Chinese Internal Politics

M

Minm

Junior Member
Registered Member
FairAndUnbiased said:
China is not a western government. Let's look at Russia - even Putin is smart enough to not stack his cabinet.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

PM of Russia
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Party Chair of United Russia: Dmitri Medvedev. Personal friend of Putin.
Chairman of State Duma:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Chairman of Federation Council:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Minister of Defense: S
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Minister of Foreign Affairs:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Minister of Internal Affairs:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

FSB Chief:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

FIS Chief:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Presidential chief of staff:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Secretary of Security Council:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Special Representative for Environment and Transport:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Of the top 12 standing members of the Russian Security Council who are not Putin, 6 are technocrats, 6 are Putin's personal friends.

Of the top 6 standing members of the PBSC who are not Xi, 2 are technocrats, 4 are Xi's personal friends.

Putin had the wisdom from working in FSB for decades to not surround himself with only yes-men.

Putin is said to have stacked his cabinet with too many personal friends which is responsible for the poor Russian performance in Ukraine. But he only has 1/2 of his cabinet being his friends, not 2/3.
Click to expand...
Did you watch the Russian security council meeting from before the war? These people don't have independent power, they're scared of Putin.

I think Xi has been grooming talent. I'm not happy with seeing Li Qiang rewarded despite the Shanghai lockdown mess, but other than this one mistake he has done very well in his career and it would be a shame to waste him. A team of people united in their vision for a better future might be more effective than factional infighting.

Has Xi's government been very effective in his first two terms? He probably would have wanted to move faster on some things, but lacked the political power to do so. For example, the one child policy could have been abolished faster. He's had to use the anti corruption campaign to threaten any opposition. With more power, China can make decisions faster.

There's also the issue of corruption. A whole generation of officials who got promoted under Hu are tainted by corruption. Xi has to serve for long enough so that none of the corrupt generation gain power. The only people Xi knows are clean are the people he's worked with before. They have risen up the ranks together with Xi and they worked well together in previous roles. If Li Qiang worked well together with Xi in Zhejiang, why would he now be an impotent yes man? Zhejiang turned out alright after all
 
I

Icmer

Junior Member
Registered Member
Overbom said:
So it seems Wall Street Journal was correct. Wonder where they got the news from...
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1584043250075123712
Click to expand...
WSJ reported that Xi was ultimately responsible for the delay in mass outbreak response resulting in the Shanghai lockdown. So it makes sense that such failures did not hold Li Qiang back from party advancement.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

In addition the removal of CYL alumni was unsurprising given Li Keqiang's public display of unfaithfulness to the dynamic clearing policy. Such sentiments are potentially widespread within the party (reflecting those of the populace in recent months), so potential dissent was minimized.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
H

henrik

Senior Member
Registered Member
FairAndUnbiased said:
He was given the MBA in an executive MBA program while he was working full time. Executive MBAs are almost impossible to fail and they go very slowly to make sure the students pass.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

His real degree: 浙江农业大学宁波分校农机系农机化专业学习 - Zhejiang Agricultural University, Ningbo campus, agricultural mechanics. Note that in the 1970's Zhejiang Agricultural University was still Zhejiang Agricultural College 浙江林学院, a 2 year program.

I made a post about the goals needed to be accomplished if this is to be worth it.
Click to expand...
HK Poly Univ ranks higher than many mainland Chinese universities. And who needs regional office or central office? The new members will get hands on experience.

There was no mass outbreak of covid in Shanghai at all. If that small number of cases were regarded as an outbreak, than the whole world should still be shutdown.
 
ZeEa5KPul

ZeEa5KPul

Colonel
Registered Member
FairAndUnbiased said:
I have to say that this degree of control over the PBSC by 1 person is unprecedented, literally without historical precedent.

5/7 are Xi Jinping or a personal friend of Xi Jinping: Xi himself, Ding, Cai, Li Q, Li X. Only Zhao and Wang are not a personal friend of Xi. Meanwhile Ding X, Cai Q, Li Q, Li X all have no real political base other than personally knowing Xi because they do not have critical experience like national office (Cai, LiQ, LiX) or regional office (Ding). Without Xi, they have no power.

Meanwhile, let's compare to Mao's Politburos. Mao always kept people with independent political power around him like Liu Shaoqi, Zhou Enlai, Deng Xiaoping, all of whom were powerful leaders in their own right. Mao did not stack the Politburo with his personal friends. This meant that when Mao and Zhou died, there were people waiting in the wings that could credibly hold national power like Hua Guofeng and Deng Xiaoping.

If say Xi got a heart attack, on the other hand, 5/7 of the PBSC is lost, because 4 of the people sitting there don't have personal political power. Cai/LiQ/LiX only had regional leadership, but no national leadership, how do they credibly formulate or even evaluate national policy? Ding never held executive power, how does he credibly know how to translate theory to the mechanisms of government policy? It will be up to Zhao and Wang to carry the country, and they're old too.

I have a bad feeling about this. I would have felt much better if Hu was up there.
Click to expand...
That's not how it works, China is no longer run as a collection of personal fiefdoms. There is a very clear mechanism for continuity of government: If the president has a heart attack, the vice-president becomes president.
 
I

Icmer

Junior Member
Registered Member
henrik said:
HK Poly Univ ranks higher than many mainland Chinese universities. And who needs regional office or central office? The new members will get hands on experience.

There was no mass outbreak of covid in Shanghai at all. If that small number of cases were regarded as an outbreak, than the whole world should still be shutdown.
Click to expand...
You misunderstand "mass outbreak response" because you do not know how outbreaks were previously handled in Shanghai. Shanghai authorities pointedly avoided mass responses to outbreaks (i.e. lockdowns) in favor of surgical quarantines guided by intelligent contact tracing, previously seen as a role model for China before Omicron's infectiousness was better understood.

By China's standards, Shanghai's outbreak was indeed massive and still unparalleled in case numbers in the mainland. You also clearly do not know anything about epidemiological definitions because no educated person would claim it wasn't an outbreak. Whether Shanghai's BA.2 wave is considered an outbreak by definition has nothing to do with whether the world should be shut down. A totally illogical argument.
 
M

Minm

Junior Member
Registered Member
The Shanghai lockdown was a massive failure, but don't we want people who experiment with new policies and try to find better ways of dealing with problems? If the smart contact tracing and smaller quarantines had succeeded in Shanghai, we'd be celebrating Li as a hero. You have to take risks, if you take no risk at all there'll be no success. People willing to be bold and take risks are exactly the ones China needs.

The more I think about it, the better Li looks. Purging someone for a single mistake is how Europe lost all its good politicians. Now it's being led by people who avoid bold, risky decisions at all cost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top