral decay. It's sad.

It's not the same. Democracy is a system.

People-oriented is an ideological concept.

The people-oriented principle is the basic principle for those in power to manage the country, while democracy is the way to elect and dismiss those in power.

The essence of <> democracy is that the broad masses of the people enjoy full freedom and power, the state power is freely elected by the people, and there must be an effective supervision mechanism for the operation of the people, and the above three are indispensable.

1. The broad masses of the people enjoy full freedom and rights, including basic human rights, mainly speech, association, publication, litigation, residence, etc.

2. ** must be elected by the people, from all levels to **. The election must be a free election without manipulation and without partisan influence.

3. The best mechanism is the separation of powers advocated by developed democracies and Mr. Sun Yat-sen, that is, the three powers of the legislative, executive and judicial powers are parallel, not subordinate to each other, and mutually restrictive.

Substantive democracy refers to the moral idea of democracy.

Substantive democracy is to embody the content of democracy and the value it wants to serve, the content of democracy is to reflect the will of the people, and the value of democracy lies in the realization of good governance of the country and the high quality of life of the people.

Examples of procedural justice and substantive justice contradicting each other:

When a person commits a heinous crime, people think that his death is not a pity, but because of the irrationality of the relevant law, the criminal will only receive a lighter punishment. Although the law was later changed in the country because of this event, the new law did not work for him because it had happened before.

You should know what I'm talking about. This is a typical tragedy caused by the irrationality of the law, but why can't "substantive justice" be implemented and this person sentenced to a heavy sentence? This is the same reason why a person is tried according to legal procedures even if he knows that he has committed a crime, and even that person has the right to hire a lawyer.

Who doesn't want someone to eliminate violence and peace, and who doesn't want someone to rob the rich and help the poor, but now we are vigorously building a society ruled by law, and governing the country according to law is placed in an increasingly important position, and a society under the rule of law cannot allow individuals to carry out executions instead of judicial organs, and substantive justice must be achieved through procedural justice, and when there is a conflict between the two, it must also be done according to procedural justice.

Humanism and Democracy.

It is only superficially similar, but they are fundamentally different in substance.

First of all, in terms of the origin of the monarch and the people, the vast majority of Chinese people-oriented thinkers believe that the relationship between the monarch and the people is predetermined, and only a very few believe that the king should be freely elected by the people or otherwise elected from among the people. The vast majority of democrats in the West, on the other hand, believe that rulers are born from the people and should be produced by the people through contracts.

Second, although traditional Chinese people-oriented thinkers generally believe that the monarch is set up for the people, it is to "appease the people" and "support the people". But this kind of soothing the people is the duty of heaven to the king. Therefore, the king is accountable first to the heavens, not to the people.

In contrast, Western democrats advocate "by the people, by the people, and for the people", believing that the ruler should be responsible to the people first.

Third, Chinese people-oriented thinkers emphasize that the people are the basic elements that make up the state, and this is mainly from the perspective of political rule. In other words, without the people, the ruler not only cannot rule, but also cannot guarantee his own food, clothing, shelter and personal safety. When Western democratic thinkers say that the people are the constituent elements of the state, their main focus is on the natural composition of the state, that is, the state must have the three basic elements of land, population and sovereignty to become a state.

Finally, the fundamental difference between nationalism and democracy is that the former presupposes that sovereignty rests with the monarch, while the latter assumes that sovereignty resides with the people. When the populists regard the people as the foundation of the state, they presuppose that the people are the objects of the king's rule, and without them there would be no king's rule. The people are the foundation of the whole body of government, and the king is the sovereign of this body of government.

Western democratic thinkers not only emphasize that the people are the foundation of national politics, but also emphasize that the sovereignty of political rule lies with the people, not with the king.

The idea of people-oriented and the idea of democracy are not only substantively different, but also fundamentally opposite. Traditional Chinese people-oriented thinkers often emphasize the "people-oriented" at the same time as the "monarch". Therefore, in terms of its ideological essence, the traditional Chinese people-oriented is also a monarchist.

The class nature of the difference between the two is not the same.

The end result is not the same.