A Little Bit of Self-Analysis from the Commies

[Randy W]

from the People's Daily and this guy

 

Zhang Weiwei is Director of the Centre for China Development Model Research, Fudan University in Shanghai.

 

 

The five reasons why China works

The Communist Party of China has to a great extent followed this tradition and built an impressive system of selecting its leaders based on merit and performance. For instance, its top decision-makers (6 out of 7 Politburo's Standing Committee members) all worked at least twice as much as party secretaries or governors at the provincial level, which means they have on average administered a population of about 100 million before being promoted to their current positions in Beijing.

 

The CPC today, like its predecessors in China's long past, also claims to represent the whole nation, but with a mission to restore the country's premier world-class status. Key independent surveys, including those by the Pew or the Asian Barometer over the past decade, show a consistent pattern in which the Chinese central authorities command a high degree of respect and support (above 75 percent) within the country. Depicting China's polity as being on the verge of collapse, as appears so often in the Western media, is out of touch with China's reality.

In this context, the word "party" may be a misnomer for the CPC, as it bears no similarity with the type of political institutions like the Republican or Democratic parties of the U.S., which openly represent group interests of a society and compete with each other. The CPC has tried, in China's own political tradition, to represent the interests of the overwhelming majority of people, who apparently accept this, at least up to now, thanks largely to the fact that most people have found their living standards significantly improved over the past three decades.

 

In this sense, the CPC should better be viewed as a state party or, in a hypothetical American context, a merge of the Republican and Democratic parties in which competition of ideas and competence is the norm and consensus and can-do spirit is prized.

 

 

It's hard to effectively summarize - check out the article if you're interested.

Edited March 13, 2014 by Randy W (see edit history)

[Randy W]

With a higher degree of legitimacy in the decision-making process, there is usually no need to "sell" the state's decisions, as the United States does, to the public. Once decisions are made in Beijing after such a process, they are usually ready for "study and execution" or to be further tested in various pilot projects.

 

. . .

 

China is still faced with many daunting challenges ranging from corruption to regional income gaps and environmental degradation. But China is indeed better than at anytime in its modern history. The country is now the world's largest laboratory for economic, social and political experimentation. There is a every reason to believe that China, which has a continuously adaptive political system, will reach its objective of becoming the world's largest economy in a decade's time -- with all the implications for China itself and for the rest of the world at large.

 

[dan1984]

Interesting.....

[Mick]

An interesting article to say the least. I especially found interesting, the author's statements about how China's system was like a merging of America's Democratic and Republican parties where a competition of ideas exist, but a consensus and a can-do spirit is prized. If that is true, then it would be a system that is more workable than ours. Over here, with our two parties, we have a competition of ideas but no consensus or can-do spirit. What we end up with, instead of progress, is gridlock and stagnation. Both sides are equally to blame, so there is no need for political discussion here.

[Randy W]

An interesting article to say the least. I especially found interesting, the author's statements about how China's system was like a merging of America's Democratic and Republican parties where a competition of ideas exist, but a consensus and a can-do spirit is prized. If that is true, then it would be a system that is more workable than ours. Over here, with our two parties, we have a competition of ideas but no consensus or can-do spirit. What we end up with, instead of progress, is gridlock and stagnation. Both sides are equally to blame, so there is no need for political discussion here.

 

 

There's a LOT going on within the Communist Party that we're not aware of. My own opinion is that whether China succeeds or not will depend on how benevolent the powers that be are - that is, do they operate in the best interests of the country, or are they there to cement their own power? A lot will depend on how much of a system of checks and balances exists within the party. That is, when someone (or some division) within the party oversteps their authority or abuses their power can another step in and make it right. I think we are seeing that this system DOES exist, but to what degree and how effective it is will determine the future course of events.

 

More self-reflection, inspired by Taiwan

 

Protests blot Taiwan image

 

Su Tseng-chang, chairman of the opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), along with Tsai Ing-wen, former chairwoman of the DPP, and several other major DPP members also put on black shirts and arrived to support the protest, Eastern Television reported.

 

Not far from the demonstration, another group of people holding carnations also rallied outside Taipei's main railway station on Sunday, calling for an end to the occupation and for social stability.

 

. . .

 

Li told the Global Times that the ideological conflicts between pro-mainland and anti-mainland factions have long afflicted Taiwan's politics, making it more complicated than divided opinions over policies.

 

Some also see the violent and chaotic movement as street politics that reflect flaws in Taiwan's democracy.

 

. . .

 

Some in the mainland have viewed Taiwan as a "laboratory of democracy." During the island's leadership election in early 2012, mainland intellectuals and Net users closely followed the poll with curiosity, and some of them marveled at the qualities exhibited by both Ma and his opponent Tsai during the election.

 

Zheng Dongyang, a mainland media commentator, was among those who went to Taiwan to observe the 2012 leadership election.

 

In an opinion piece posted on news portal ifeng.com, Zheng said the occupation of Taiwan's "Legislative Yuan" has caused some reflections on social media in the mainland.

 

"There are a number of people like me who love Taiwan. We often ponder over the reform that Taiwan has gone through and sum up experience for the mainland's development. However, we are disappointed by the protest this time," Zheng wrote.

 

[Mick]

I think you points are well-taken Randy. I am sure that are many aspects of the inner workings of China's goverment, especially at the highest level, that we are in the dark about. I think the advent of social media and its popularity in China has provided the goverment with an instant feedback mechanism as to the social response to their actions and policies. For this reason, I think it remains in their best interest to not weild a heavy hand in response to criticism in the social media. If they respond too strongly, it may stifle honest self-expression and thus negate the much-needed feedback loop. Yet, at the same time, they have to establish and police certain "lines in the sand" so to speak. In and of itself, I think the entire phenomenon of social media in China is a fascinating subject of study. Way back when, in my graduate school days, I would have loved to tie into something of this nature. However, back then we didn't even have PCs, much less the Internet and social media.

[Randy W]

I think you points are well-taken Randy. I am sure that are many aspects of the inner workings of China's goverment, especially at the highest level, that we are in the dark about. I think the advent of social media and its popularity in China has provided the goverment with an instant feedback mechanism as to the social response to their actions and policies. For this reason, I think it remains in their best interest to not weild a heavy hand in response to criticism in the social media. If they respond too strongly, it may stifle honest self-expression and thus negate the much-needed feedback loop. Yet, at the same time, they have to establish and police certain "lines in the sand" so to speak. In and of itself, I think the entire phenomenon of social media in China is a fascinating subject of study. Way back when, in my graduate school days, I would have loved to tie into something of this nature. However, back then we didn't even have PCs, much less the Internet and social media.

 

I've said before - I think the social media is the greatest gift ever handed the Chinese Communist Party censors. It provides a sandbox that everyone WILL play in - one that can be monitored, controlled, and even the ideas seeded to help steer the conversation in the "right" direction. It can be a major tool for either good or evil, all the while earning MAJOR brownie points in the world media for the "free discussion" it allows.