China's Hu says graft threatens state, party must stay in charge

Comments (23)
DeanMJackson wrote:

The article reads, “China’s outgoing leader sees unprecedented opportunity, unknown risks”

The greatest threat to the Chinese Communist Party and their comrades in the USSR are the devastating revelations of Communist global strategy coming from Dean Michael Jackson, a strategy all Communist nations signed onto in 1960, and seen by Communist strategists as the only credible stratagem that had a chance in defeating the West with.

You see ladies and gentlemen, all decisions made by Communist nations must be vetted through the LRP, since it is the “historical duty” of all Communist nations to defeat the West:

“Behind the impressive smokescreen of pseudo-democracy, pseudo-capitalism and pseudo-reform, this Russian-Chinese ‘cooperation-blackmail’ strategy is irreconcilably hostile to the West. Again, this is no mere presumption. It was explicitly confirmed in May 1994 to Clark Bowers, a member of an official US Republican delegation to Peking, by Mr Mo Xiusong, Vice Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party, who is believed to be the highest-ranking Chinese Communist official ever to have answered questions put to him by a knowledgeable Western expert on Communism:

BOWERS: Is the long-term aim of the Chinese Communist Party still world Communism?

Mo XIUSONG: Yes, of course. That is the reason we exist.” – “The Perestroika Deception” (1995), by KGB defector Major Anatoliy Golitsyn.

In order to understand the World Communist threat to our liberties, one must understand Communist strategy:

“Lenin advised the Communists that they must be prepared to “resort to all sorts of stratagems, maneuvers, illegal methods, evasions and subterfuge” to achieve their objectives. This advice was given on the eve of his reintroduction of limited capitalism in Russia, in his work Left Wing Communism, an Infantile Disorder.

… Another speech of Lenin’s … in July 1921 is again highly relevant to understanding “perestroika.” “Our only strategy at present,” wrote Lenin, “is to become stronger and, therefore, wiser, more reasonable, more opportunistic. The more opportunistic, the sooner will you again assemble the masses round you. When we have won over the masses by our reasonable approach, we shall then apply offensive tactics in the strictest sense of the word.”

If you examine the backgrounds of prominent Russian figures, you will find that they have long Communist Party/ KGB or Komsomol pedigrees. Yet for some inexplicable reason, the Western media have accepted their sudden, orchestrated, mass “conversion” to Western-style norms of behavior, their endless talk of “democracy,” and their acceptance of “capitalism,” as genuine. “Scratch these new, instant Soviet “democrats,” “anti-Communists,” and “nationalists” who have sprouted out of nowhere, and underneath will be found secret Party members or KGB agents,” Golitsyn writes on page 123 of his new book [The Perestroika Deception]. In accepting at face value the “transformation” of these Leninist revolutionary Communists into “instant democrats,” the West automatically accepts as genuine the false “Break with the Past” — the single lie upon which the entire deception is based.

In short, the “former” Soviet Union — and the East European countries as well — are all run by people who are steeped in the dialectical modus operandi of Lenin. Without exception, they are all active Leninist revolutionaries, working collectively towards the establishment of a world Communist government, which, by definition, will be a world dictatorship.

It is difficult for the West to understand the Leninist Hegelian dialectical method — the creation of competing or successive opposites in order to achieve an intended outcome. Equally difficult for us to comprehend is the fact that these Leninist revolutionaries plan their strategies over decades and generations. This extraordinary behavior is naturally alien to Western politicians, who can see no further than the next election. Western politicians usually react to events. Leninist revolutionaries create events, in order to control reactions to them and manipulate their outcomes.” — William F Jasper, Senior Editor for The New American magazine.

You ask, what does Jasper mean when he says, “Leninist Hegelian dialectical method — the creation of competing or successive opposites in order to achieve an intended outcome”?

Simply explained, and on a tactical level, it’s called the “Scissors Strategy”, where one blade represents (for example) Putin & Company, however the other blade of the scissors–the leadership of the political “opposition” to Putin & Company–is actually controlled by Putin & Company*, which leaves the genuine opposition in the middle wondering why political change isn’t taking place. Understand this simple strategy?

