China military stresses Party control in face of 'liberal' enemies

[sword1947]

I am not saying that public opinion don't matter at all. But still the CCP is obsessed with staying in power.

I don't even understand their obsession. The only examples of people staying in power, and not being dethroned and then burned down, in history has been that of rulers giving power up.

Just look at British Queen. She is still the head of Britain, because the royal family gave up power when it so desired.

What I'm saying is that there will come a time when the wise thing for CCP will be to give up power.

Also, it is not a good thing for any institution if there is a ban on rational analysis. There must be freedom to speak and talk and discuss, like the way we are doing. Military must not remove people who want to depoliticize the military, because they have very valid points.

Remember Lee Kuan Yew, "Either you make fundamental changes, and change power by consensus, or there will be a revolution with violence."



How is the party, "elected by the people"?



Also, aren't you a Zhuang from Guangxi? (Just asking)

the people can join the party, then he can be elected to be a leader in the party.

I am not saying that public opinion don't matter at all. But still the CCP is obsessed with staying in power.

I don't even understand their obsession. The only examples of people staying in power, and not being dethroned and then burned down, in history has been that of rulers giving power up.

Just look at British Queen. She is still the head of Britain, because the royal family gave up power when it so desired.

What I'm saying is that there will come a time when the wise thing for CCP will be to give up power.

Also, it is not a good thing for any institution if there is a ban on rational analysis. There must be freedom to speak and talk and discuss, like the way we are doing. Military must not remove people who want to depoliticize the military, because they have very valid points.

Remember Lee Kuan Yew, "Either you make fundamental changes, and change power by consensus, or there will be a revolution with violence."



How is the party, "elected by the people"?



Also, aren't you a Zhuang from Guangxi? (Just asking)

"Yes" for the second question

 

[sicsheep]

I am not saying that public opinion don't matter at all. But still the CCP is obsessed with staying in power.

I don't even understand their obsession. The only examples of people staying in power, and not being dethroned and then burned down, in history has been that of rulers giving power up.

Just look at British Queen. She is still the head of Britain, because the royal family gave up power when it so desired.

What I'm saying is that there will come a time when the wise thing for CCP will be to give up power.

Also, it is not a good thing for any institution if there is a ban on rational analysis. There must be freedom to speak and talk and discuss, like the way we are doing. Military must not remove people who want to depoliticize the military, because they have very valid points.

Remember Lee Kuan Yew, "Either you make fundamental changes, and change power by consensus, or there will be a revolution with violence."



How is the party, "elected by the people"?



Also, aren't you a Zhuang from Guangxi? (Just asking)

I dont get your point man, the only CCP leader who died in office was Mao,

Deng, Jiang, Hu, all left office voluntarily once their term was up.

Any Chinese person is free to join the ruling party CCP, you do not have to come from a CCP family or have money.

Freedom of speech is another totally different topic, this thread is about PLA's loyalty right?

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

the people can join the party, then he can be elected to be a leader in the party.


"Yes" for the second question

I think it will be you southerners who will bring change. Today's China has literally been built by southerners.

Sun Yat sen
Deng Xiaoping
Mao Zedong
etc etc etc.

You name it.

Yet, when I look at present day Politburo Standing Committee, I only see Zhang Gaoli as the sole Southerner.

I dont get your point man, the only CCP leader who died in office was Mao,

Deng, Jiang, Hu, all left office voluntarily once their term was up.

Any Chinese person is free to join the ruling party CCP, you do not have to come from a CCP family or have money.

Freedom of speech is another totally different topic, this thread is about PLA's loyalty right?

We very well know, that Deng, though he wasn't in any major post, was powerful till his death.

And then Jiang took over, and remained powerful till Hu decided to give up all power in all forms, and Xi Jinping came up.

So it is only Hu who has done this thing. Let's see if XJP remains true to his word, and gives up power completely.

 

[sicsheep]

I think it will be you southerners who will bring change. Today's China has literally been built by southerners.

Sun Yat sen
Deng Xiaoping
Mao Zedong
etc etc etc.

You name it.

Yet, when I look at present day Politburo Standing Committee, I only see Zhang Gaoli as the sole Southerner.



We very well know, that Deng, though he wasn't in any major post, was powerful till his death.

And then Jiang took over, and remained powerful till Hu decided to give up all power in all forms, and Xi Jinping came up.

So it is only Hu who has done this thing. Let's see if XJP remains true to his word, and gives up power completely.

XJP only hopes he had the power even Jiang had, now power in China is very institutionalized and lies within branches of governments instead of one person.

the kennedys, the bush, the Clintons were very influential after leaving office.

again, every country's armed forces answers only to the ruling party, so nothing wrong here.

 

[JSCh]

And how do you define "Serve the People"?

Let's say a hypothetical scenario, where 70% people want no censorship on the Internet. Will CCP serve the Chinese people and withdraw all censorship from the Internet? (Barring ones that are harmful to security, like sites that may store data overseas)

Well, there is no fool proved way of defining "serve the people". Just like there is no precise definition of "Public good". And I think you know it.

But China people since ancient time, would monitor the power that be, to evaluate if they "serve the people". And would complain if they were perceived to veer from that. Chinese government, if they want to keep their rule or "mandate of heaven", would be sensitive to the people satisfaction.

And about the censorship.

ALL countries in the world have at least some censorship on the internet. The degree of censorship have to be evaluated against other factors that would deliver better good for all citizen. China censorship were put in place mainly for social, political stability and unity.

You seem to advocate free censorship with the exception of security. Can you accept that there are other culture or thinking that may not agree with your view?

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

Well, there is no fool proved way of defining "serve the people". Just like there is no precise definition of "Public good". And I think you know it.

But China people since ancient time, would monitor the power that be, to evaluate if they "serve the people". And would complain if they were perceived to veer from that. Chinese government, if they want to keep their rule or "mandate of heaven", would be sensitive to the people satisfaction.

And about the censorship.

ALL countries in the world have at least some censorship on the internet. The degree of censorship have to be evaluated against other factors that would deliver better good for all citizen. China censorship were put in place mainly for social, political stability and unity.

You seem to advocate free censorship with the exception of security. Can you accept that there are other culture or thinking that may not agree with your view?

Absolutely. That is why I have no problem if that is indeed done if most Chinese want it. Yet, the young Chinese I meet, find censorship a nuisance.

That is why I'm asking, that according to you, if Chinese people some day want weibo to be uncensored, and that they can post anything, according to the CCP philosophy of serving the people, they would free the censorship right?

Also, I am totally in support that all sites and companies must be forced to keep data within the country, and if Facebook, or Google don't accept that, to block them.

 

[chauism]

Absolutely. That is why I have no problem if that is indeed done if most Chinese want it. Yet, the young Chinese I meet, find censorship a nuisance.

That is why I'm asking, that according to you, if Chinese people some day want weibo to be uncensored, and that they can post anything, according to the CCP philosophy of serving the people, they would free the censorship right?

Also, I am totally in support that all sites and companies must be forced to keep data within the country, and if Facebook, or Google don't accept that, to block them.

Censorship was only one small issue some people might have some concerns, I myself from time to time found it was unnecessary and some times it was needed. However when it comes to those major issues that really matters in people's life such as how the country is running and how oneself prograss in life, people are quite satisfied with the govenment which is ruled by CCP.

You should ask yourself comparing to all other major issues that Chinese people concerns in their lives, how important is censorship?

China’s Optimism | Pew Research Center
http://www.pewglobal.org/files/pdf/261.pdf

Also when it comes to PLA, you do realize that in China people have much better perception of military force than let's say police and other local law enforcements right?

 

[JSCh]

Absolutely. That is why I have no problem if that is indeed done if most Chinese want it. Yet, the young Chinese I meet, find censorship a nuisance.

That is why I'm asking, that according to you, if Chinese people some day want weibo to be uncensored, and that they can post anything, according to the CCP philosophy of serving the people, they would free the censorship right?

Also, I am totally in support that all sites and companies must be forced to keep data within the country, and if Facebook, or Google don't accept that, to block them.

Like I said, there could never be totally free censorship. If allowing something do not harm the stability and unity of the nation too much, then they would be allowed. The policy would be adjusted (relaxing or tightening) with the changing time just like any other government policy. As could already be witnessed. But bear in mind, that China leadership might not share your view that whatever is popular is always the right thing to do.

 

[Kyle Sun]

tell me which one is pla

 

[sword1947]

I think it will be you southerners who will bring change. Today's China has literally been built by southerners.

Sun Yat sen
Deng Xiaoping
Mao Zedong
etc etc etc.

You name it.

Yet, when I look at present day Politburo Standing Committee, I only see Zhang Gaoli as the sole Southerner.



We very well know, that Deng, though he wasn't in any major post, was powerful till his death.

And then Jiang took over, and remained powerful till Hu decided to give up all power in all forms, and Xi Jinping came up.

So it is only Hu who has done this thing. Let's see if XJP remains true to his word, and gives up power completely.

it doesn't matter who will be the leader, all for the people, all for better living standard, all for a stronger country which can protect the people from danger in this world

 

[empirefighter]

PLA loyal to CCP，CCP represent the most of people，CCP donot represent the rich and noble class. To the foreigners，we have too different culture and different political system，so it is too hard for you to understand ，so forget it.
You just need to know below： we Chinese never think it is wrong about PLA loyal to CCP，all the armies are the ruling tool for the ruling class in their own countries，if you try to rebel and the police cannot handle it，then you will see the army come to supress .our red army was created by CCP，so it is loyal to the CCP. I like to see that，if the army loyal to the ruling class （they call it nation and we call it CCP）like the west which means the rich class，then PLA cannot be called red army any longer.

 

[TheNoob]

CCP ofcourse, obviously the govt....

