• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Attempted Military Coup in China?

Very complicated story indeed. I have not read everything about it yet, and I actually don't care to much about individual politicians carrers in China. In the end they all stand for the same ideology, which I could never vow for or support.
Not true at all. Although all of the senior Government members make a big show of solidarity, harmony and unity, the truth is that there are a very broad range of ideaologies within the senior ranks of the party and the military.
 
Very complicated story indeed. I have not read everything about it yet, and I actually don't care to much about individual politicians carrers in China. In the end they all stand for the same ideology, which I could never vow for or support.
It's interesting how people who admit that they haven't read much about it, and don't fully understand it, nevertheless feel so comfortable reaching such sweeping conclusions.

The truth is very, very different from the way that you've depicted it. Even among the senior leadership, there are major differences in ideology: some wanting to return to more hard-line Communism, the others pushing for greater openness and a more democratic system.

Once you get away from the senior leadership, the differences become even more marked. There are Chinese gov't officials who actually want a fully democratic, multi-party system. There are Chinese gov't officials actively pushing for more gov't accountability, and greater transparency in the political process.

Of course, for people who haven't read much about it, and don't know much about it, it's easy to see them as "all just a bunch of Communists, who just want to keep their power"...and ironically, because they already "know" this "truth", they don't really bother researching more, or trying to understand the actual situation. A great example of how ignorance perpetuates ignorance.

But I tend to take such comments rather personally. As I've mentioned elsewhere, I have friends who are Chinese gov't officials, who are actively working from within the current structure to push for reform and democratization. By doing so, they risk not only their careers (I have one friend who lost his position and his Party membership because of his efforts), but even their freedom (there's always the potential of imprisonment).

So -- who do you think I have greater respect for? The guy who doesn't understand the situation, yet thinks they know enough that they don't need to understand it...or they guy who bears the label of "Chinese government official", yet who is risking his career and his freedom to try to make his country a freer, more open country? Pisses me off to no end to hear people describe "all Chinese government officials" as being part of the same corrupt, power-hungry entity (although certainly there are many gov't officials who fit that description).

Even Wen Jiabao -- who currently is the Prime Minister of China -- is an active force for reform. In fact, he's been such an open advocate for significant reform, and so vocal in his criticism of some current government policies, that his own comments on the issues to foreign media have been censored in China! That's right...China's Prime Minister is so controversial that his own people aren't allowed to hear what he wants for his country (although it gets out through unofficial channels).

"All the same"? Please.
 
Last edited:
Why would the Chinese even want a democracy? With a century of instability caused by popular movements under their belt, I'm sure they are probably just fine with the current stable meritocracy, despite any flaws. It's not like they have any historical examples of democracy to hold up as some kind of governmental utopia like the West does with Greece and Rome.

They may couch the party in communist ideological terms, but the Chinese are fairly pragmatic these days. I assume this is why Bo's activities made so many of the hierarchy nervous (and maybe why Bo was so paranoid of them). But I'm no expert.



Even Wen Jiabao -- who currently is the Prime Minister of China -- is an active force for reform. In fact, he's been such an open advocate for significant reform, and so vocal in his criticism of some current government policies, that his own comments on the issues to foreign media have been censored in China! That's right...China's Prime Minister is so controversial that his own people aren't allowed to hear what he wants for his country (although it gets out through unofficial channels).

Interesting...who actually controls the media and censorship then?
 
Last edited:
Why would the Chinese even want a democracy? With a century of instability caused by popular movements under their belt, I'm sure they are probably just fine with the current stable meritocracy, despite any flaws. It's not like they have any historical examples of democracy to hold up as some kind of governmental utopia like the West does with Greece and Rome.

They may couch the party in communist ideological terms, but the Chinese are fairly pragmatic these days. I assume this is why Bo's activities made so many of the hierarchy nervous (and maybe why Bo was so paranoid of them). But I'm no expert.

People want democracy when the majority of them have more than enough money to buy the bare essentials and start buying such things as TVs, newspapers, a decent education and access to the Internet. The reason is so they can have a collective voice in the laws of the land. The Chinese are at that stage.
 
Why would the Chinese even want a democracy? With a century of instability caused by popular movements under their belt, I'm sure they are probably just fine with the current stable meritocracy, despite any flaws. It's not like they have any historical examples of democracy to hold up as some kind of governmental utopia like the West does with Greece and Rome.
I think rjh01 said it pretty well; in the past, the main priority for Chinese was stability, and a strong centralized government was able to provide that. However, now that the country is not only relatively stable, but people are getting better educations and higher standards of living, they also tend to pay closer attention to what the government does, how it affects them...and want to have a voice in what goes on.

China's most likely steps in this direction will be a one-party democracy. That is, only one party is allowed, but people can vote for their favorite from a slate of candidates from that party. This is already done at the village level of government, where they have regular elections, and if a particular official hasn't done a good job, they'll be voted out and replaced by someone else. The one-party thing is a strong limitation...but it still allows people greater control over the government than they've had in the past.

Multi-party democracy is not likely gonna' come for quite some time yet.



Interesting...who actually controls the media and censorship then?
China has both a President and a Prime Minister (also called Premier, the two terms tend to be used interchangeably); of the two, the President has the main power. Historically (by this, I mean over the past three Presidents), the President has been more conservative, and the Prime Minister more of a reformer. Wen Jiabao is not new in being outspoken, his predecessor Zhu Rongji also ruffled quite a few feathers in his time, including being the first high-level government official to have a western-style open press conference where the international press could ask any questions they wanted, with no pre-screening or censorship (of course, the Chinese media censored many of the questions and answers that were actually provided to the Chinese people).

And going backwards in time, Zhou Enlai is still largely respected in China as a leader who pushed hard for reform, and put the people ahead of personal political agendas.

In the behind-the-scenes voting for the President and Premier, they generally choose a conservative leader to keep the balance and ensure the military doesn't revolt; and a more reform-minded Premier to appease the moderates.

To get back to your question...the media is controlled by the President.
 
Last edited:
Bo Xilai Wife Charged in Poisoning Death of U.K Citizen

China unveiled formal charges against the wife of ousted Politburo member Bo Xilai over the alleged murder of a U.K. businessman, in a case that’s shaken the Communist Party months before a leadership transition.

Gu Kailai, once a well-known lawyer, was accused of “intentional homicide” by poisoning Briton Neil Heywood, the official Xinhua News Agency said yesterday. An orderly in the family home, Zhang Xiaojun, was also charged, the report said.

“The facts are clear and the evidence is firm and adequate,” Xinhua said. Gu, 53, and her son had a financial conflict with Heywood, which led her to believe he was a threat to her son’s safety, Xinhua said.
 
Just to update the trial has taken place:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-19190993

The trial of Gu Kailai for the murder of British businessman Neil Heywood has ended in the Chinese city of Hefei, after one day.
A court official told reporters Ms Gu had not contested the charge that she killed Mr Heywood by poisoning in 2011.
The date of the verdict would be announced later, the official said.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom