Hacked By AdGhosT & Tayeb TN & bo hmid

 

 

 

 

 

close your eyes and listen Elfen Lied <3

Greets~:AdGhosT-- adel pro tn- Anonback Tnx - A_Ghacker - xvirus -Malousi Foryn - MaxKiller - Nexamos

Hacked By AdGhosT

Hacked By AdGhosT & Tayeb TN & bo hmid

 

 

 

 

 

close your eyes and listen Elfen Lied <3

Greets~:AdGhosT-- adel pro tn- Anonback Tnx - A_Ghacker - xvirus -Malousi Foryn - MaxKiller - Nexamos

CCP = GOD? » The Peking Duck

CCP = GOD?

First of all, if you aren’t following the Sinica podcasts on Popup Chinese, you are missing some excellent commentary on current issues in China. This one is from two days ago, and it complements this post. It is 100 percent must-hear.

A key contributor to the podcast, Gady Epstein of Forbes, now has an article on a topic that comes up a lot in that podcast, namely the staying power of the CCP and how it has maintained an iron grip on all aspects of life in China that it deems necessary to maintain control. Like the podcast, you simply have to read it.

The piece is based on the soon-to-be-released book The Party by Richard McGregor, which I’ve already pre-ordered. Judging from what Epstein writes, this is one scary book.

“The Party is like God,” a professor from People’s University in Beijing tells McGregor. “He is everywhere. You just can’t see him.”

The Party is not simply an account of how the party succeeds in ruling through its mechanisms of autocracy. The party’s Achilles’ heel–its lack of any independent check on its power–undermines at every turn its efforts to police corruption, vet its members, reform its bureaucracy and respond to crises.

The maneuvering required to conduct a high-level corruption investigation sounds like it is out of a mafia movie. Taking down a Politburo member, former Shanghai Party Secretary Chen Liangyu, required a side deal to keep hands off of the family of former General Secretary Jiang Zemin, whose consent for the takedown was required because he was the reigning kingpin of the Shanghai faction, despite the fact that he no longer held any official leadership posts.

The party’s apparatus of control dominated every stage of decision-making in the disastrous Sanlu milk powder scandal, from covering up melamine contamination that poisoned thousands of babies to censoring media coverage that could have saved lives to blocking legal action that could have given families some measure of justice and deterred future corporate misbehavior. At every stage where some check or balance might exist in a democratic system, the one-party system failed its people.

Well, I suppose it’s not like we didn’t know the party controls the media and everything else it wants to control, and that the big SOEs are simply part of the state apparatus. But reading this, you really have to wonder how real those signs of hope we all like to point to – the increased freedom to criticize the Party, the Glasnost approach we sometimes see in the Global Times and other media, the ability of public opinion to shake the party into action as it did after Sun Zhigang’s murder or in the case of the waitress who stabbed a menacing official – you have to wonder if these aren’t just escape valves that the party cynically uses to create a sense of democracy, a sham. Because no matter how touchy-feely China seems at times, if you really get in the way of the party in a manner it feels could undermine it, you will be crushed like a gnat.

It’s easy to forget that when we see the stories about Han Han standing up to the CCP (this was an especially delightful example and I urge you to check it out, I was laughing out loud). And it’s easy to forget that no matter how earnest those wonderful cadres we know are (and so many of them really are wonderful), their earnest attempts to bring about change can only go so far. As we all know, there are limits. For all the new freedoms and rising GDP, China remains a quasi-police state. Not a Nazi Germany or North Korea-style police state, which rule by sheer terror and fear, but a less visible system of control that’s no less insidious, should you end up in its bad graces. Like the children who drank the San Lu milk, who could easily have been saved if squelching the news hadn’t been in the party’s interest.

I’m ready for the usual comments, “Yes, but it’s just as bad or worse in the US.” And although some comparisons can be drawn between the party in China and the power brokers who rule in the US, the comparison doesn’t work; ours can be brought to heel, they can go to jail, they can be dragged in front of congressional committees. They can’t be party to the poisoning of babies and then block media coverage, ensuring that yet more babies die. They can try, as some drug companies have tried to keep secret their research showing their drugs had lethal side effects. But they’ll usually be exposed and punished, if not as severely as deserved.

As Epstein says at the close of his article, most Chinese are content not to look behind the curtain and ask questions – “times are too good.” But no good times last forever, and after the ball it will be fascinating to see how the party maintains the harmony and relative stability it so cherishes today. Will it work when springtime becomes the winter of discontent?

______________

Richard Burger is the author of Behind the Red Door: Sex in China, an exploration of China's sexual revolution and its clash with traditional Chinese values.

The Discussion: 68 Comments

@Cheung

CCP didn’t have the justification to become a governing party. They won a civil war, but they were not elected to represent to majority. And majority Chinese was passively silent regarding regime change, because they didn’t know what to expect. Mao won some support from left leaning intellectuals because he promised China with democracy, but of course that was a lie.

May 27, 2010 @ 11:01 am | Comment

@merp
To say that America will drag the rest of the world down with them is a wet dream of neocons.

