What's new

Understanding the CPC

LowPost

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Sep 12, 2014
Messages
628
Reaction score
8
Country
China
Location
Germany
Yesterday @Genesis created the thread Political Liberalization in China where we've got an interesting discussion going on about the CPC at the moment and because little is known outside of China about how the party works, I'm starting this topic concerning the Understanding the CPC series on CCTV. A couple of months ago, sales of the English edition of the book series China Today: Understanding the CPC commenced in New York City and here's an article about it:

'Understanding the CPC' series, a must-read for understanding China

On May 28, at the recent Book Expo America (BEA) held at Jacob K. Javits Convention Center in New York, the English edition of "China Today: Understanding the CPC" series was launched.

As the first of three series of books in the "China Today" collection, "Understanding the CPC" gives an accurate description of the domestic and foreign policies of the CPC in response to concerns from the international community.

This is the first time that China has been invited to attend the world's largest book fair as a guest of honor. The launch ceremony attracted a large number of media, readers, famous libraries and research institutions in the United States.

In recent years, there have been more and more seminars involving China and the Communist Party of China (CPC) among think tanks in Washington, which shows that it would be impossible to develop relations with China without understanding the the CPC .

However, US interest in China is beset with confusion and misunderstanding. Even today, the "Communist Party of China" is a term misinterpreted and even demonized by some American politicians and media outlets, which affects the public's awareness and understanding of the CPC. With Sino-US relations becoming increasingly important, it is the right time to make the "Understanding the CPC" series available in the United Sates.

President Zhao Fan of the Party Building Books Publishing House said that the aim of the series is to explain today’s China to its readers, explain why the CPC has the support of the Chinese people, explain how the CPC led the Chinese people to overcome one challenge after another in achieving the "China miracle", and to explain issues like China's fight against corruption and others.

"To understand China, it is necessary to understand the CPC", said Robert Lawrence Kuhn, the US author and China expert.

If the world does not understand the CPC, it is the CPC's responsibility to open itself up, said doctoral student Allen at Columbia University. Similarly, he said, if you want to understand the United States, you need to know about the White House, Congress, Democrats and Republicans. You need to understand their thinking, ideas, and operational mechanisms if you are to understand their policy direction.

Robert Lawrence Kuhn took the view that by understanding the CPC, you will have more respect for China's achievements. Many people do not understand in particular its role transition from a "revolutionary party" to a "ruling party". At present, China is at an important stage of development and the result will affect the entire world. Understanding the CPC is the only way to understand China's current situation and predict its future.

Kevin Rudd, former Prime Minister of Australia and President of the Asia Society Policy Institute stated that the Chinese people chose the CPC as the ruling party of China. The outside world is interested in the road taken or foreign policies carried out by the China's new leadership. Many practical problems including economic growth, environmental pollution, corruption and social stability are testing the capabilities and policies of the new leadership. Therefore, to understand China's domestic and foreign policy, it is necessary to understand the CPC's concerns, ruling ideas and thinking.

This article was edited and translated from 《“解读中国共产党”系列图书走进美国主流社会》, source: People's Daily


So this public intellectual called Robert Lawrence Kuhn hosted the five-episode special series Understanding the CPC, which in turn is part of the show Closer to China with R. L. Kuhn on CCTV News, about the said book series. You can find all episodes here: Understanding the CPC_CCTV.com English

And there's the YouTube playlist of it though the fifth episode has yet to be uploaded on the channel of CCTV English: Understanding the CPC - YouTube

As mentioned before I wanted to help our rational debaters @Spectre, @Lure and @LeveragedBuyout and others understand China's politics better. Looking forward to more candid contributions from you lot. :)
 
.
Much appreciated!

I will be revert with queries and comments once I have digested all the info.
 
.
@rugering Thanks for this, I will comment when I've had a chance to watch the series (may take some time). Out of curiosity, when Kevin Rudd says that "the Chinese people chose the CPC as the ruling party of China," do you know when or how this choice was made, or is he conflating the CCP's victory in the civil war with a mandate to govern?
 
.
the question is how communist is the communist party of china.