On a strategic level, from 1960 – 1989 the USSR and China played the “Scissors Strategy”, by pretending to be enemies. This strategy allowed one side to play off against the other with the West, thereby gaining political advantages from the West, which neither Communist giant could have achieved if it was believed they were united. Clever, huh?

Keep Jasper’s words in mind.

Read more on the “Long-Range Policy” in the 1984 book, “New Lies for Old” (available at Internet Archive), by KGB defector Major Anatoliy Golitsyn, the only Soviet-era defector to still be under protective custody in the West.

Nov 07, 2012 9:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jo5319 wrote:

A book from 1984?! The Soviet Union hadn’t even crumbled yet!
That’s really passe!

Nov 07, 2012 9:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
WJL wrote:

Audits and corruption investigations of government officials in China are more common place than tax audits in America. That is why they did not have a general financial crisis like America.

Nov 07, 2012 11:02pm EST  --  Report as abuse
trevorh wrote:

“We should enhance our capacity for exploiting marine resources, resolutely safeguard China’s maritime rights and interests and build China into a maritime power,” he said.

“We must never let words act in place of the law or (personal) power replace the law; nor will we allow the ignoring of the law for personal benefit,” Hu said.

Really? Do they even sell mirrors in China?

Or maybe he is only against “personal” ignoring of the law for “personal” benefit? It’s ok if it is “collective” ignoring of the law for “collective” benefit.

“Hey, I won’t ignore the law and beat you up, you won’t ignore the law and beat me up. Let’s get together, ignore the law and beat up that guy under the tree who speaks differently and looks differently.” Sounds familiar?

Oh dear, I hope he didn’t mean that. Otherwise, God or whatever, please bring me to a better alternate universe already. I’m so sick of this one.

Nov 07, 2012 11:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
trevorh wrote:

Actually, taking my previous comment back :P
If the “collective” means everybody then that might not necessarily be evil in all cases.

Nov 08, 2012 1:05am EST  --  Report as abuse
WeWereWallSt wrote:

“China’s Hu says graft threatens state, party must stay in charge”

Wow, there’s a non sequitur for you. Reuters with the irony in the headline. Love it.

WJL — the US financial crisis was caused by the private sector and bad macro housing/lending policies, not government corruption. Audits and corruption investigations of government officials solve nothing so long as the government is an on-going unelected bunch of old unusually rich men. China has has a financial crisis for her 3,000-year history. Propaganda doesn’t change that.

Nov 08, 2012 1:35am EST  --  Report as abuse
FollowTao wrote:

China does not lack talents nor skills; what it lacks is a leadership that does not believe enough in democracy to self-correct the system. Admit it, democracy is the way forward – never mind you call it Western or otherwise because it is a fact it originates from the West.

The point is not whether to copy Western democracy or not but rather does China even has democracy to start with, whatever the variety?

From the Ching Dynasty to the present what did China in was control and more control in the belief that the human intellect of leadership can resolve systemic problems, when in fact what China needs is less control.

Control is like inhalation which should be accompanied by freedom which is like exhalation. One without the other is against the law of life.

Nov 08, 2012 2:08am EST  --  Report as abuse
leungsite wrote:

Corruption is widespread among first-line cadres many of whom simply stay put or declined promotion. A leader at whatever level by peer pressure must demonstrate model behavioral code to his subordinates. More crack-downs only finds even more to crack down.

@FollowTao There was no such era as called ‘Ching Dynasty’. I believe it’s ‘Manchuria Dynasty’ you talked about.

Nov 08, 2012 5:36am EST  --  Report as abuse
Free_Pacific wrote:

So, more military to seize territory (Panatag, Mischief, Paracels, Senkaku’s, Spratly’s). More investment to be able to extract resources from that stolen territory (plus from soon to be new puppets like Fiji). And more power for the party to ensure the tyranny of the Pacific escalates.

He could have just said ‘More of the same’ and been done with it.

