Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance:
Page# 178 - Soviet Union
“The
subsequent articles in this chapter spell out what each of these terms
meant in practice, including the process of nominating candidates, who
would come from “public organisations and societies of the working
people: Communist Party organisations, trade unions, cooperatives,
youth organisations and cultural societies” (Supreme Soviet 1936a,
article 141, 1936b, stat’ia 141).”
Page# 181 - Soviet Union
“The drive for electoral democracy did not long live up to its lofty
aims, with the most embarrassing retreat being from multi-candidate
contested elections to single-candidate elections. At the same time,
there was an even greater effort to ensure democratic accountability
through elections internal to the Party.”
page# 208 - DPRK
“there are also distinct emphases in light of the DPRK’s
concrete conditions. In terms of electoral democracy: while there is
only one decision-making body, the Supreme People’s Assembly (along
with regional people’s assemblies), there is also the Democratic Front
for the Reunification of the Fatherland. This is not a governing body per
se, but it plays a crucial role in the electoral process. Made up of all
political parties, mass organisations, and religious groups, it proposes
multiple candidates, debates their suitability, and approves one
candidate for elections.”
Page# 379 - China
“Election to the position of Party branch secretary takes place at a
plenary or general members meeting, although the election also needs
to be approved by the regional Party committee”
Regarding the USSR, they pivoted to a system of approval voting. Candidates were selected through consensus, and voted on accordingly, rather than in contested elections.
Regarding the DPRK, candidates are selected through consensus, then approved or not.
Regarding the PRC, you are writing about an internal party election, rather than a broader societal election.
Please be serious and read the book, rather than quote farming. You’re already misrepresenting and misinterpreting the book.
I have speed-read through this one and can affirm it, and I gave you added context when you brought out specific passages. I’m sorry, but sometimes you need to do in-depth study of a subject if you are to understand the whole. Read the entire section on the PRC, for example, it doesn’t take long compared to the entire book.
Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance:
Page# 178 - Soviet Union “The subsequent articles in this chapter spell out what each of these terms meant in practice, including the process of nominating candidates, who would come from “public organisations and societies of the working people: Communist Party organisations, trade unions, cooperatives, youth organisations and cultural societies” (Supreme Soviet 1936a, article 141, 1936b, stat’ia 141).”
Page# 181 - Soviet Union “The drive for electoral democracy did not long live up to its lofty aims, with the most embarrassing retreat being from multi-candidate contested elections to single-candidate elections. At the same time, there was an even greater effort to ensure democratic accountability through elections internal to the Party.”
page# 208 - DPRK “there are also distinct emphases in light of the DPRK’s concrete conditions. In terms of electoral democracy: while there is only one decision-making body, the Supreme People’s Assembly (along with regional people’s assemblies), there is also the Democratic Front for the Reunification of the Fatherland. This is not a governing body per se, but it plays a crucial role in the electoral process. Made up of all political parties, mass organisations, and religious groups, it proposes multiple candidates, debates their suitability, and approves one candidate for elections.”
Page# 379 - China “Election to the position of Party branch secretary takes place at a plenary or general members meeting, although the election also needs to be approved by the regional Party committee”
Regarding the USSR, they pivoted to a system of approval voting. Candidates were selected through consensus, and voted on accordingly, rather than in contested elections.
Regarding the DPRK, candidates are selected through consensus, then approved or not.
Regarding the PRC, you are writing about an internal party election, rather than a broader societal election.
Please be serious and read the book, rather than quote farming. You’re already misrepresenting and misinterpreting the book.
it’s all right there in black and white.
show me a definitive source that shows soviet, Chinese, and DPRK elections did/do not need approval from their respective communist parties.
I did, you didn’t read it.
you said you read it, you should be able to find the proof you say is in there easy. if you read it you likely already know what chapter it’s in.
I have speed-read through this one and can affirm it, and I gave you added context when you brought out specific passages. I’m sorry, but sometimes you need to do in-depth study of a subject if you are to understand the whole. Read the entire section on the PRC, for example, it doesn’t take long compared to the entire book.
you speed read a 407 page book in 25 minutes? impressive
No, I read it before, that’s why I linked it for you and could tell you what each paragraph was referencing.
then it should be easy for you to post the context you’re referring to