1. in a true socialist system, there is no party system and any "revolutionary command council" or "revolutionary movement" or "revolutionary party" will dissolve at some point and enable the people to rule themselves... this happened to the maximum extent in the libyan jamahiriya but not in china or even ussr.

2. china is seen as ruthlessly capitalist even by capitalists, and this must have long been a indicator to the cpc.

3. a truly communist/socialist "communist party" and society is internationalist or transnationalist in nature... this is sadly not so in case of china and the cpc... in the last two decades, china and cpc have been nationalist and not internationalist... china has not opposed the nato wars against libya and syria in particular as well as the nato regime-change program against venezuela.

4. societies guided by socialism such as venezuela and dprk are more deeply aligned by technically non-socialist russia than with the technically communist "people's republic of china".

i hope for the cpc to take a radical u-turn and go back to basics... i hope i have made my points simple and condensed.

@Yorozuya
 
Last edited:
.
@rugering Thanks for this, I will comment when I've had a chance to watch the series (may take some time). Out of curiosity, when Kevin Rudd says that "the Chinese people chose the CPC as the ruling party of China," do you know when or how this choice was made, or is he conflating the CCP's victory in the civil war with a mandate to govern?

By volunteering in huge numbers. And since then by going with the flow. I know you're jealous, because of every American street looks like Kabul, and on every corner you see 'out of business' signs, curtesy of China, but your kind of 'democracy' is not what China wants nor needs. If not for the CPC, the world's BIGGEST poverty reduction wouldn't have happened. China built more than twice the amount of infrastructure in the past 30 years than the US since day one. That kind of thing doesn't happen without the CPC. Now go pollute an American thread, about how journalists get gunned down on live TV.
 
.
@rugering Thanks for this, I will comment when I've had a chance to watch the series (may take some time). Out of curiosity, when Kevin Rudd says that "the Chinese people chose the CPC as the ruling party of China," do you know when or how this choice was made, or is he conflating the CCP's victory in the civil war with a mandate to govern?

That is correct. Victory in a civil war is indeed mandate to govern, just as the KMT took the mandate to govern from the Qing by victory in an uprising and just as how the United States gained the mandate to rule America by victory over the British Empire. The Chinese civil war was the biggest people's revolution in history.
 
. .
in what way??

KMT forces at the start of the war were 4.3 million while CPC was only 1.2 million military members. By the end of the war, the CPC had grown to 4 million soldiers.

Why?

Because the CPC was successful in recruiting regular people.

It was the biggest mass revolution in world history, with the Russian and French revolutions as #2 and #3. The KMT regime had basically destroyed the Chinese economy with hyperinflation, corruption, stealing of foreign aid and basically behaving like a typical 3rd world dictatorship, so when the people rose up, they collapsed like a house of cards.
 
.
That is correct. Victory in a civil war is indeed mandate to govern, just as the KMT took the mandate to govern from the Qing by victory in an uprising and just as how the United States gained the mandate to rule America by victory over the British Empire. The Chinese civil war was the biggest people's revolution in history.

Victory decided the winner of the war, not the mandate to govern. Even if one conflates the two, that was the mandate granted several generations ago; what mandate has the current generation given to the CCP to govern?

Let me put it another way. If war is the only medium through which mandates can be granted in China, doesn't that grant legitimacy to armed insurrection, as a valid path to claiming the mandate? The CCP proved its worthiness to govern by winning a war, so should those who disagree with the CCP resort to armed insurrection in order to prove their own worthiness?
 
.
Victory decided the winner of the war, not the mandate to govern. Even if one conflates the two, that was the mandate granted several generations ago; what mandate has the current generation given to the CCP to govern?

Let me put it another way. If war is the only medium through which mandates can be granted in China, doesn't that grant legitimacy to armed insurrection, as a valid path to claiming the mandate? The CCP proved its worthiness to govern by winning a war, so should those who disagree with the CCP resort to armed insurrection in order to prove their own worthiness?

Where was your mandate to exterminate the indigenous population of the American land?
 
.
Victory decided the winner of the war, not the mandate to govern. Even if one conflates the two, that was the mandate granted several generations ago; what mandate has the current generation given to the CCP to govern?

