Languish.org

Next week sees the US Presidential election and election for House and some Senate seats, so will this general election prove more important historically, than the special meeting of the Chinese communist party which has just started, where they'll choose new leaders, retire others and perhaps set the course for China for the next 10 years.

How do you see events following from both 'elections' ?

 :hmm:

I suspect the results of the Chinese meeting are a foregone conclusion.

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 29, 2012, 06:15:25 PM
I suspect the results of the Chinese meeting are a foregone conclusion.

Ditto, it's already decided.

Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 29, 2012, 06:16:11 PM

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 29, 2012, 06:15:25 PM
I suspect the results of the Chinese meeting are a foregone conclusion.

Ditto, it's already decided.

Which wasn't the question.

The question isn't which one is most in doubt, but which one has the biggest impact on the next 10 years.

Given what seems to be going on in China right now, I don't think everything is quiet settled yet. The Wen Jiabao 2.2B thing shows the struggle isn't over quite yet.

My erections.

My guess would be China, based on:

- Issues of greater seriousness to be worked upon in China than in the USA
- Possibly wider divergence of opinion between Chinese oligarchic elites on how to approach those issues, than between Romney and Obama

all chinese leaders look the same to me  ;)

Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on October 29, 2012, 06:32:53 PM
My guess would be China, based on:

- Issues of greater seriousness to be worked upon in China than in the USA
- Possibly wider divergence of opinion between Chinese oligarchic elites on how to approach those issues, than between Romney and Obama

Translation:  the Chinese will solve their problems much more quickly and more efficiently than we will.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 29, 2012, 06:48:11 PMTranslation:  the Chinese will solve their problems much more quickly and more efficiently than we will.

Or their power struggles will spiral out of control and the CPC dynasty will fall amidst blood and chaos, to your and Ed Anger's amusement.

Why single them out, I think the forum in general will get a real kick out of watching that.

I doubt jake knows what I'd do.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 29, 2012, 06:48:11 PM

Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on October 29, 2012, 06:32:53 PM
My guess would be China, based on:

- Issues of greater seriousness to be worked upon in China than in the USA
- Possibly wider divergence of opinion between Chinese oligarchic elites on how to approach those issues, than between Romney and Obama

Translation:  the Chinese will solve their problems much more quickly and more efficiently than we will.

Isn't that the sad truth. And the same thing could be said for the UK.


I've even got a suspicion that the Eurozone might get their shit together before us even.  :unsure:

Quote from: Ed Anger on October 29, 2012, 07:08:07 PM
I doubt jake knows what I'd do.

Based on previous performance, I expect there to be posts on languish about your murder boners. That is all.

Well last time we elected a Republican we invaded a country in Middle East.  I don't think China will do that no matter who they pick.

Quote from: Jacob on October 29, 2012, 07:26:05 PM

Quote from: Ed Anger on October 29, 2012, 07:08:07 PM
I doubt jake knows what I'd do.

Based on previous performance, I expect there to be posts on languish about your murder boners. That is all.

I found Jesus.

Quote from: Ed Anger on October 29, 2012, 07:32:09 PMI found Jesus.

Finally cleaned the couch cushions, eh?

I'm keeping it holy.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 29, 2012, 06:48:11 PM

Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on October 29, 2012, 06:32:53 PM
My guess would be China, based on:

- Issues of greater seriousness to be worked upon in China than in the USA
- Possibly wider divergence of opinion between Chinese oligarchic elites on how to approach those issues, than between Romney and Obama

Translation:  the Chinese will solve their problems much more quickly and more efficiently than we will.

I doubt it.  Their issues are way more deep-seated and numerous than Amerika's, and their governmental structure less equipped to handle them.

Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on October 29, 2012, 08:47:43 PM

Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 29, 2012, 06:48:11 PM

Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on October 29, 2012, 06:32:53 PM
My guess would be China, based on:

- Issues of greater seriousness to be worked upon in China than in the USA
- Possibly wider divergence of opinion between Chinese oligarchic elites on how to approach those issues, than between Romney and Obama

Translation:  the Chinese will solve their problems much more quickly and more efficiently than we will.

I doubt it.  Their issues are way more deep-seated and numerous than Amerika's, and their governmental structure less equipped to handle them.

