zhang fei,
Quote:
|
My feeling is that whatever happens in the economic realm, the Party would no more relinquish power than the Last Emperor handed over the reins of power voluntarily. There is only one Chinese leader who has done so in recent Chinese history. His name is Lee Teng Hui, the former leader of Taiwan's Kuomintang dictatorship. It is possible that the Chinese Communist Party might follow in his footsteps, but the Party has bathed itself in blood in the 60 years (in a manner unprecedented even in China's blood-soaked history) since it won the jackpot and crowned itself emperor. The question is whether - if the Party gives up power - aggrieved friends and family members will start taking down party members much as Kurds and Shiites are going after Baath Party members in Iraq.
|
market reform in china IS the party giving up power, after all, what is the central thesis to communism (or maoism)? but in any case, market reforms have been such that they have weakened the CCP's political power. the CCP tried to dictate to banks to stop lending money. it's failed.
by the way, lee denghui is not a particularly good example. the fact that he was even voted into power, and that he was selected by the KMT at all, is a demonstration that at that period of time, taiwan had already begun serious reform. the KMT knew that the taiwanese economy had grown to such a point that without internal reform- which also meant embracing native Taiwanese- their party was going to go away. either peacefully or violently. so no, he wasn't the one that really gave up power. the person who really made moves to that aspect, and evidence shows that it was not ALTOGETHER voluntary, was chiang ching-kuo.
china is headed towards that point. it's still far away, though.
the CCP would have to be as dumb as rocks if they gave up power in such a way that would lead to their own execution, b'aath party style. they haven't shown themselves to be that stupid. they know the history behind them, and apparently, the public has forgiven them for it, because they've shown that the current leadership is a good deal better than mao was in the 60s and 70s.
if china didn't disintegrate that way in the cultural revolution, or in the interim between mao's death and deng's rise, it's doubtful it will disintegrate that way in the future.