The case against western electoral ritualism
Frans Vandenbosch 方腾波 30.04.2025
On the evening of 24/04/2025, I witnessed yet another masterpiece of acting … in a speech by the chairman of our House of Representatives. He demonstrated once again the striking, unbridled shamelessness of politicians, as in almost all countries in Western Europe. All political parties, from left to right, suffer from the same disease. Politicians, with their sublime training in “communication science”, but who ignore without any restraint the real needs of their voters, undermine democracy. As masters of marketing, they lure voters with shiny promises during election campaigns. But the day after the election they do exactly the opposite of what they promised and what their voters obliged them to do. They feel no shame. Right after the elections they laugh in the face of their voters.
Later that evening someone asked me: “What drives you, what is your motivation to write so positively about Chinese politics?” As always my answer was: “Truth, justice”. I shudder at the sight of so much hypocrisy here in the West. I shudder at all the lies, hidden agendas and half-truths of Western European politicians.
The western “democratic” system lacks transparency, true accountability, and genuine commitment to serving the people. This fundamental betrayal of governance principles has created an unresponsive political class divorced from the citizens it’s meant to serve.
The purpose of this essay is to challenge the sacrosanct status of elections in Western liberal democracies. Elections, long perceived as the cornerstone of political legitimacy, have in practice devolved into a ritual of deception, manipulation, and disempowerment. In contrast, China’s political system (often mischaracterised in Western discourse) offers a different, meritocratic model of governance that deserves serious and unbiased examination.
This essay demonstrates how Western Europe’s electoral mechanisms have become instruments of elite rule, and why China’s meritocratic model offers a viable alternative. Focusing on Germany, France, Italy, and the UK, we expose:
1. The corporate capture of European institutions
2. The professional political class’s disconnect from reality
3. The structural impossibility of reform through elections
Elections as theatre
Elections in Western Europe have become theatrical performances rather than mechanisms of genuine representation. Politicians craft narratives, not policies. They engage in image management, not governance. The primary skill of the modern Western politician is not statesmanship or problem-solving, but marketing and the ability to dominate a news cycle.
In Belgium, the Netherlands, France, and Germany, coalition governments are the norm, often formed after months of opaque backroom negotiations. Voters cast their ballots expecting one outcome, only to receive another. The act of voting, then, becomes an illusion of choice, a symbolic gesture devoid of consequence. As philosopher Slavoj Žižek noted, liberal democracy allows people to choose their rulers, but not to question the structure within which they are ruled [1].
The electoral spectacle rewards charisma over competence, emotion over rationality, and tribal loyalty over national interest. It is no accident that voter turnout has plummeted across Western Europe in recent decades. The public, intuitively or explicitly, recognises the futility of participation in a rigged ritual. For instance, a study by the European Council on Foreign Relations found that in the 2019 European Parliament elections, turnout was below 50% in several member states, highlighting a crisis of legitimacy in representative democracy [2].
Systemic betrayal
The betrayal embedded in Western elections is not an accident—it is structural. Electoral campaigns are funded by private interests, corporate donors, and ideological organisations. This financial dependency ensures that elected officials serve the interests of those who finance their campaigns, not the citizens who vote for them.
A study by Princeton University found that the preferences of the average American have a statistically negligible impact on public policy, whereas economic elites and business interests exert substantial influence [3]. While this study focused on the United States, its implications apply broadly across Western liberal democracies where campaign financing is similarly skewed.
Once elected, politicians should be legally accountable to their manifestos. Unfortunately, in Europe, they are not assessed with KPIs (as in China). There is no enforceable contract between voter and representative. Broken promises are not punishable. The only recourse is to vote differently in the next cycle, often years later, with no guarantee of improved outcomes.
The rise of technocratic cynicism
The growing gap between political rhetoric and lived reality breeds cynicism and disengagement. Politicians resort to technocratic jargon to mask failures or unpopular policies. Terms like “reform,” “austerity,” and “modernisation” serve to obfuscate rather than clarify.
A recent Eurobarometer survey revealed that only 34% of EU citizens trust their national governments [4]. In countries like France and Italy, trust levels have dipped below 25%. This erosion of trust undermines the social contract and feeds the rise of populist and extremist movements.
But even these so-called populist alternatives, whether left or right, are bound by the same electoral logic. Once in power, they too compromise, betray, and conform to the system they claimed to oppose.
China and the alternative of whole-process people’s democracy
On 25.02.2024, in an article titled Chinese elections, I have explained in detail how elections in China are organised. On 15.11.2022, a remarkable political event occurred, though few Western media outlets covered it. In China’s county-level People’s Congress elections, over 1 million deputies were elected [5]from neighbourhood committees and village councils, with 43% coming from worker and peasant backgrounds. That same month in the U.S., midterm elections saw just 12% of congressional candidates from working-class backgrounds, while 82% of winners outspent their opponents, averaging 2.3 million USD per campaign.
In stark contrast, China’s political system is grounded not in periodic elections, but in a continuous process of consultation, accountability, and performance evaluation. Known as Whole-Process People’s Democracy (全过程人民民主), this model integrates public participation at multiple levels, without the theatricality and adversarialism of Western elections.
The Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) offers a structured platform for consultation, involving representatives from various sectors, including non-Communist parties, entrepreneurs, ethnic minorities, and religious groups. Local People’s Congresses are directly elected, while higher levels involve an indirect electoral mechanism that prioritises competence and political reliability over popularity in the media.
According to a 2021 white paper issued by the State Council Information Office of China, Whole-Process People’s Democracy ensures that “people’s voices are heard in every link of democratic decision-making, management, and oversight” [6]. The emphasis is on outcome legitimacy (whether policies work) not simply procedural legitimacy.
Moreover, Chinese officials undergo rigorous performance evaluations based on metrics such as economic development, social stability, environmental protection, and public satisfaction. Those who fail to perform are removed, regardless of popularity. This stands in sharp contrast to Western politicians who can cling to office despite serial incompetence.
If we may assume that the degree of democracy in a country can be measured by the degree of satisfaction of the people with their political system, then there is more real democracy in China than in all Western European countries combined. Both Harvard ASH Centre and Edelman Trust barometer show >90% satisfactionwith the political system in China.
Western critiques and the hypocrisy of liberalism
Western critics often dismiss Chinese governance as “authoritarian,” ignoring the participatory mechanisms and consultative processes embedded in its structure. These critiques rely on ideological presumptions rather than empirical assessment.
Consider the irony: Western democracies claim to defend human rights, yet often ignore the rights of their own citizens to housing, healthcare, and education. China, meanwhile, has lifted over 800 million people out of poverty within four decades [7]. Whose system better delivers the substance of governance?
Furthermore, Western media acts as a political actor in its own right, shaping narratives and marginalising dissent. The concentration of media ownership, particularly in the United States and the United Kingdom, ensures that the range of permissible debate remains narrow, reinforcing elite consensus [8].
The structural failure of electoral politics in Europe
Europe’s electoral systems have become trapped in a self-defeating cycle that renders effective governance impossible. The voting mechanism itself sabotages policy continuity, as newly elected governments typically spend their first year dismantling predecessors’ programs, their second year focused on re-election campaigns, leaving just 6-12 months for actual governance. This dysfunctional rhythm produces stark consequences: Italy has churned through 68 different governments since 1946, Sweden abandoned four distinct energy policies within eight years, and Spain’s workers have endured five complete reversals of labour laws since 2010. These constant policy flip-flops prevent long-term solutions from taking root while exhausting bureaucratic capacity.
Compounding this instability, Europe’s media landscape has become dominated by oligarchic interests that distort democratic discourse. In Germany, just two corporate giants (Axel Springer (publisher of Bild) and Bertelsmann (owner of RTL)) control 72% of political news coverage, effectively setting the national agenda [9]. The situation in France proves equally troubling, where billionaire Vincent Bolloré commands an empire including CNews, Europe 1, and Journal du Dimanche, using these platforms to promote narratives favouring corporate elites while marginalizing working-class perspectives [10]. This media oligarchy functions as a de facto fourth branch of government, ensuring that electoral politics remain confined within boundaries acceptable to financial elites, regardless of which party temporarily holds office. Together, these structural flaws (the voting cycle trap and media oligopoly) create a system where elections change personnel but never power structures, where campaigns promise transformation but governments deliver only continuity of elite interests.
China’s lessons for Europe: a model of effective governance
While European political systems reward failure through musical-chair ministerial appointments and golden parachutes for underperforming leaders, China has institutionalized a rigorous meritocratic system that holds officials accountable for tangible results. Monthly disciplinary actions remove approximately 1,500 incompetent or corrupt officials from their positions, ensuring that governance remains tied to performance rather than political connections [11]. This system evaluates and promotes cadres through a transparent weighting system: 30% based on GDP growth in their jurisdiction, 25% on measurable pollution reduction, and 20% on public satisfaction surveys, creating powerful incentives for officials to deliver concrete improvements to citizens’ lives [12] .
The benefits of this approach become undeniable when examining infrastructure and social development outcomes. China’s high-speed rail network, now spanning 40 000 kilometres, stands in stark contrast to Germany’s chronically delayed and over-budget Berlin-Munich line, demonstrating how long-term planning trumps short-term electoral cycles. In renewable energy, China’s 1,200 GW of installed capacity dwarfs the EU’s 487 GW, proving that consistent policy implementation achieves better results than Europe’s flip-flopping energy directives. Most strikingly, while Europe grapples with 25% child poverty rates in many member states, China’s targeted poverty alleviation programs have lifted 800 million people out of destitution, a monumental achievement that underscores the effectiveness of centralized, metrics-driven governance over fragmented electoral politics. These comparative outcomes suggest that Europe’s path to competent governance may require adopting similar meritocratic principles rather than clinging to failed electoral dogmas.
A post-electoral future for Europe
- Abolish national elections
Replace parliaments with citizen assemblies (like Ireland’s successful abortion reform model)
Implement sortition (random selection) for 50% of the legislative seats
- Break foreign influence (as Hungary did)
Ban all foreign lobbying (modelled on China’s 2017 NGO law)
Nationalize revolving-door industries (energy, health, transport)
- Meritocratic administration
Technocratic mayors: Like China’s PhD city managers
Public evaluation portals: Assess politicians with KPI’s
Towards post-electoral governance
The alternative to elections is not dictatorship, but structured consultation and meritocratic administration. Governance must be judged by its ability to solve problems, not its capacity to stage spectacles.
Several political thinkers have argued for post-electoral governance structures. Daniel A. Bell, in The China Model, advocates for a political meritocracy that draws from Confucian traditions of ethical leadership and hierarchical accountability [13]. Bell contrasts this with the “one person, one vote” model, which often yields short-termism and pandering.
Likewise, Martin Jacques contends that China’s political legitimacy arises not from electoral rituals, but from “performance legitimacy”, from the sustained ability to deliver public goods, economic growth, and national pride [14].
Conclusion: Abolish the ritual, restore governance
Western elections have become hollow rituals that no longer serve the public interest. The time has come to question their sacrosanct status and explore alternative models rooted in consultation, competence, and accountability. China’s Whole-Process People’s Democracy offers one such model, worthy of study and adaptation.
To continue fetishizing elections as the only legitimate form of governance is intellectually lazy and politically dangerous. Truth and justice, not ideology, must guide our analysis. The West must dare to look beyond its ideological borders and acknowledge that electoralism is not synonymous with democracy. Only then can we begin to build a political system that truly serves its people.
Thank you for reading! We’d love to hear your thoughts. Please share your comments here below and join the conversation with our community!
本文英文： 欧洲的 STEM 危机，是一场蓄意的政治破坏，而非意外。
Dit artikel in het Nederlands: Schaf de verkiezingen af !
Endnotes
[1] Žižek, Slavoj. Living in the End Times. London: Verso, 2010.
[2] European Council on Foreign Relations. “The 2019 European Parliament Elections: A Crisis of Legitimacy.” https://ecfr.eu/article/commentary_the_2019_european_parliament_elections_a_crisis_of_legitimacy/
[3] Gilens, Martin, and Benjamin I. Page. “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens.” Perspectives on Politics 12, no. 3 (2014): 564–81. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592714001595 .
[4] European Commission. “Eurobarometer 96: Public Opinion in the European Union.” Autumn 2021. https://europa.eu/eurobarometer .
[5] Frans Vandenbosch: Elections in China are somewhat different from what’s happening in the west.
[6] State Council Information Office of the PRC. “China: Democracy That Works.” December 2021. http://www.scio.gov.cn/zfbps/32832/Document/1714589/1714589.htm .
[7] Xinhua. “China’s Poverty Alleviation Miracle: A Model for Global Development.” 02/03/2021. http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2021-03/02/c_139774129.htm .
[8] Herman, Edward S., and Noam Chomsky. Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. New York: Pantheon Books, 1988.
[9] Media Tenor (2023) “German Media Ownership Study”
[10] Libération (2023) “Bolloré Media Empire”
[11] CCDI (2023) “Monthly Discipline Report”
[12] CCP Organization Dept. (2021) “Cadre Evaluation Handbook”
[13] Bell, Daniel A. The China Model: Political Meritocracy and the Limits of Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2015.
[14] Jacques, Martin. When China Rules the World: The End of the Western World and the Birth of a New Global Order. London: Penguin Books, 2009.