Bullets to the back of the head is more efficient than dealing with a House Select Committee.

Quote from: Razgovory on October 29, 2012, 07:30:34 PM
Well last time we elected a Republican we invaded a country in Middle East.  I don't think China will do that no matter who they pick.

Is that really important historically though?  :hmm:

Eh.  Honestly, if I had my way, our government changeovers would resemble the Chinese system more closely.  10-year, 1-term limits for the Presidizzle and Senatorius Maximi, 5-year, 2-term limits for the Mini Reps.

The gubmint might actually be able to get stuff done without Reps only caring about elections every other year, some peeps would actually be in long enough to see their programs come to fruition, and people might actually vote more based on qualifications if they know that their choice is going to be their headache for the next decade.

Pretty good article on China at the brink of transition.

http://www.npr.org/2012/10/29/163622534/chinas-new-leaders-inherit-country-at-a-crossroads

Quote from: jimmy olsen on October 30, 2012, 02:01:12 AM
Pretty good article on China at the brink of transition.

http://www.npr.org/2012/10/29/163622534/chinas-new-leaders-inherit-country-at-a-crossroads

Seems reasonably accurate, yeah.

Meh, the Americans have there elections all the time and not much changes whoever is in power.  The Chinese thing seems more interesting.

Will either of these events be able to live up to the ICD Cultural Diplomacy meeting?

Quote from: Neil on October 30, 2012, 06:56:15 PM
Will either of these events be able to live up to the ICD Cultural Diplomacy meeting?

Or to the ICP.

Quote from: crazy canuck on October 30, 2012, 03:37:39 PM
Meh, the Americans have there elections all the time and not much changes whoever is in power.  The Chinese thing seems more interesting.

The Chinese have elections all the time as well, they just mean less.  I imagine the new Chinese leaders will be the same technocrats as were the last ones.

Quote from: Razgovory on October 30, 2012, 07:15:24 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on October 30, 2012, 03:37:39 PM
Meh, the Americans have there elections all the time and not much changes whoever is in power.  The Chinese thing seems more interesting.

The Chinese have elections all the time as well, they just mean less.  I imagine the new Chinese leaders will be the same technocrats as were the last ones.

You guys are in an endless often meaningless election loop.

This meeting of the Chinese is going to determine their leadership for a generation.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 29, 2012, 09:00:51 PMBullets to the back of the head is more efficient than dealing with a House Select Committee.

You're sounding like Raz now.

Quote from: crazy canuck on October 31, 2012, 11:34:34 AM
You guys are in an endless often meaningless election loop.

I do appreciate that we have a vast bipartisan consensus on most issues...yet are more polarized than ever.  So we have really ferocious elections about nothing.

Quote from: Jacob on October 31, 2012, 12:21:08 PM

Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 29, 2012, 09:00:51 PMBullets to the back of the head is more efficient than dealing with a House Select Committee.

You're sounding like Raz now.

Right.  Because they just don't do that anymore.

Your increasing Sinosympathizing is irksome, Dances With Mao.  Your love of the yellow halflings' women has clearly slowed your mind.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 31, 2012, 12:36:35 PMRight.  Because they just don't do that anymore.

Your increasing Sinosympathizing is irksome, Dances With Mao.  Your love of the yellow halflings' women has clearly slowed your mind.

It's simply that I'm more interested in what's actually happening in China than in your fevered fantasizing.

It's not the Cultural Revolution anymore. It seems like significant factions are trying to pull China back in that direction as part of their play for power. How that is playing out - see the Bo Xilai scandal and the nationalist protests against Japan - is fascinating. Your and Raz's ignorant stereotyping for lols are less so.

Well, the PRC does execute more people that anywhere else in the world. The US executes like 50 people a year, while China executes thousands, including for non-violent crimes. IIRC, the Chinese don't even announce who they have executed after they've done it (it's a state secret)*. So while they're not rounding people up and machine-gunning them in a ditch, it's not like the state is adverse to killing its own.


* Interestingly, I think Japan's the same way. In Japan, they do not announce who they will be executing ahead of time; each day at like 8:00am they come around and tell the inmates if they're going to die that day. The inmate gets, at most, a few hours warning. Apparently this has led to numerous people on death row in Japan going insane.

