It will be interesting to see what effect Xi's increasing consolidation and even amplification of power has on China's, particularly the Party's, stability in coming years. To apply an old maxim from Nathan Rothschild, "It requires a great deal of boldness and a great deal of caution to make a great fortune; and when you have got it, it requires ten times as much wit to keep it." Xi has clearly been successful in following an ambitious plan to promote himself, but in doing so he has created a position that will become even more attractive to other ambitious and talented members of the Party. When the reward increases, the amount of acceptable risk to earn that reward and the demand for that risk do as well. Some dictators are brilliant and paranoid enough, and command enough loyalty (and/or fear), to maintain their newfound power, but not all, and it indeed requires much more effort than acquiring it.
Once the exercise of these new powers becomes somewhat expected, and the holding of them by one man becomes familiar, then those on the next rungs of the ladder will start imagining what China could become if another, better man held them. We will really see who Xi is in how he responds to those ambitions.
Under a Communist party dictatorship, you don't vastly consolidate power, purge tens of thousands of people on supposed corruption charges, disappear prominent business leaders, curtail numerous freedoms, alter the power structure of the party and its influence wings (such as the youth league), and build yourself up as the new Mao or Deng Xiaoping - if your intention is not to seize control for yourself. Xi Jinping was never doing all of that just to hand power to the next leader and it certainly wasn't for the benefit of the Chinese people.
He's their new dictator, most likely until old age removes him. He'll rule China for 20 years.
The short list of people that should be terrified of what's obviously coming next: Jack Ma, Pony Ma, Robin Li. The next step in power consolidation, is to begin taking over greater government control of Tencent, Alibaba and Baidu. It will be necessary to reduce Jack Ma's economic power in China, ultimately these giants are a challenge (or potential challenge) to Xi Jinping's dictatorship. Alibaba + Alipay is increasingly becoming the center of China's economy, more and more of that economy is flowing through those entities.
Prediction: Jack Ma won't last more than another three to five years in his current prominent position. Economic power always falls by necessity to the kind of political power that Xi Jinping increasingly wields.
All the Chinese online services are already subservient to the government, which has deep hooks into their communications and transaction systems to monitor the activities of businesses, organisations and citizens. It's already been done. You don't get to be a fraction of the size of any of these companies without 'opening the kimono', to borrow a Japanese phrase, as wide as it goes.
As long as Jack Ma and his cohort cooperate fully with the authorities and continue greasing the right wheels, they will be left alone and in fact will be cherished and protected as the cornerstones of the surveillance state they have already become.
It is possible to interprete his actions as much more benevolent than what your statements imply. Two of the strongest grievances among ordinary Chinese are:
1) prevalent corruption within the party and the resulting unfair advantages among those with connections
2) pollution and environmental degradation, which partly stem from 1).
When corruption is so widespread in the whole governing system, there is probably no way to greatly reduce it in short order without consolidating power and using it decisively.
My hypothesis is Xi does want to become very powerful and influential but more in the style of a legendary statesman who plays a pivotal role in developing China into a new era. I would bet that he will step down in 5-10 years from now but retain power behind the scene through the people he picks and more importantly the system he reforms and develops.
The three Internet giants, including the entrepreneurs who lead them, will likely be safe because Chinese leaders will want capable hands to steer them into dominating positions at the global scale, not least since they will most likely comply with the ideology and wishes of Chinese political leaders without much resistance.
>When corruption is so widespread in the whole governing system, there is probably no way to greatly reduce it in short order without consolidating power and using it decisively.
Xi isn't consolidating power away from the grocery inspectors that like to be tipped. No one human has the vast reach that would be required to see in to every single government action, down to the lowest levels.
The only way to stop corruption is to ensure a free press with an empowered and informed population. That's not the direction that China's going.
Until the past year, I never understood why populism was a bad word. "Doing what the people want? What's the problem with that?"
I always learned growing up in school that the definition of democracy was "rule of the majority, with respect for minority rights". I never realized how important that second part was.
That true, democracy and a free press don't ensure wise decisions by the electorate, but they do ensure the opportunity for the electorate to change their minds and have it stick.
Corruption needs to be tackled from the top down. When the leaders don't, or can't, corrupt, it is much less likely the subordinates will be very corrupt.
To handle low-level corruption, they are developing the social credit system [1], which is a kind of national reputation system. It is negative for individual freedom but might be deemed necessary for rampant corruption practices in many businesses and government units there.
> To handle low-level corruption, they are developing the social credit system [1], which is a kind of national reputation system. It is negative for individual freedom but might be deemed necessary for rampant corruption practices in many businesses and government units there.
How would that help with corruption? Are people going to be able to thumbs-down a corrupt official without facing penalties or retaliation?
I assume individual corruption doesn't happen in isolation, but in mutually re-enforcing webs. The low-level corrupt have the support of the high-level corrupt, who they pay off, etc.
India tried to “see into every government action” by eliminating cash, thereby forcing all bribes onto the books (probably still in an obfuscated form, but one you can find anyway through network analysis.)
Most low level corruption in China is in kind, or things like membership cards and gift cards. I went to a friend's wedding over there and one of the big dinners was paid for by some very dodgy looking guys who were 'friends' of the groom's well connected family, but didnt stay for the meal.
> that should be terrified of what's obviously coming next: Jack Ma, Pony Ma, Robin Li.
A ruler can not rule without people. It's more likely he will "convince" them to support him. (Or they might see which way the wind is blowing and not need convincing.) 2nd to the throne is still a very powerful position after all.
They should be fine. It's people who are opposed to him that are at risk.
