> Less corruption

there's been, in 2025, 983 000 people receiving disciplinary sanctions[0]. then:

1. either there's no corruption, and people are getting sanctioned for no reason

2. there's corruption

> Less incompetency

one thing they seem to do correctly in China, is to select their leaders not based on pure political skills, but on actual thinking skills: many of them come from technical backgrounds, and have been trained to think rationally.

furthermore, in my experience, Asian people, and Chinese in particular, also have better working habits − stronger wills − than most Westerners.

I'd still be careful about assuming they're really _that_ more competent. intellectual theft, propaganda, rushed work, all could contribute to a temporary illusion of superiority.

> Less freedom for stuff like protesting

this is a watered-down description of the actual situation.

you can get jailed, beaten up, tortured, killed, etc. religious groups seem to be the main target of the most violent treatments[1]. there's really no reason to target peaceful people, via such extreme means.

[0]: https://www.brasildefato.com.br/2026/01/30/investigations-in...

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_China

It's not a linear relationship where you trade one for the other. You don't just get a more competent government by giving up freedoms.

I think parsing out what kind of freedom would help here. The US has a lot of “freedom of” but not a lot of “freedom from.”

Wait until you live through what Argentina or Brasil have then see how you feel about redress, petition and speech.

This is one of the most insane things I’ve ever read on this forum.

The assertion that being able to summarily execute people you accuse of corruption somehow reduces corruption is absurd. If that were true, places like Russia would have no corruption. Being a dictator just ensures that corruption flows your way as the leader.