Quote from: Jacob on October 31, 2012, 12:58:22 PM
It's not the Cultural Revolution anymore. It seems like significant factions are trying to pull China back in that direction as part of their play for power. How that is playing out - see the Bo Xilai scandal and the nationalist protests against Japan - is fascinating. Your and Raz's ignorant stereotyping for lols are less so.

Yeah, it's a fascinating spectator sport.

But I'm not going to buy into the whole "zomg they're changing from within" bullshit, simply because they've become increasingly flush with cash the last 20 years.  If anything, that makes party leadership even more reticent to reformation.  And they're still the biggest, meanest, nastiest totalitarian government on the planet.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 31, 2012, 01:44:34 PM
But I'm not going to buy into the whole "zomg they're changing from within" bullshit, simply because they've become increasingly flush with cash the last 20 years.  If anything, that makes party leadership even more reticent to reformation.  And they're still the biggest, meanest, nastiest totalitarian government on the planet.

That is all correct.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 31, 2012, 01:44:34 PMYeah, it's a fascinating spectator sport.

But I'm not going to buy into the whole "zomg they're changing from within" bullshit, simply because they've become increasingly flush with cash the last 20 years.  If anything, that makes party leadership even more reticent to reformation.  And they're still the biggest, meanest, nastiest totalitarian government on the planet.

I agree with you completely that the CCP is seriously messed up, and as a result, so is China. And I agree that there is little evidence that they're on the road to democracy and freedom.

That said, they have changed. The way things are fucked up now are different than how they were fucked up 25 or 50 years ago. Within the party, there is significant push for at least some reform (though personally I think it's likely that if they start serious reforms, it could well cause instability and collapse nonetheless), but there is also significant resistance; who is going to win isn't apparent IMO, and it will have significant repercussions (though it could just be a matter of which flavour of clusterfuck it will be).

Quote from: Jacob on October 31, 2012, 12:58:22 PM

Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 31, 2012, 12:36:35 PMRight.  Because they just don't do that anymore.

Your increasing Sinosympathizing is irksome, Dances With Mao.  Your love of the yellow halflings' women has clearly slowed your mind.

It's simply that I'm more interested in what's actually happening in China than in your fevered fantasizing.

It's not the Cultural Revolution anymore. It seems like significant factions are trying to pull China back in that direction as part of their play for power. How that is playing out - see the Bo Xilai scandal and the nationalist protests against Japan - is fascinating. Your and Raz's ignorant stereotyping for lols are less so.

What was so ignorant about my statement?

Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2012, 05:09:23 PMWhat was so ignorant about my statement?

There's a significant power struggle going on in China right now and the stakes are rather high, both for the individuals involved and the country as a whole. You may not be able to perceive the differences between people like Bo Xilai and Wen Jiabao, but they're there and they're real.

Quote from: Jacob on October 31, 2012, 05:16:12 PM

Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2012, 05:09:23 PMWhat was so ignorant about my statement?

There's a significant power struggle going on in China right now and the stakes are rather high, both for the individuals involved and the country as a whole. You may not be able to perceive the differences between people like Bo Xilai and Wen Jiabao, but they're there and they're real.

I wasn't aware that Bo Xilai was in the running to be one of the guys to run the country, what with the criminal charges against him.

Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2012, 05:27:17 PM

Quote from: Jacob on October 31, 2012, 05:16:12 PM

Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2012, 05:09:23 PMWhat was so ignorant about my statement?

There's a significant power struggle going on in China right now and the stakes are rather high, both for the individuals involved and the country as a whole. You may not be able to perceive the differences between people like Bo Xilai and Wen Jiabao, but they're there and they're real.

I wasn't aware that Bo Xilai was in the running to be one of the guys to run the country, what with the criminal charges against him.

That is the context which has given the story meaning.

Yeah, it also seems to be a good reason not to consider him a contender anymore.

Quote from: Razgovory on October 31, 2012, 05:27:17 PMI wasn't aware that Bo Xilai was in the running to be one of the guys to run the country, what with the criminal charges against him.

:lol:

Perhaps this is more funny in Danish.

This Bo guy, he the one from Tecmo Bowl?

I don't think so, Jake is just being a dick as far as I can tell.

Alright, just in case you're not deliberately obtuse here's the breakdown, in very broad strokes:

The struggle for the leadership in China takes place before the CCP congress. What happens there is a result of all the politicking that goes on before the actual meeting.

These last 6-12 months (or longer) has seen significant turmoil within in the CCP as competing factions, with competing visions for China (and competing cliques of clients as well).

On one hand we have a group who have things like persecuting the Falun Gong up to and including widespread torture and organ harvesting and the crackdown on Tiananmen Square in '89 as their legacy and who believe that the Cultural Revolution is a useful model and Mao worship is good and useful; on the other hand, we have a faction who was sympathetic to the student protestors in '89, who advocate gradual reform including experiments in local democracy and a move away from state control in business, and who thinks the Cultural Revolution was a terrible mistake.

That's not to say that neither faction is considering giving up power, or that they don't have corrupt members; but there is nonetheless a stark contrast between the two and the direction they'll take the country; and how they'll interact with the world as exemplified by one faction whipping up and publicizing anti-Japanese sentiment over border disputes.

... nor is it likely accurate that there are just two factions, but these are the broad differences that we can see right now.

So this thing is going on right now, and has been for a while. The fall of Bo Xilai (a significant member of the neo-Maoist faction) - and a number of other events - are indications of how the power struggle is going. The rest of us will have an idea how it turns once the party congress is done, but given the recent 2.7B story in the papers it seems like things aren't settled quite yet.

So yeah, Bo Xilai is not in the running anymore. That's significant because he was a terrible douche and corrupt motherfucker even by Chinese CCP standards, because it's one of the biggest shakeups in the CCP in years, and because it's the result of the battles to determine China's future.

Quote from: Ed Anger on October 31, 2012, 06:06:53 PM
This Bo guy, he the one from Tecmo Bowl?

:lol:

I was under the impression that the ones who ordered Tienanmen square were also those who pushed for economic reforms and were not interested in another cultural revolution.  You know, like Deng and his successors.  The Bo scandal seems to me that the party isn't interested in another Maoist, and power will go to someone like Hu Jintao, ie another technocrat.

Quote from: Ed Anger on October 31, 2012, 06:06:53 PM
This Bo guy, he the one from Tecmo Bowl?

LOL BO KNOWS REPRESSION

Quote from: Razgovory on November 01, 2012, 01:55:34 AM
I was under the impression that the ones who ordered Tienanmen square were also those who pushed for economic reforms and were not interested in another cultural revolution.  You know, like Deng and his successors.  The Bo scandal seems to me that the party isn't interested in another Maoist, and power will go to someone like Hu Jintao, ie another technocrat.

There are different factions and cliques within the CCP, with often conflicting goals. If you chose to conflate them all then of course you're not going to be able to see the difference between them.

There are significant differences in goals and aims between, say, Bo Xilai and Wen Jiabao for example; or between Zhao Ziyang and Zhou Yongkang. Zhao Ziyang, for example, was one of the key architects of economic reforms and he was dismissed and confined to house arrest for his support of the students at Tiananmen; Zhou Yongkang on the other hand is (or at least was) responsible for public security and is widely seen as favouring harsher crackdowns on dissent (except, of course, staged nationalist protests used to display his own influence).

Whether the party is or isn't "interested in another Maoist"* depends on the outcome of the internal power struggle that is being played out leading up to the upcoming congress and transfer of leadership. Bo's ouster and the fallout from that points at the outcome you're saying, but it was far from a given and it's not quite settled yet.

*not that Bo Xilai was necessarily Maoist in any sense other than as a populist aesthetic (though I suppose you could argue that is all there really is to Maoism).

Are you sure I'm the one who's conflating them, and you aren't seeing differences that aren't there?  It was Deng who had the economy liberalized and reformed the succession processes, and at the same time it was ultimately Deng who ordered the crackdown at Tienanmen Square.  There are differences between the cliques, but it's a matter of shades of grey, not black and white.  I strongly suspect that new leaders will follow the same policies that have profited the old leaders so well for the last 20 years, at least until some outside influence shakes it up.

Quote from: Razgovory on November 01, 2012, 04:33:36 PM
Are you sure I'm the one who's conflating them, and you aren't seeing differences that aren't there?

Yes.

