Chinese General news resource thread

[Doombreed]

Did you write "gun control"? man I feel sorry for you. Where is Blackstone and other American posters.

LOL. Shots fired!

 

[solarz]

Propensity to corrupt and be corrupted is a outflow of human nature and behaviour. It is not a function of political system be it democratic or one party. When you have rule of law, transparency, accountability, and due process to enforce then corruptive practices will not prevail. So the question is with Xi's governing style what more do we want to see if corruption is truly to be addressed?

First, I would like to point out that anti-corruption should never be a goal in and of itself. The objective is to promote social harmony, and anti-corruption measures are just one of the many measures needed to achieve that objective.

Second, rule of law does not prevent corruption, not when corruptive practices have been written into the law. Transparency and accountability are mere buzz words used by politicians to win elections. How do you make transparent a complex bureaucracy that employs tens of thousands of people? How to you hold accountable people who have vastly more influence and power than you?

 

[Doombreed]

Is corruption only a recent phenomenon in any country? Is there any country with out a history of tribute and bribes? If not, what is the point of your statement?

Of cause, no one is saying that anti-corruption is bad for China and indeed, this is a hearts and mind coup for the CCP. But it's way too early to say that this is the inflection point for the CCP and they will now become the blue sky white cloud corruption free party. Indeed, that is against thousands of years of Chinese governance tradition.

The problem is people start arguing a point and then forget what the original argument was. Then takes things out of context. Here's my orginial qoute. I was answering to the suggestion that the CCP has now changed its ways and is working on being a party of honesty and virtue. My statement was meant to say that corruption has always been around in Chinese officialdom and I don't think the CCP is going to be the dynasty that ends it.

That's the point of that statement.

 

[Doombreed]

So you do base your standards on the characteristics of other nations.

Why do you believe that we should compare China to Denmark and New Zealand instead of US and Japan?

Because they're the best. I bet when you went to primary school, your mother told you to find out who the best student in the class was and do what he does. Bet she didn't say "oh sure Johnny got 67% just like you, but we're in the same social-democraphic. So you did well son. Don't compare yourself with Andy, his parents are professors."

My mother didn't anyway. And I think you're selling yourself and the Chinese people short, to say so otherwise.

I have higher hopes for the Chinese Nation.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Yeah that has been always the point. This has never been about stopping corruption. Corruption is the excuse not the reason. China is a failure therefore they have the right to impose themselves to tell others what is right. It has always been looking for an excuse to impose their values onto China. That's about control over others. And those people they've been successful at imposing their values happen to be the most disenfranchise in that society. And that's by design because those are the least threat to their power.

 

[Brumby]

First, I would like to point out that anti-corruption should never be a goal in and of itself. The objective is to promote social harmony, and anti-corruption measures are just one of the many measures needed to achieve that objective.

I don't understand what social harmony actually means but a forward looking society should ensure justice for all, equal opportunity and protection under law. Corruption undermines all the basic tenets of these elements that are so important for social cohesion.

Second, rule of law does not prevent corruption, not when corruptive practices have been written into the law. Transparency and accountability are mere buzz words used by politicians to win elections. How do you make transparent a complex bureaucracy that employs tens of thousands of people? How to you hold accountable people who have vastly more influence and power than you?

The problem is not in the lack of law, but in enforcement with transparency and accountability in the whole process. They are not mere buzz words but proven principles that counteract corruptive practices. The problem with PRC in recent history is the lack of willingness to enforce until Xi came along and went after the much bigger fish. Enforcement includes transparency in the prosecution and due process observed and that the people found guilty are held accountable according to the standard established by law regardless of influence or power. Lack of transparency in prosecution will invite allegations of witch hunt or dual agenda.

 

[AssassinsMace]

How apropos for this discussion.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

October 22, 2014 4:59 pm

The myopic western view of China’s economic rise

By Martin Jacques


The reforms that count tend to conform to the western model, writes Martin Jacques


In the west there is an underlying assumption that the Achilles heel of China is its political system. Since the country lacks western-style democracy, its system of governance is unsustainable. Ultimately, China will be obliged to adopt our kind of political system.

Yet China’s governance system has been remarkably successful for more than three decades. It has presided over the greatest economic transformation in modern history.

The state is highly competent, able to think strategically, while at the same time pragmatic and experimental. It has presided over rapidly rising living standards and enjoys a great deal of popular support. The idea that sooner or later – the western assumption has generally been sooner – public support will evaporate is farfetched. On the contrary, with economic growth still rapid and living standards rising similarly, it seems more likely that the regime will enjoy growing rather than declining support.

