SWEET! So after the riots, I haven’t heard much about purges of random protesters, or the return of old officials (yet). So before that comes down the road, it’s not a bad idea to celebrate with an election! Bloomberg doesn’t give the newly elected Village Chief/”Village Committee Head”‘s name, but China Times tells us his name is 林祖鑾 (Lin, Zu Luan), who won with 3400 votes. Out of a total population of 8363, they received 6899 ballots, which equates to 82.49% voting rate. You can’t even get that in America, where the Amurrk’ns claim they created democracy!
What’s interesting is according to China Times:
Voters can mail in or phone in, with one person able to vote on behalf of 3 other people, so it was common to see 1 person with 4 white ballots, sitting down to slowly write down names.
回复@孟彦弘: 我可从没反对一人一票，我反对的是迷信一人一票。一人一票只是民主最肤浅的一层。光有这个，而没有更深层次的权力分立与制约机制，不可能防止专制。 //@孟彦弘:请教@秋风论道，深得老兄赞赏的这次乌坎选举，难道不是一人一票吗？不一人一票，老兄认为该如何设计呢？
Responding @MengYanHong: I’ve never been opposed to one-person-one-vote, what I’m opposed to is the worship of one-person-one-vote. It’s just the most shallow layer of democracy. If that’s all you have, and you don’t have any of the deeper layers that separate and restrict the powers [of government institutions] then there’s no way to prevent autocracy.
//@MengYanHong:Politely Asks @AutumnWindDebatesTheWay，I’m glad you can appreciate the elections in Wukan. Isn’t this one person one vote? If it’s not one person, one vote, how would you go about designing this system of yours?
Well, according to China Times, it’s more like, “One person, one vote, by proxy, of which one person has four votes.” Which sounds like a very interesting way of carry out democracy. What would Chairman Mao have to say about this?
I’m not gonna’ bother translating that…
In any case, Batman would be proud!