QuoteIt was Deng who had the economy liberalized and reformed the succession processes, and at the same time it was ultimately Deng who ordered the crackdown at Tienanmen Square.

Deng isn't around anymore.

Oh, well since you are sure you are right and I'm wrong, then I reckon there's no point in arguing with you.  I mean, who is Raz to argue with an evolved ball of light who is not only certain about the inner politics of an opaque organization such as politburo, but also my own mind.

Lesson learned.

I like the new I-found-a-new-hobby-as-a-China-watcher-so-it-makes-me-smarter-than-you-even-though-we-all-read-the-same-open-source-shit-on-them Jacob.   :)

But don't forget Jacob gets all the inside news from his in-laws in Sichuan, which makes him an expert in Chinese politics.

It's the same factor that has suddenly made my brother an expert on Brazilian politics. :rolleyes:

Maybe he can tell us which dog food doesn't have lead in it.

:lol:  :hug:

... but yeah, I don't claim to be an expert but I do think that what I post on China is more informed than Raz and CdM's platitudes.

Quote from: Ed Anger on November 01, 2012, 05:54:07 PM
Maybe he can tell us which dog food doesn't have lead in it.

I wouldn't buy dog food from China.

Quote from: Jacob on November 01, 2012, 06:11:06 PM
... but yeah, I don't claim to be an expert but I do think that what I post on China is more informed than Raz and CdM's platitudes.

Uh, huh. Whatever :rolleyes:  You wanna quite insulting me now?

Quote from: Jacob on November 01, 2012, 06:15:09 PM

Quote from: Ed Anger on November 01, 2012, 05:54:07 PM
Maybe he can tell us which dog food doesn't have lead in it.

I wouldn't buy dog food from China.

Hell, I don't trust products made in parts of Europe.

made in Plovdiv. PASS

Quote from: Razgovory on November 01, 2012, 06:17:00 PMUh, huh. Whatever :rolleyes:  You wanna quite insulting me now?

Yes :hug:

In fact, on rereading our exchange you didn't say anything particularly terrible; I apologize for being a jerk to you.

I blame CdM.

Quote from: Jacob on November 01, 2012, 06:11:06 PM
... but yeah, I don't claim to be an expert but I do think that what I post on China is more informed than Raz and CdM's platitudes.

I feel neither obligated nor compelled to regurgitate my offline policy reading list to get into a dick-measuring contest with you over the internal machinations of the Muddled Kingdom. 

Languish is a litter box, and I will kick my shit around anyway I like.  More informed, fuck you, Dances With Mandarins.  I don't need to post an annotated bibliography to cut to the chase about China.  I save that for the occasional audited course for fun and to creep out hottie 22 year old coeds.

You may very well BE better informed.

It's just that your posts here don't reflect that. Like you said, you save that for your 22 year old coeds.

Which is a pity. Because frankly, I'm more interested in a measured perspective than in dick measuring contests.

Don't have to type as much with them.

Quote from: Jacob on November 01, 2012, 06:45:00 PM
Which is a pity. Because frankly, I'm more interested in a measured perspective than in dick measuring contests.

OK, fine, we can do that.  It'll be fun.  But you know where I stand with them.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 01, 2012, 06:58:56 PM

Quote from: Jacob on November 01, 2012, 06:45:00 PM
Which is a pity. Because frankly, I'm more interested in a measured perspective than in dick measuring contests.

OK, fine, we can do that.  It'll be fun.  But you know where I stand with them.

Cool.

So what is your take on the current transition of leadership in the CCP (other than that the ideal American response involves several carrier groups at a minimum)?

They won't have to replace the phone books at the podium.

Quote from: Jacob on November 01, 2012, 07:05:58 PM
So what is your take on the current transition of leadership in the CCP (other than that the ideal American response involves several carrier groups at a minimum)?

I honestly feel for Mr. Xi, because it is doubtful that he will be able to maintain the growth his predecessor was lucky enough to marshal, which will wind up hurting him simply because the Chinese don't possess the flexibility or the organic economic institutional elasticity to deal with the global economic slowdown.  Sure, they've been riding it out a little bit better on straight capital, but you can only muscle through so much, and when the bubble pops on them, it's going to hurt them harder than it ever could Europe or Wall Street.  And that will impact their political reformation.