If America does default on its debt, what will happen 772billion dollars worth of Treasury bills held by China?

The CCP will have a terrible nightmare rather than a wet dream.

May 27, 2010 @ 11:07 am | Comment

“The vast majority of Tibetans supported the CCP, especially in the early days.”
—listen, if that’s how you like to see it, be my guest. But are we still in “the early days” these days?

To Spotless,
I guess you’re more of a purist than I am. They won the war, and to the victor go the spoils. I don’t begrudge the CCP having the chance to govern the country in 1949. But they haven’t won anything in the ensuing 61 years to justify their continued iron grip on power, least of all an election.

May 27, 2010 @ 3:20 pm | Comment

@Merp: Do you have any doubt that if America goes down, it will take China with it?
Apart from the highly probable occurrence of war, China is presently half an economy. The other half of it, the one that does that buying and provides liquidity, is mostly American.

In that sense, by the way, Japan is one of the world’s most balanced economies – an empire of both production and consumption, indeed with large debts, but owed mostly (~95%) to its own citizens.

So when are you moving to Israel?

May 27, 2010 @ 3:24 pm | Comment

@merp

No, he just kept them too well.

Yup. That crackpot kept his promises so “well” that his Red Guards damaged so many Tibetan monasteries and force so many monks to return to laity.

May 27, 2010 @ 4:01 pm | Comment

@spz
If America does default on its debt, what will happen 772billion dollars worth of Treasury bills held by China?

America owns hundreds of billions in licensed IP, assets, cash, etc in China. They can be nationalized in the case of a default.

Yup. That crackpot kept his promises so “well” that his Red Guards damaged so many Tibetan monasteries and force so many monks to return to laity.

Yep, Tibetan Red Guards were a bit too enthusiastic, even for Red Guards.

@Dror
Do you have any doubt that if America goes down, it will take China with it?
Apart from the highly probable occurrence of war, China is presently half an economy. The other half of it, the one that does that buying and provides liquidity, is mostly American.

Only in Republican wet dreams, Dror. China would hardly even be touched- America is just one customer out of many. China’s profit margin for exports to America are next to non-existent (around 3%)- the vast majority of revenue is owed to foreign designers and foreign companies.

America provides nothing except a sort of system where exporters are forced to deal in the dollar- China has no choice but to do what it does, as do many Middle Eastern countries (many of which have learned the hard way). If America goes down, someone else will just have to play banker and consumer- not a hard job to fill once the the world’s policeman is out of the way.

In that sense, by the way, Japan is one of the world’s most balanced economies – an empire of both production and consumption, indeed with large debts, but owed mostly (~95%) to its own citizens.

Indeed, but to do better they will need to be more pragmatic in their dealings with America, and resist pressure to allow greater immigration/”immigrant rights”. Japan is on the path of destruction if it allows foreigner suffrage.

May 28, 2010 @ 4:48 am | Comment

@Merp: Last time I checked, China’s private consumption as share of GDP has been trending a decline over the last two decades. And last time consumer spending in the US fell significantly (Q4/08), China was trembling and seething. And that was only the beginning.

Looking at the profit margin is erroneous, since most of China’s investments and businesses (both public and private sector) are in fact losing money. China does not mind losing money as long as it can keep people employed. Optimizing its productive capacity (and making it profitable) is not exactly a national priority at this point.

My wet dreams are definitely not “Republicans” and feature more attractive visions than the ones we are discussing here :), but I, and history, would advise you not to discount the US of A, especially not in comparison to China.

And as for Japan: their social cohesion and homogeneity is one of their main sources of strength. The last thing they need is “greater immigration”. When developed countries finally realize it is time to tighten their belts and take the pain of Austerity, the Japanese are in the best position to do so peacefully, exactly because they do not have any immigrants and have a relatively large and solid middle class that shares the same culture and values.

May 28, 2010 @ 8:53 am | Comment

Last time I checked, China’s private consumption as share of GDP has been trending a decline over the last two decades.

It depends on whether or not you consider investment “private consumption”. China was only export led in the first few years following “reform and opening up”, it no longer is.

And last time consumer spending in the US fell significantly (Q4/08), China was trembling and seething.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster#Pirates_and_global_warming

China’s GDP dropped because of their own real estate slowdown. It had nothing to do with the U.S. Japan, SK and Taiwan suffered a huge drop in GDP because many of their exports through China did not sell, but this did not impact Chinese GDP growth significantly.

Looking at the profit margin is erroneous, since most of China’s investments and businesses (both public and private sector) are in fact losing money.

That’s a pretty bold statement. Do you mean overseas investments? Many of them are losing money, but China’s investments overseas are small- not to mention that they’re losing money because European/American assets are bleeding to death.

but I, and history, would advise you not to discount the US of A, especially not in comparison to China.

History? America’s history barely even registers as a blip. Their preeminence has only been decades old.

May 28, 2010 @ 11:44 am | Comment

Merp,

1. Private Consumption: Government investment does not grow on trees. It uses money taken from the private sector. If investment is done by the government, it is, by definition, not private consumption. The other large chunk of investment in China comes from foreign sources, which, again, are by definition not private consumption.