We should not, however, regard support for the regime as simply a function of economic growth. It has become almost axiomatic in the west to believe that democracy is the sole source of a regime’s legitimacy. This is mistaken. The legitimacy of the Chinese state lies deep in the country’s history. Along with the family, the state is one of the two most important institutions. For at least two millennia the state has been seen as the guardian and embodiment of Chinese civilisation. This is the key source of its legitimacy.

Some of the other characteristics of the state – the emphasis on meritocracy, state competence and an essentially familial concept of the relationship between the state and the people – are similarly deeply rooted.

When the state has functioned poorly, then so has China, the classic example being during the century of humiliation from the first opium war to 1949. The Communist party’s achievement in recent decades has, not least, been its reinvention of the state and the restoration, in a modern context, of its main historical characteristics – its pivotal status, competence, meritocracy, legitimacy and efficacy – following their disastrous decay over the previous century.

There is a tendency to see Chinese government as unchanging. This is because in the west the only reforms that we really count are those that appear to move the country towards the western model. In fact, government has been through huge and constant reform since 1978, far greater than anything that has taken place in the US or the UK. It is inconceivable that the Chinese state could have masterminded such a huge economic transformation if it too had not been the subject of profound reform. This process will continue, probably even more dramatically.

Rather than dismiss the Chinese governing system as fragile and tenuous, we need to understand what has been, by the standard of the past three decades, an extraordinarily successful institution, one that the world will increasingly come to recognise it must learn from.

Hitherto it has been assumed that China, rather than western democracies, will face chronic problems of governance. We have become deeply ahistorical about western democracy, viewing it as some kind of eternal and ideal solution to the problem of governance. Yet it is clear that American democracy has become increasingly dysfunctional, short-term, polarised and subject to capture by vested interests, in particular the 1 per cent.

There are strong historical reasons for believing that western democracies may face a difficult and uncertain future. Their past success has been based on two underlying conditions: firstly, the fact that the west has for at least two centuries dominated the world, bringing huge economic advantages and bestowing on their political elites great status and prestige; and secondly, their populations have for a long time enjoyed rising living standards. Neither can be relied upon in the future.

The west is in decline, Europe rampantly so. Some estimates suggest that by 2030 China could account for a third of global output and be twice the size of the US economy. American power would then be a pale shadow of what it is today. This is bound to affect how the American people regard their political elite and political system. Furthermore, with strong evidence that living standards have been static for many people in the US and western Europe, the outlook is uncertain.

Rising powers tend to enjoy strengthening domestic support, while declining ones incur their citizens’ discontent. We should not discount the possibility that the problems of governance will become more acute in the west than China.



The writer is the author of ‘When China Rules The World: The End of the Western World and the Birth of a New Global Order’

There's this arrogant belief that everyone wants to be like the West. I like how Western women thumb their noses at every other culture on the treatment of women, yet why are they still complaining about sexism within their own culture? If they're still complaining about sexism then you haven't figured it out yourself. So why is expected that Western women are the model for all women of the world to follow? Let's ignore how China has half of the top 12 richest self-made women in the world including No.1 because it doesn't fit with their agenda that has nothing to do with women's rights. Xi has implemented an unprecedented anti-corruption drive but because they weren't directing it, it can't possibly be real.

 

[Blitzo]

Because they're the best. I bet when you went to primary school, your mother told you to find out who the best student in the class was and do what he does. Bet she didn't say "oh sure Johnny got 67% just like you, but we're in the same social-democraphic. So you did well son. Don't compare yourself with Andy, his parents are professors."

My mother didn't anyway. And I think you're selling yourself and the Chinese people short, to say so otherwise.

I have higher hopes for the Chinese Nation.

Who or what is a reasonable standard to compare to should be both ambitious (ignore any differences in determinants of outcome like demographic, history, etc) but also realistic (considering those same factors).

Use the former to make a wish list, use the latter to appreciate the existing hurdles faced to implementation.
I live in NZ and as much as I can appreciate the media transparency, environmental preservation, and overall social health, I also appreciate that NZ has had very unique advantages and not every country has those advantages. So while it is understandable to hope all can reach the highest standard, it is also unrealistic and unreasonable to demand it of every nation on earth.
And obviously, there are other factors like military, economy, geopolitics to consider when one wants to talk about how far this particular anti corruption campaign will go.

 

[Doombreed]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Graft-busters on the mainland are closing the net around a powerful family headed by Ling Jihua, for long the right-hand man of former president Hu Jintao.

The Emperor reigns alone!

 

[shen]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Emperor reigns alone!

oh please, Hu Jintao himself remove Ling from real power and demoted him to the powerless position at the Untied Front department. Hu was reportedly personally sadden and disappointed once the scandal involving his secretary Ling's son came to light. Now Xi is just been even tougher. But to try to portray this as a power struggle is ridiculous.