I wish him luck putting a happy face on trying to combat the corruption and graft that's finally reared its ugly head publicly, but that's the Chinese way of doing business going back several dynasties.  It's what they do.  And he's a team player.  He did a good job with the Olympics, but I don't think he's got the the political capital despite the overall party endorsement coming in to challenge the Zemin hardheads of the party, despite his reputation from his time running his province and his previous Round Eye-friendly appointments.  Sound like anybody we know?

In short, I see the bomb going off under him when China's economy hits the skids, resulting in a whiplash effect on this whole myth of their political reform.  Don't think he's the guy that will be able to handle it.  They will regress.

But I like the fact that they're opening up the upcoming Congress to foreign journalists in ways I didn't think they would before, but you know the message will still be as controlled and as unified as ever.

And three carrier battle groups would suffice.

Besides, moderate elements or hardliners aside, still doesn't change the fact that they're buying into an expansionist foreign policy into the blue waters surrounding them.  That's the US Navy's job.
When you've got the bigwigs in the PLA and the PLAN sucking down Alfred Mahan like he's back in style as a basic tenet for power projection, you've got trouble in River City.

Quote from: Jacob on November 01, 2012, 06:29:06 PM

Quote from: Razgovory on November 01, 2012, 06:17:00 PMUh, huh. Whatever :rolleyes:  You wanna quite insulting me now?

Yes :hug:

In fact, on rereading our exchange you didn't say anything particularly terrible; I apologize for being a jerk to you.

I blame CdM.

Thank you, thing is, I'm not really anti-china.  I admire their pragmatism.

I don't think there's a myth of political reform CdM.  I've not read any suggestion that China's reforming in any significant way.  There's a battle of the elites in which attitudes to past reform seem to be synecdoche for political programs.  They are, in turn, taken as signifiers of views on future reforms - while currently not much changes and this goes on in the background and is largely played out to the public through symbolic gestures, the odd leaked story and inexplicable falls from grace.  It's like a very post-structuralist politics.

Quote from: Sheilbh on November 01, 2012, 09:12:51 PM
I don't think there's a myth of political reform CdM.

I wasn't referring to the CCP political machine itself, but the increasing relaxation at the street level we've seen in recent years, particularly the wired communications world--which the government now picks and chooses who to slam shut, and when, as opposed to snuffing it all.  There, we've seen the illusion of reform.

It sorta reminds me of the late 1980s, how the party allowed a certain level of dissidence to perpetuate for a while, giving the illusion of possibility, only to snap back the rubber band with a viciousness when the party saw it go too far.  Now, it's not as extreme as it was then, and it's happening on a much longer timeline and along a much broader horizon, but I see parallels.

But even there is there a perceived relaxation?  I mean look at Ai Weiwei and the like.  The extent to which there's been a relaxation seems almost to enable the party to take the pulse of the country - a role the Communist Party historically played in the Soviet structure.

If anything I think a larger worry of this 'relaxation' is that the tail could start wagging the dog and inadvertantly the party could be pushed into more extreme foreign policy posturing, by the nationalist web they've encouraged.

I would argue that Chinese expansionist nationalism never went away in the first place, it simply had no place to go;  not until 1992 and the subsequent military Great Leap Forward.  It's only been gaining vocal traction in relation to capability.

CdM, I agree with your assessment of Xi's position; the economic growth is slowing and the wealth disparity increases social tension will rise especially as the those left behind by the new economy are arguably worse off - with fewer government services and fewer guarantees of earning a livelihood.

As I see it, he has two broad courses of action he can take if he can't somehow rejuvenate growth and bring benefits and hope to the bottom 200-400 million Chinese: 1) He can sit tight as pressure builds, hoping that the kettle won't boil over until later; 2) He can try gradual reforms, but that could easily backfire as well, just like it did in 1989. So yeah, as you say, he'll have a lot in his brief. And what you say about the corruption and clientilism as a way of doing business and politics is bang on as well, and is arguably a bigger problem. I think Wen Jiabao was right when he said the biggest threat to the future of the Communist Party is corruption. If Xi could somehow provide good accountable governance then a lot of the other problems would lessen a fair bit.