2. Slowdown: You mean that all the closed factories, unemployed factory workers, and decline in exports were due to a slowdown in the RE market? That’s an interesting theory. Don’t let reality stand in your way.

3. Investment: I was talking about investment within China, not about China’s investment overseas (which is generally more efficient than its local investments).

4. History: Last time I checked, the US of A is about 4 times older that the People’s Republic of China. And no, what another incarnation of China did 500 years ago does not count in this discussion (and in any case, as you know, the history of the people and civilization that spawned America did not begin in 1776 ).

May 28, 2010 @ 2:49 pm | Comment

Private Consumption: Government investment does not grow on trees. It uses money taken from the private sector. If investment is done by the government, it is, by definition, not private consumption. The other large chunk of investment in China comes from foreign sources, which, again, are by definition not private consumption.

Then I don’t see what your point was- China is not reliant on the US, as you were insinuating.

2. Slowdown: You mean that all the closed factories, unemployed factory workers, and decline in exports were due to a slowdown in the RE market? That’s an interesting theory. Don’t let reality stand in your way.

If you call closing down factories who couldn’t make the cut and the lowest wage earners losing their jobs “trembling and seething” then I wonder what you call Europe and America’s mess? Again, this has nothing to do with the fact that China isn’t reliant on America for GDP growth.

3. Investment: I was talking about investment within China, not about China’s investment overseas (which is generally more efficient than its local investments).

Are you implying that Chinese people don’t need houses or roads? This is nothing like Japan’s over-investment in the 80s.

Last time I checked, the US of A is about 4 times older that the People’s Republic of China. And no, what another incarnation of China did 500 years ago does not count in this discussion

Last time I checked, America wasn’t a world power until after World War 2. Also, the last time I checked China isn’t the only country with political change in the last 40 years. Nice try though.

May 29, 2010 @ 9:41 am | Comment

False as always, Merp. America became a world power after WWI. It became THE world power after WWII.

And China is definitely reliant on the US, and in more ways than one. There is nowhere else on earth for China to put all of its trillions from foreign investment, and no matter how much you deny it, US trade is still essential for China to continue its growth.

May 29, 2010 @ 9:57 am | Comment

Let’s just say China hadn’t been a world power since the US became one, though she’s definitely in the conversation now as opposed to years past.

China’s had political change in the last 40 years? Hmmm, guess I missed the memo on that one. Economic change in the last 30, absolutely.

May 29, 2010 @ 12:58 pm | Comment

SK, I think there’s definitely been political change, though not the political overhaul (a reversal of the one-party dictatorship) that a lot of people would like to see. Politically China is not what it was in 1970, nor what it was in 1990. There’s a lot of aspects from back then that linger, but there have certainly been a lot of changes, mostly but not entirely for the better.

May 30, 2010 @ 12:30 am | Comment

You are too young, what a naive student, Richard!

CCP is indeed God!

It was God since founding, is still God, and will be God forever!

May 30, 2010 @ 1:55 pm | Comment

In Christianity, power is divided between God and the Devil.

However, there is the slight embarrassment that the Devil was also the creation by God.

What went wrong with the 6 Sigma QC systems?

Therefore, the powerful one is not necessarily God.

Christians have the characteristic traits of worship or fear for power.

Buddhists are trained not to worship or fear of power, not even the supernatural powers. It is an obsession.

We all have equal chance to be Buddha – masses are Buddha before enlightenment; Buddha are masses after enlightenment.

Worship or fear for CCP because of its power?

Chilly Han, history teacher Yuen, awakening young ones spit on CCP power.

They are the ones to make that change.

May 31, 2010 @ 7:43 am | Comment

And China is definitely reliant on the US, and in more ways than one.

Far from it.

There is nowhere else on earth for China to put all of its trillions from foreign investment

This is because that’s how the Fed sets it up. If it came down to it, there are a lot of ways China could use the reserves politically.

and no matter how much you deny it, US trade is still essential for China to continue its growth.

Nope. Exports to the US are insignificant. The US however licenses and sells IP, invests in China, and exports raw materials to China in addition to being roughly 2% of China’s GDP growth.

Still far from “reliant”.

May 31, 2010 @ 9:51 am | Comment

Dream on Ferin. You always cite your statistic from the CIA World Fact Book (interesting how your nemesis becomes your savior when it says stuff you want to hear) but that is misleading. If you don’t believe that the US is a crucial trade partner for China then we won’t get anywhere. The two countries are highly reliant on one another and no one with any economic credentials would ever dispute that. The Chinese do not dispute this, only you. But we’ve debated this before, and you’re simply deranged on the subject, so I’m not going to let the thread be derailed again with your denials.

GUL, thanks for the Haiku/koanesque appraisal of the CCP.

May 31, 2010 @ 10:49 am | Comment

USA today is very sick half dead tiger, dwarted by a China paper tiger made up with T-bills.

A parasite symdrome: eat your host to death.

May 31, 2010 @ 11:52 am | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.