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

PLA loyal to CCP，CCP represent the most of people，CCP donot represent the rich and noble class. To the foreigners，we have too different culture and different political system，so it is too hard for you to understand ，so forget it.
You just need to know below： we Chinese never think it is wrong about PLA loyal to CCP，all the armies are the ruling tool for the ruling class in their own countries，if you try to rebel and the police cannot handle it，then you will see the army come to supress .our red army was created by CCP，so it is loyal to the CCP. I like to see that，if the army loyal to the ruling class （they call it nation and we call it CCP）like the west which means the rich class，then PLA cannot be called red army any longer.

But isn't today CCP and princelings the ruling class? Haven't they just replaced the aristocrats?

PLA loyal to CCP，CCP represent the most of people，CCP donot represent the rich and noble class. To the foreigners，we have too different culture and different political system，so it is too hard for you to understand ，so forget it.
You just need to know below： we Chinese never think it is wrong about PLA loyal to CCP，all the armies are the ruling tool for the ruling class in their own countries，if you try to rebel and the police cannot handle it，then you will see the army come to supress .our red army was created by CCP，so it is loyal to the CCP. I like to see that，if the army loyal to the ruling class （they call it nation and we call it CCP）like the west which means the rich class，then PLA cannot be called red army any longer.

Also, don't say "we Chinese".

I have met many Chinese, who don't agree with you.

Also, if an army is used to suppress one's own people, then that is essentially a thug of an army, meant to promote dictatorship.

Finally, don't forget where you are coming from. CCP itself overthrew someone. If you don't create right conditions, you will be overthrown.

 

[chauism]

But isn't today CCP and princelings the ruling class? Haven't they just replaced the aristocrats?

Yes, Xi Jinping is a princeling, but that has nothing to do with why he is the leader of China, he like the other 7 in the Poliburo, started at the very primary level similiar to community councils and slowly climbed the ladder through town, county, city then providence level leadership before he became the VP. He experienced 16 major jobs transfers and governed accumulative population of 150 millions over 40 plus years to become the Chairman of CPC and president of China. There are many other more princelings that their parents were much more powerful than Xi's father in China, Xi Jinping stands out because he has proven his ability of leadership and competence.

My question to you is my friends, how long it takes and how much experience needs for a politician in India to become prominent player on a national political stage?

Also, don't say "we Chinese".

I have met many Chinese, who don't agree with you.

Also, if an army is used to suppress one's own people, then that is essentially a thug of an army, meant to promote dictatorship.

Finally, don't forget where you are coming from. CCP itself overthrew someone. If you don't create right conditions, you will be overthrown.

Well, Pew research center might disagree with you here. Anyways I am not going to pretend that everything is rosy there in China, but if you ask whether CPC should be continued to rule PRC, then the majority would definitely agree, even though there are some small issues that some people might not be contented with.

 

[mike2000 is back]

Well i agree both with some Chinese members and bussard on here . The CCP is indeed the ruling party in china, so the army /military ought to listen to /follow the ruling party /government /presidents orders like it does in the West and everywhere else. So nothing different /special about that. in this regard, i agree with Chinese members here.

However. Bussard is correct when he says corruption /nepotism and favoritism in the military and party can indeed be a big threat to the party survival /control over the Army /country. If the party doesn't evolve /reforms then it too will be consumed by these 3 great ills i mentioned and topple as well just like the party toppled it's predecessor KMT before it rose to power. So I agree with bussard that as Lee Kwan yu said : "Either you make fundamental changes, and change power by consensus, or there will be a revolution with violence." that's indeed a very important statement which the CCP has to bare in mind.

Also the main problem with the CCP just like with any other communist one party state (like Vietnam. North Korea or Cambodia) is that the Party comes before the country /state and the party is above both the constitution and everything else. In short, the Party is the state. reason corruption often gets spirals out of the party control since there are no independent/authoritative checks and balances who can surpervise the party itself. Any public criticism against the party (especially by public individuals, high ranking official, citizen) is seen as an attack against the country itself, not just the party. That's a very wrong system, which means even n ultra patriotic Chinese or Vietnamese citizen who loves his country but despise the ruling party will be considered a traitor /liberal outcast etc and treated accordingly /discarded. Anybody can love his country but still despise the party, that shouldn't be considered an offence at all. So i think the CCP just like any other one party communist state ought to reform in some aspects, else at 1 point when the positives they have contributed falls short of the negatives they too might be toppled as they did with the former ruling party. what goes around comes around. adapt and change else change will come to you by force.

In conclusion, I will say the biggest difference between the communist one party system and other multi party democracies is that, the military is so politicised in one party regimes that it owes it's allegiance/serves tje party first before even the country. For example, if the party was in danger of losing power. The CCP /VCP etc can call in the army for help (like they did during the Tienanmen square massacre) to maintain power irregardless of the consequences to the country , while in a multi party democracy, there's no way/guatanter will listen to the parties call since it had little to no business in politics. So yes communist one party regimes have more political control /loyalty over the Army.