I don't think there's a myth of reform. There's been some reform, but I don't think there's much more than a hope that more reform is coming; I think what Sheilbh says on that is pretty true. They're signs and portents and indications that are much more gestures in factional infighting as than indicators of actual political programs; I don't think anyone is really fooled that it's more than that.

I definitely agree with you that there's been a relaxation on the wired world. My wife reads political stuff on Weibo daily, and the things people are saying these days may be wrapped in easily pierced metaphors to escape automated censors, but there's no doubt that extremely critical and cynical comments circulate freely. The people of China know what the people of China think without it being mediated by the CCP, and that  is a significant difference from, say, 10 years ago. I don't think that's as much of a relaxation as the fact that it's basically Sisyphean to try to control it and it's impractical to shut down. Instead the CCP is left cracking down on the highest profile dissenters, like Ai Wei Wei, in the hope that it makes an example. In spite of that, the Chinese are pretty blunt and irreverent in what they say about their government. They've always been like that by themselves I think, except through the worst bits of the Cultural Revolution, but now they have a bigger audience through the net.

I see the parallels to the 1980s as well, though I read both cases a little less cynically than you did. I think there was some genuine attempts at gradual reform at the time; however as is often the case in that kind of situation the people, especially the less than satisfied ones and the young, wanted things faster and deeper and that scared the elites so they cracked down. I think there's a definite risk that something like that will play out again.

On the nationalism, I think fears of "the wild beast" that Sheilbh is alluding to are a bit over stated at the moment to be honest. On one hand, your average Chinese is pretty strongly nationalist with some hot buttons especially when it comes to Japan. On the other hand, most of them are also pretty concerned about their bread and butter issues - much like Americans (or anyone else for that matter). Everything I heard about the recent demonstrations and riots against Japan suggests that they were staged and deliberately covered by the media, yet the average Chinese were not particularly moved. I kept hearing things from people there that the protesters were bussed in from out of town, that they were obvious thugs or security people in civilian outfits etc and that their excesses were an embarrassment to whatever city the riots took place in. I mean, I'm not suggesting that there aren't millions of people who agree with the rioters, but I think it's possible to overstate the size of the fire that's being played with.

On the military front, I agree that they're positioning themselves to project force in the region and that's something that will increase tension and the risk of confrontation and worse. I'm not quite sure what you're getting at when you say nationalist expansionism, so I don't have much of a comment there.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 01, 2012, 07:40:08 PMAnd three carrier battle groups would suffice.

A measured response by languish standards.

Quote from: Razgovory on November 01, 2012, 07:47:15 PMThank you, thing is, I'm not really anti-china.  I admire their pragmatism.

Yeah, I don't think you are.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 01, 2012, 07:44:29 PM
When you've got the bigwigs in the PLA and the PLAN sucking down Alfred Mahan like he's back in style as a basic tenet for power projection, you've got trouble in River City.

And that starts with 'T' and that rhymes with 'C' and that stands for 'China'.

Taiwan, Guam and Japan are unsinkable.  When the PRC makes their move, they'll all die.

"Illusion of political reform" versus what year's political reality? 1990?

And I'd never thought I'd see the day where CDM says he feels for the (upcoming) leader of the Chinese Communist Party.   :P

Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on November 02, 2012, 02:35:12 AM
"Illusion of political reform" versus what year's political reality? 1990?

It has certainly convinced Sinopologists who honestly believe change is a' comin'.

QuoteAnd I'd never thought I'd see the day where CDM says he feels for the (upcoming) leader of the Chinese Communist Party.   :P

I have a soft spot for red, what can I say.  But you guys know that already.

