Chinese Internal Politics

To bring this back on topic, I'd like CYL simps (I kid, I kid) to answer a quick question. The CYL crowd brought China wonderful things like environmental destruction (remember Airpocalypse?), rampant corruption, melamine milk, 農 kids shitting in the streets, and gutter oil cuisine. Their entire economic program was blowing up a housing bubble and packing peasants into shoe factories - that "worked" while it did but clearly that has no future anymore. Xi spent the last ten years cleaning up their mess and he's still not done.

Here's the question: After all that, why should they have a seat at the table?

ZeEa5KPul said:

To bring this back on topic, I'd like CYL simps (I kid, I kid) to answer a quick question. The CYL crowd brought China wonderful things like environmental destruction (remember Airpocalypse?), rampant corruption, melamine milk, 農 kids shitting in the streets, and gutter oil cuisine. Their entire economic program was blowing up a housing bubble and packing peasants into shoe factories - that "worked" while it did but clearly that has no future anymore. Xi spent the last ten years cleaning up their mess and he's still not done.

Here's the question: After all that, why should they have a seat at the table?

Click to expand...

I think like you too. Hu Jintao is overrated. He generated incredible economic growth and was somewhat good at marketing China. He also laid the foundations of the current high-tech defense industry China has. But on the other hand his team brought:

1- Environmental destruction. In 2012 China was one of the most polluted countries in the world.

2- Rampant income inequality. In 2012 China was a lot more unequal than the USA, which is not the case anymore. Xi Jinping generated less growth, but he definitely increased the real income of an average Chinese more than Hu Jintao.

3- Slow pace of institutional reforms. Many regulatory mechanisms were quite impotent in 2012. Which were leading to things like widespread production of counterfeit products, food safety scandals, sexpats becoming teachers in China without needing any qualifications, nothing getting done without stashing some money into document folders, etc...

4- An overly brute SCS policy. Western media conveniently ignores that Hu actually captured islands in SCS. Xi Jinping is just an inheritor of the problems.

BoraTas said:

I think like you too. Hu Jintao is overrated. He generated incredible economic growth and was somewhat good at marketing China. He also laid the foundations of the current high-tech defense industry China has. But on the other hand his team brought:

1- Environmental destruction. In 2012 China was one of the most polluted countries in the world.

2- Rampant income inequality. In 2012 China was a lot more unequal than the USA, which is not the case anymore. Xi Jinping generated less growth, but he definitely increased the real income of an average Chinese more than Hu Jintao.

3- Slow pace of institutional reforms. Many regulatory mechanisms were quite impotent in 2012. Which were leading to things like widespread production of counterfeit products, food safety scandals, sexpats becoming teachers in China without needing any qualifications, nothing getting done without stashing some money into document folders, etc...

4- An overly brute SCS policy. Western media conveniently ignores that Hu actually captured islands in SCS. Xi Jinping is just an inheritor of the problems.

Click to expand...

Every generation of leaders have their own tasks, and learned materialist dialectics all know that everything has two sides, can not avoid, do not be harsh on them!

xlitter said:

Every generation of leaders have their own tasks, and learned materialist dialectics all know that everything has two sides, can not avoid, do not be harsh on them!

Click to expand...

That's absolutely correct, but there comes a point when their time is done. Now is not the time for Hu's vision, but Xi's.

I am going to post a number of analysis with differing perspectives on the recently conducted/concluded CPC 20th Party Congress where Gen.Sec Xi Jinping was granted/obtained another 5 year term which makes him the 1st Chinese leader in the current modern CPC structure to break the 10 year term.

This discussion and American analysis is from the Quincy Institute think tank, which advertised itself as a more pragmatic and realist alternative to the caravan of think tanks populated in D.C. who just simply regurgitates China as the ultimate bogeyman.

It's also worth hearing perspectives and insights from these folks to see if their understanding and perceptions align with some or most of the members thinking and take on this forum. Feel free to judge and ascertain the panelists perspectives on China since their discussions revolved around these key issues: the CPC, Hu Jintao scene, Xi Jinping 3rd term, Taiwan issue, Russia-China relationship going forward, Sino-U.S. relationship and the origin and culprit of the breaking down of relationships between the current hegemon (U.S.) vs the incoming hyperpower that's China.

The original idea Deng had to have some sort of balance of power was to institute the age limit and a ten year term. He hand picked Jiang to be the successor and Hu was also picked by Deng to succeed Jiang. While in theory this produced some check and balance, in practice Jiang was able to pack the party with his people to such an extend that Hu had limited power. Jiang's roots were so deep that it took Xi ten years to remove a lot of his influence. To some extend, some of Jiang's people are still in charge of various places today. I think Xi decided to break this model do what he can to continue his own power. He would rule until he is physically unable, which may come in his fourth term. After that, there will not be two or more groups vying for power, they will all be his people. The age limit is still more or less respected even though some exceptions are made.

The strength of this model is that every successor would not have to spend a decade uprooting the influence of the previous ruler. A young guy in power with all the elders being from Xi will ensure more stability.

The downside is also obvious. There is no way to course correct if the group is unable to see or act when faced with a hurdle that requires sacrificing their own interests for the good of the country.

Let's hope that the CPC have enough internal voices that when the ship sees the iceberg, they can make the necessary corrections to avoid it. Thus far, from the way they pricked the real estate bubble and handling of Covid, it does not seem this is a problem. We will have to wait to see if this is an issue in the future.

Xi has been cleaning Hu's mess for a decade and he is still not finished

That should tell you a lot about Xi's "two" terms. For alI I care he can rule all the way until 2032. 10 years as a firefighter, and 10 years as a "normal" Party Chairman should be ok

reservior dogs said:

The original idea Deng had to have some sort of balance of power was to institute the age limit and a ten year term. He hand picked Jiang to be the successor and Hu was also picked by Deng to succeed Jiang.

Click to expand...

Seems Deng was interested in limiting everyone's power except his own.

reservior dogs said:

After that, there will not be two or more groups vying for power, they will all be his people.

Click to expand...

This right here. Whoever comes after Xi will just be continuing the Xi program. Lib clowns like to imagine that the "Party Elders" are really in charge of China - well, those elders will be Xi and his men.

Isn't this far exaggerating the problems with Hu Jintao government?

Firstly about pollution, 1-2 years of change wouldn't have meant much. Hu's China was a responsible power in climate that juggled the needs of a well developed industrial sector with the needs of the environment. Under no time did China's per capita pollution rise above the German one, a nation with roughly comparable industrial development.

Under Xi it is not much different.

The Washington tagline based on half truth that China is the "biggest polluter", well, China is the largest developed nation and the largest nation overall. Everything must be examined at a per capita level, if you do arbitrary groupings, I can also say "the West is the biggest polluter in the world", or "western democracies are the biggest polluters in the world". It is expected and normal for China to have the largest consumption as long as the per capita level isn't untenable then

So pollution is just a big nothing burger for both Xi and Hu governments, the only actors trying to make it a big deal are malicious ones.

Xi did further strengthen anti corruption measures but its not like the Hu government didn't have strong rule of law and institutions either. There was a decent level of efficiency, and not much money fell into corruption.

The greatest of the Hu era corrupt official was probably Bo Xilai who gathered 25 million+ RMB through illegal activities. That might sound like a lot but on an institutional level, it's peanuts, skimmed off the top in an unnoticeable way, rather than crippling corruption that destroys whole projects.

Without the effective institutions of Hu, it wouldn't be possible to cast a wide net like Xi did when he reinforced existing institutions either.

So I think the role of Hu shouldn't be discredited, but Xi defintely achieved more than Hu which was not doing much besides keeping the status quo.

ZeEa5KPul said:

Seems Deng was interested in limiting everyone's power except his own.

This right here. Whoever comes after Xi will just be continuing the Xi program. Lib clowns like to imagine that the "Party Elders" are really in charge of China - well, those elders will be Xi and his men.

Click to expand...

Yes, Deng was much more interested in a continuation of his rule than having a system of checks and balances. You can think of his action as a way to ensure that his rule continues. In that way, every leader of China has and will act the same way.