Nov 08, 2012 6:49am EST  --  Report as abuse
americanguy wrote:

Now tell me the Communist Chinese leaders don’t sound just like Republicans and right wingers. Except for Hu being against corruption of course. Republicans welcome corruption.
“We need to stay in control to save the country”
“We need to spend more on the military to save us from the boogey man”
“We have to tell the people how to think because we are smart and they are stupid”
“The people think they want something, but they are wrong, we will tell them what they want”
“We will either walk on the closed road or the evil road”
Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Republicans – all hard core communists.
I have heard them say the exact same things for years.

Nov 08, 2012 7:20am EST  --  Report as abuse
misterjag wrote:

How is the CCP going to clean up its corruption problem when it extends to its top leaders?

Nov 08, 2012 7:23am EST  --  Report as abuse
smg1044 wrote:

“We will never copy a Western political system” he declares, while standing beneath a ridiculous golden copy of the symbol of a failed European political system.

The entire 20th century was a financial crisis for China. Their best move was copying a few elements of a Western-style liberalized capitalist economic system.

Nov 08, 2012 7:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
JamVee wrote:

He should have said that everyone in the room must submit complete personal financial records to a state auditor, who would be investigating each and every one of them. NOW THAT WOULD SHOW HE WAS SERIOUS! I mean, in a totalitarian state like China, why not?

Nov 08, 2012 8:11am EST  --  Report as abuse
BlueCannon wrote:

China’s Guangzhou recently busted a district supervisor over street hawkers to have owned 21 mortgage-free apartments. His source of wealth remains a mystery. You bet this is only the tip of an iceberg.

Nov 08, 2012 9:08am EST  --  Report as abuse
Doc62 wrote:

Graft and big money own China. Notice Hu panders on corruption to a “hand picked crowd”? The real Chinese people have been beaten into submission. They looked like scared sheep when I toured there. The few dissenters are beaten, harassed, jailed and isolated. To squelch the strong ones, the party attacks their families instead.
We just proved our system of government is better. Big Money tried to buy our elections and it couldn’t be done! Our people have spoken!
God Bless America!

Nov 08, 2012 10:12am EST  --  Report as abuse
Bob9999 wrote:

In other words, China’s outgoing President says that the country is ruled by a corrupt organization which has made staying in power its top priority. Sounds like we live in interesting times.

Nov 08, 2012 1:05pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jhvance wrote:

The parallel between Hu’s outgoing 2012 warning about danger from “corruption” in the Chinese Communist Party and Eisenhower’s 1960 outgoing warning about the danger posed by the “military-industrial complex” is striking — both are astute observations by individuals with deep knowledge from an inside position of the associated character and power involved, and despite occupying the highest office in their respective countries (a major force in the world of their times) were essentially powerless to make any substantive institutional corrections for the endemic problem which they tried, perhaps bravely or foolishly, to highlight in a very public way.

Nov 08, 2012 1:30pm EST  --  Report as abuse
4ever49 wrote:

americanguy – you must have double-dosed your self with your meds; you’re talking jibberish!!

Nov 08, 2012 3:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Marlboro wrote:

We have the same problem here with our communist party, but the people just voted them back into power again. Go figure.

Nov 08, 2012 7:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Pterosaur wrote:


Do you know what Democracy really is? It’s simply one vote per person to select its president and some other matters. That’s about it. It’s nice to have, but it can’t solve all the problems of the world and more specifically the corruption problem. I don’t need to point to examples where democracies fail to put corruption under control.

Following Tao also means To Be Pragmatic, and not stuck in some form of ideology. I think you still have a long way in your pursuit of Tao.

Nov 08, 2012 8:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
FollowTao wrote:


Nah, democracy is more than one man one vote. It is a whole system of checks and balances. And who says democracy will resolve corruption completely? It is just obvious that what China needs is more democracy and this from the mouths of its own top leadership if you have been following the news at all. Just that there is not enough collective will amongst the leadership to do so.


Where do you get your history lessons? Never heard of Ching Dynasty? Why there’s always google if you have a problem.

Nov 08, 2012 10:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
dmwyant wrote:

Anyone watching China could have predicted this happening…they couldn’t keep up 10%+ economic growth forever. The place is run by politicians now, not the engineers that started the economic revolution.

Nov 08, 2012 11:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Htos1 wrote:

How very terrible for them!
Obama will take care of that.
They aren’t whites.

Nov 09, 2012 7:08am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.