Quote
US election fascinates Chinese; some envy voters

BEIJING (AP) — Where can a pop star score a hit by talking about the U.S. Electoral College for 33 minutes? In China, where Gao Xiaosong's straightforward explanation of the system drew more than 1 million hits in four days.
Chinese have long been fascinated with U.S. presidential elections, but interest is particularly high this year because Americans are voting at the same time Beijing is going through its own political transition. A generation of Communist Party leaders will step down next week to make way for younger colleagues after a highly secretive selection process.
For many ordinary Chinese, comparisons are irresistible.
In a political cartoon circulated online, an American voter covers his ears as the candidates verbally attack each other on TV, while a Chinese man struggles to hear anything from the party congress, taking place behind closed doors.
"Every political system has its pros and cons, but I do think it will be great if I get to participate and get to make a decision after the candidates tell me what their platforms are for the next four years," said Guo Xiaoqiao, a freelance worker in human resources.
Chinese delight in speculating whether President Barack Obama will fend off Republican challenger Mitt Romney, but they are more captivated by Americans' ability to vote for their leader. Their own leaders are distant figures whom they have no way of replacing.
"The 18th Party Congress is a meeting for the party. We ordinary people can only watch it as an audience," said Wang Xiaojian, a 21-year-old Peking University student. "The U.S. presidential election is a campaign that gets everyone involved."
As Gao, a pop singer known for his syrupy ballads, found out, many Chinese are even interested in the U.S. Electoral College, the often perplexing system in which the president is elected not by individual votes, but by the candidates' state-by-state performance.
In a video from his online talk show that was posted on the popular video-sharing site Youku.com, Gao explained that the college is an attempt to balance the rights of states with the will of the majority.
"The opinion of the state is important; so is that of the people," Gao said. He called America's founding fathers the "greatest group of people in history."
As a public performer used to censorship, Gao was careful not to draw direct comparisons to China's system or its leaders. But even explaining America's election system is somewhat at odds with Beijing's practice.
For decades, China's public knowledge of U.S. elections was limited to state propaganda, which depicts the election as a money game controlled by Wall Street. Campaign finance scandals and vote fraud dominate coverage. Even if Chinese don't wholly believe it, the repetitive line of state media has an impact on how they view U.S. politics.
"The coverage is to serve the internal propaganda needs but not explain how the U.S. election works," said Chinese media critic Zhao Chu. "You hardly see any reports that can clearly explain how the U.S. election works."
The less-censored Internet has changed the game, giving Chinese space to comment and exchange opinions. Videos of the presidential debates are available online.
Censorship on the U.S. election has mostly been in form of guidance from censors. State media have been told to play down reports on the election and keep them short and factual, according to editors at two media outlets.
Amateur translator Guo Xiaohui, who has produced Chinese captions of U.S. political programs, said he believes giving the public an unfiltered look at American politics could get them thinking more about their own government, though he added that it also reveals the negative aspects of the U.S. system.
"The two sides are very confrontational and uncompromising," he said. "It would be better off if they can soften a bit, like the Chinese do."
Others see the U.S. system as clearly superior.
"I admire the voting rights protected by the U.S. Constitution. I pay attention to the fairness and seriousness in the election procedure," said Li Youli, a retired manager in a commerce regulatory agency in Beijing who learned about U.S. elections through an English language class.
"China's political system is so backward that it should implement one thing first: to unconditionally ensure the basic political right for citizens in a republic: the voting rights," he said.
Admiration for the U.S. political system does not necessarily extend to the U.S. itself. U.S.-China relations have been buffeted by tiffs over trade, nuclear proliferation and global hotspots like Syria and Iran. Romney has promised to label China a currency manipulator if elected, a step that could lead to a trade war between the world's two largest economies.
Many Chinese resent what they see as scolding by U.S. presidents, politicians and media about China's human rights lapses and its authoritarian system.
A Pew Global Attitudes Project survey released last month found that nearly half of Chinese have a negative view of the United States. Still, the survey registered a small increase among Chinese who like American democracy, up to 52 percent, from 48 percent in 2007. More dramatic was a decrease in Chinese rejecting American democracy, down to 29 percent from 36 percent in 2007.
Xu Chunliu, a content editor for the microblogging site Tencent Weibo, said he has observed little criticism of the U.S. election system among Chinese web users.
"I don't think Chinese people are holding their own political system in such high esteem that they feel they can criticize others," said Xu.
But he added that even being able to have conversations about voting and democracy is a positive step.
"From the Taiwan election to the U.S. election, the Chinese are always thinking and debating among themselves," Xu said. "I think China is developing into a more normal country."

How adorable.

Quote from: mongers on October 29, 2012, 04:43:29 PM
How do you see events following from both 'elections' ?

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.economist.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fimagecache%2Ffull-width%2Fimages%2F2012%2F11%2Farticles%2Fmain%2F20121110_wwd000.jpg&hash=2fa6ac0853a449d986b39e85d4b875b52ca404e5)