If you scenario is correct (which i think it is), it will be a textbook example on the inability of non-democratic regimes to maintain economical growth in the long run.
I say textbook, because as opposed to nazis and USSR , it would have all happened without a war (hopefully).
All of that was coupled with a new law that would basically require companies to have backdoors in their products, either directly or through "ventures" with a local Chinese company (pretty much all major US tech companies have already agreed to this), a more aggressive crackdown on VPNs and encryption, including cryptocurrencies, a recently launched advanced video mass surveillance system, and the soon-to-launch "Citizen Score" system.
All of that meant to ensure Xi will be able to rule with an ironfist with no questions asked (or if the questions are asked, they will be swiftly silenced).
Remember you will be supporting this regime the next time you decide to use a Baidu software framework in your app, or buy a Xiaomi phone. Yes, all smartphones and such are manufactured in China, but at least we can see the end of that road with robotics and automation set-up in other countries. Killing global Chinese brands will be harder, if they are allowed to grow.
>Prediction: Jack Ma won't last more than another three to five years in his current prominent position. Economic power always falls by necessity to the kind of political power that Xi Jinping increasingly wields.
Already happening:
"Chinese crackdown on dealmakers reflects Xi power play"
I went to Jack Ma's wikipedia page to learn more about him. It's one of the most strangely written articles I've ever read. It reads like a 7th grader's essay.
An excerpt:
> In 1994, Ma heard about the Internet. In early 1995, he went to the US and with his friends they helped him get introduced to the Internet. During his first encounter he searched the word "beer".
I guess these predictions are not necessarily contradictory, because by picking one of his own as General Secretary he would retain a lot of influence (in the extreme case he might effectively retain all power, like when Dmitry Medvedev was President of Russia in 2008–2012). In any case it will be interesting to see what happens.
Its very hard to analyze what Xi's status will be. Chinese political system is very complex and opaque, but it has internal structure. It resembles some kind of elective monarchy were noble class rules and elects ruler and his handlers based on complex balancing of power.
Many questions will be answered tomorrow when they announce new members of the Politburo Standing Committee and we will see how many Xi's allies are added.
In the past they could change power peacefully because the outgoing leader didn't fear reprisals from the incoming one. But if it is accepted practice to attack others under the guise of 'corruption', then the outgoing leader always has to fear being purged. Can Xi trust that the next guy won't be able to find some excuse to purge him?
Protip: 19th congress was the last one for the original Soviet leaders. Paradox: the most extreme totalitarian regimes crumble the moment their leadership reach the apex of political power. While all of Stalin's lieutenants had all political arsenal necessary to preempt him, none did because they were all too afraid, while Khrushchev was the only one to risk it all despite being the "the mouse trying to eat the elephant" there.
Did it come from the people who were also convinced that capitalism will bring democracy to China? How has that experiment been working out, lately..?
Dictatorships don't just magically arise. They start from a single-party political system with multiple powerful people engaged in a power struggle. Eventually, one of them wins the struggle, and purges the others.
In 1917, nobody in charge of the Bolshevik party predicted that in 20 years, Stalin would kill all of them, and become a dictator.
I don't know what "it" is that you are referring to, but they did change their leaders once every ten years.
You make it sound like they had to choose between capitalism and democracy. In fact, they had neither. Former, they could implement by allowing things to happen. Latter, they could not get in any obvious way.
Xi's China is evil. It props up North Korea, a country that mercilessly starves and punishes its millions of citizens, a country that can soon strike with nuclear missiles at Japan, South Korea, US, Australia, India, etc. It pollutes the air and its neighbors air with reckless abandon. It floods the river and ocean with plastics with no regard. It acts like a baby whenever Taiwan, a small but free democratic country, wants to be recognized by the world. It acts like a bully against its neighbors regarding south asia sea. It acts like a bully whenever dali lama visits other countries. It suppresses muslims in Xinjiang and buddhists in Tibet. It has a massive censorship/surveillance on its own citizens. It props up other dictators around the world in Venezuela, Russia, Laos, Cambodia, etc. It floods the world with cheap shoddy products that destroy manufacturing, communities, and families in democratic countries.
And we are the ones helping. We buy products made in China.
Please, stop doing business with China. Please, punish China with sanctions and tariffs. If you wish for your kids futures to not be run by dictators.
They suppress all "foreign" religion, not just muslims and buddhists.
They also steal/copy anything they can get their hands on. Airplanes, pharmaceuticals, tech, you name it, China will copy it and make a Chinese version without respecting your patents/copyright/whatever.
Yet all of my H1-B Chinese coworkers have drunk the Koolaid and think their country is great and that people are just jealous of China's growth and success.
China has done an amazing job of growing their economy, even in spite of being a self-perpetuating dictatorship that destroys anyone who challenges their political rule, even kidnapping people from other countries who publish books they don't like. But compare them to say India, China has grown so much faster. It's interesting to think about different systems. I do expect China to inevitably face a downturn because of stimulating the economy too much with unneeded infrastructure, bad loans that cities have, etc.
I could ask a rhetorical "what if you s/China/USA/g ". Issue is that it doesn't absolve our problems at home.
I agree with your assessments (not because I think China is more evil than the US, but simply because I believe in the US)... but what's the practical possibility? Major US corporations like Apple can't divest easily from China, and people aren't going to give up their iPhones.
Once the exercise of these new powers becomes somewhat expected, and the holding of them by one man becomes familiar, then those on the next rungs of the ladder will start imagining what China could become if another, better man held them. We will really see who Xi is in how he responds to those ambitions.