China names conservative, older leadership

Comments (10)
happy_12 wrote:

Well that was an interesting election. And exactly just how many people did he had to kill to be “chosen?”

Nov 14, 2012 11:24pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Jocomus wrote:

Of the seven standing members in Poliburo, I notice there’s one Liu Yunshan who had been working in Inner Mongolia for 30 years. He should be able to look after interests of ethnic minorities in China.

“Serve the country with pride but not complacency” What an impressive motto from Xi !

Nov 14, 2012 11:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Danzig83 wrote:

China could openly admit to its citizens what the rest of the world already knows and that is China has no territorial claims at all to Aksai Chin, Arunachal Pradesh, Baekdu Mountain, Bolshoy Ussuriysky Island, East Turkestan, Inner Mongol, Jammu and Kashmir, Matsu Islands, Paracel Islands, Penghu Islands, Pratas Island, Quemoy, Scarborough Shoal, Senkaku Islands, Socotra Rock, Spratly Islands, Taiwan, Tibet, Trans-Karakoram Tract, Zhenbao Island, etc. All you have to do is look at China’s history and see where they have stolen complete countries like Tibet as an example. It is completely and utterly laughable that China whom tries to look like the good school child is trying to bully so many other countries to steal territory from them. In the end the last laugh will be on China for the naughty school child can and will be spanked!

Nov 15, 2012 12:25am EST  --  Report as abuse
hayashikin wrote:

Am I the only person that finds the term “North Korea-trained economist” interesting?

In any case, I’m wishing all the best for China as it takes its first steps in with its new leaders, hopefully for peaceful and non-expansionary growth.

Nov 15, 2012 1:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
khatores wrote:

It’s easy for outsiders to criticize a system that they don’t have to live under or participate in. Westerners can easily find fault with China’s flawed political system, a well-intentioned but poorly considered exercise in untested ideas built on what turned out to be a fundamentally defective concept. It’s really easy to point out mistakes in an inherently flawed design.

China’s current generation of leaders didn’t design the system that they now run – they inherited it. What do we expect them to do – publicly say, “Our entire political system is a lost cause…let’s try something totally different”? That would cause an extreme loss of confidence in the current system, and moreover, many average citizens would be resistant to change.

Realistically, China just has to do the best they can with what they have. They’re trying to gradually update the existing system without rocking the boat too much. Put yourself in their position – try to modernize an unwieldy, awkward whale without running the country into the ground – and things look a whole lot different.

The article is written in a somewhat Eurocentric way that doesn’t really take into account the unique position of China. We can’t blame the Chinese for being in their current position – they didn’t ask for it – and we can’t force our own brand of capitalism/democracy onto them any more than we can in Iraq.

FWIW, Westerners are fortunate to have free political and economic systems that developed over the course of millenia, hand-in-hand with out cultural institutions and educational practices. Freedom of the press, religion or limits to governmental authority are embedded in our consciousness. That doesn’t come from genes – it comes from thousands of years of sporadic development which somewhat began with the Greeks and really picked up during the 1500s in Europe, continuing in an unbroken rave of freedom up until the present day.

It’s not just the ideas themselves that count – it’s the history and lengthy period of acceptance that it takes for people to wrap their heads around doing something different. People who have never experienced these things might not fully understand what they mean when looking at them from the outside. They might think they can assimilate them easily – until they see the ideas implemented into their culture, and they realize there are many aspects they hadn’t thoroughly considered.

It’s like putting a Porsche engine into a Corolla. It’s a great engine developed with a great deal of expertise…but you can’t just shoehorn it in. Getting it in would require a tremendous amount of modification – and making the Corolla so that it will perform to the full potential of the Porsche engine…well…once you get done making the necessary changes, it won’t be a Corolla any longer! So, what you end up with is a weird-looking Porsche. Unfortunately, the owners of the Corolla really liked the original design (it was their car, after all), and now you’ve gone and screwed it all up.

We should encourage China to modernize on their own schedule, and hope that they can contribute constructively and effectively to the world. Disparaging them for factors beyond their control is pointless and may create animosity which we don’t need.

Nov 15, 2012 4:44am EST  --  Report as abuse
Dafydd wrote:

For me your list of pressing issues misses the most important one. Demographics. They need to relax the one child policy with immediate effect. This will have a massive effect on social unrest. Parents of young children don’t do unrest. Impact the demographic cliff coming at them and help rebalance the economy toward consumption.

Nov 15, 2012 5:03am EST  --  Report as abuse
Whittier5 wrote:

China continues to be ruled by Fear.

Such a childish emotion for such an experienced civilization.

Nov 15, 2012 8:05am EST  --  Report as abuse
LynLeeshi wrote:

Danzig83, you need to do your research before making comments here. Chinese didn’t invade other countries. Instead, foreigners invaded and took control of China; at the same time, those foreigners brought their land to join China. So, in another words, the previous land owners chose to join China. And most important thing is, it happened hundreds years ago — it’s a done deal!

Nov 15, 2012 8:17am EST  --  Report as abuse
canadianeh65 wrote:

khatores, you do have a point, and what you’ve described here is the history of China since the late 1970s. It must be pointed out, though, that China’s current leaders do have a vested interest in holding onto their particular form of government. It brings them power and privilege. They’ve been playing politics a long time to get to where they are, and they won’t let go now. Unless a truly forward thinking and brave group of individuals takes over, the system will continue. I suspect that the system in place does not encourage such innovative political thinking.

I too wish them the best. I think that China’s leaders really do want to bring more prosperity to all–it is a political necessity. I hope this new batch of leaders has a relatively peaceful and prosperous reign. Not for their sake, but for the sake of all the people of China.

Nov 15, 2012 12:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jhvance wrote:

For the past few thousand years, China has never entertained any real-world notion of the Rule of Law beyond that of the Emperor (or Empress) and the Party leadership, though over the past few decades there have been efforts toward a somewhat less autocratic regimen in order to open the country’s economic opportunities and bring in global technology and managerial experience in a push to modernize.

Without an independent judiciary the results are still a pittance mostly for show and propaganda, although there are clearly some real-world benefits for the millions of workers and consumers. The Party and its leaders are very unlikely to ever lift or remove their control over the judicial system, as doing so would truly result in the imminent demise of their power and position. The Rule of Law in China remains a mythical objective as a consequence for the foreseeable future, unless evolution becomes revolution.

Nov 15, 2012 2:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.