Let me put it another way. If war is the only medium through which mandates can be granted in China, doesn't that grant legitimacy to armed insurrection, as a valid path to claiming the mandate? The CCP proved its worthiness to govern by winning a war, so should those who disagree with the CCP resort to armed insurrection in order to prove their own worthiness?

What was the legitimacy of the American government over the British empire if not for winning the war? George Washington wasn't initially elected. Also, lets not even think about Democrats vs. Republicans: what is the legitimacy of the American government itself if not for winning the war against the British? That question was the one posed by the Confederacy in 1860 and the answer is known to all.

The mandate to government given to individuals (i.e. a president) and the mandate to government given to a system (i.e. the government of a country) is very different in nature. Are you talking about the mandate to govern given to a specific person (why is Xi or Obama the president?) or are you talking about the mandate given to an entire government?
 
.
What was the legitimacy of the American government over the British empire if not for winning the war? George Washington wasn't initially elected. Also, lets not even think about Democrats vs. Republicans: what is the legitimacy of the American government itself if not for winning the war against the British? That question was the one posed by the Confederacy in 1860 and the answer is known to all.

The mandate to government given to individuals (i.e. a president) and the mandate to government given to a system (i.e. the government of a country) is very different in nature. Are you talking about the mandate to govern given to a specific person (why is Xi or Obama the president?) or are you talking about the mandate given to an entire government?

I'm talking about the mandate for a specific person (or party). The system itself, as you pointed out, is at some point imposed by war for every country. But thereafter, how is legitimacy maintained? In a democracy, every generation (and in the US, essentially every two years) the people are given a chance to return the mandate to elected officials, or replace them with new officials. What are the opportunities for the people of China to express support or displeasure at the track record or direction chosen by the CCP?

I think it was @Chinese-Dragon who mentioned at one point that the CCP continuously conducts polls to determine the will of the people, which is an interesting substitute for elections. But when the people are dissatisfied, what ensures that the CCP will respond?

----

To @rugering , with all due respect, did you watch these videos?
 
.
I'm talking about the mandate for a specific person (or party). The system itself, as you pointed out, is at some point imposed by war for every country. But thereafter, how is legitimacy maintained? In a democracy, every generation (and in the US, essentially every two years) the people are given a chance to return the mandate to elected officials, or replace them with new officials. What are the opportunities for the people of China to express support or displeasure at the track record or direction chosen by the CCP?

I think it was @Chinese-Dragon who mentioned at one point that the CCP continuously conducts polls to determine the will of the people, which is an interesting substitute for elections. But when the people are dissatisfied, what ensures that the CCP will respond?

----

To @rugering , with all due respect, did you watch these videos?
China has the institution of the basic level election, which means every adult can choose the officials they like and express their displeasure to the officials of their local basic level government.
 
Last edited:
.
I'm talking about the mandate for a specific person (or party). The system itself, as you pointed out, is at some point imposed by war for every country. But thereafter, how is legitimacy maintained? In a democracy, every generation (and in the US, essentially every two years) the people are given a chance to return the mandate to elected officials, or replace them with new officials. What are the opportunities for the people of China to express support or displeasure at the track record or direction chosen by the CCP?

I think it was @Chinese-Dragon who mentioned at one point that the CCP continuously conducts polls to determine the will of the people, which is an interesting substitute for elections. But when the people are dissatisfied, what ensures that the CCP will respond?

----

To @rugering , with all due respect, did you watch these videos?

The CPC is not an individual though. In the US an individual represents a party but in China individuals do not represent parties. Theoretically individuals can affect CPC policies through joining the CPC and voting in party elections, or running for office through the party, starting at the lowest local levels of government and working their way up. To actually becoming president is about as realistic as the 7 year old in the US that says "I want to be president someday!" of course and reality is never so clean.

A more concrete question would be: what is the difference between Xi's path to becoming president and Obama's path to becoming president and what are their similiarities? What constrains their actions?

Here's something that I have to say: Xi is just as constrained as Obama is in his actions as president because every decision making body in China is multi-person. There is never one person in charge of this or that, it is always a committee that makes a decision. Whenever there is a committee that makes a decision, as opposed to a single person, there will be constraints on the influence any individual has.
 
.
The KMT turned millions of bourgeois into proletariats, so of course the proletariats choose communism.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom