Chinese “dictator for life” Xi Jinping is not a dictator, according to former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. In fact, Bloomberg claimed this week during an interview with Firing Line host Margaret Hoover, Xi is like basically any other duly elected leader in that he is beholden to his constituents.

Bloomberg, dubbed the “nanny” when he served as mayor, made the case for the Chinese strongman amid a larger discussion regarding efforts to curb climate change.

“The United States currently accounts for about 15% of global greenhouse emissions,” said Hoover. “China accounts for roughly 30% of greenhouse gas emissions. How do we, even if we get to net-zero, how do you get China, India, and other countries to be good partners?”

“China is doing a lot," Bloomberg responded, adding, "they are now moving plants away from the cities." Note that this has no effect on climate change.

"The Communist Party wants to stay in power in China, and they listen to the public,” Bloomberg added.

Yeah, tell that to the Uighurs.

.@MikeBloomberg tells @FiringLineShow that China's leader is addressing pollution to satisfy constituents & secure his political future.

"The Communist Party wants to stay in power in China and they listen to the public," he says. pic.twitter.com/B9SoAXJwrM — Firing Line with Margaret Hoover (@FiringLineShow) September 27, 2019

“When the public says, ‘I can’t breathe the air,’ Xi Jinping is not a dictator,” the billionaire former mayor alleged. “He has to satisfy his constituents or he is not going to survive.”

Sure, China's communists are always worried their regime will be overthrown — that's part of why public gatherings and protests are forbidden in mainland China. But what part of “dictator for life” does Bloomberg not understand? Is he really ignorant of Xi's iron grip on the levers of power or does he just not care? Maybe both?

Hoover, speaking for the segment of the world that is not blissfully and/or willfully ignorant, interjected, “He’s not a dictator?”

“No,” said Bloomberg. “He has a constituency to answer to.”

“He doesn’t have a vote,” Hoover countered, correctly. “He does not have a democracy. He’s not held accountable by voters.”

“That doesn’t mean he can survive,” said Bloomberg.

“Is the check on him just a revolution?” asked Hoover, going for the natural conclusion to her guest’s own remarks.

“You’re not going to have a revolution,” Bloomberg said dismissively. “No government survives without the will of the majority of its people. OK? He has to deliver services.”

No government survives public disapproval? Isn't that an endorsement of every long-lived dictatorship, including those of Francisco Franco, Burma's military junta, and military regimes in such places as Portugal and Argentina? Did their ability to hold power for decades imply majority popular support?

Hoover, thank goodness, was having none of this.

“I mean,” she said, “the idea that the Chinese government is responsive to a sort of democratic expression of fresh air — ”

“Oh, come on,” Bloomberg interrupted, “of course they are.”

“I’m looking at the people in Hong Kong,” said Hoover, “who are protesting and wondering whether the Chinese government cares what they have to say.”

“That’s — that’s ridiculous," Bloomberg retorted, adding, "There’s always in government, even governments that aren’t what we would call a democracy, there’s lot of stakeholders who have vested interests, and they have an impact.”

Well, someone should tell this to the people of Hong Kong. Looks like they got China all wrong — Mayor Mike says so!