What's new

"There is no permanent ruling party in the world" - Chiang Ching Kuo

below_freezing

ELITE MEMBER
Feb 26, 2010
8,253
0
5,964
"世界上没有永远的执政党." -蒋经国

½¯¾¹úµÄÍíÄ꣺¡°ÊÀÉÏûÓÐÓÀÔ¶µÄÖ´Õþµ³¡± ¨C ÌúÑªÍø

How will we deal with the inevitable collapse of the government here and make it the least brutal as possible?

-----

I am a hardcore PRC nationalist and CPC supporter but I'm also realistic that no government lasts forever, including the US regime and the CPC.

In my opinion, there are some careful precedents. We can look at 2 opposing examples, USSR and ROC, to view how their ruling parties collapsed, as an example of what to do and what not to do.

1.) The country must be so strong militarily that even internal unrest would not allow outsiders to come in. The USSR was a prime example, with 5 million soldiers, 5000 aircraft and 10000 nukes, no one could touch it even with internal decline because attempting would be far too painful. Though Taiwan was not militarily powerful, it had the backing of the US, and because of this, the CPC didn't have the opportunity to launch an attack during KMT's collapse. This was not the case for weaker nations with no support like Iran, Libya and Mexico. Also not forget, China's own history. When we were militarily weak, the foreigners decided our political fate. Currently, we are on this track, and must build more nuclear weapons to ensure this.

2.) The country must not change its name or major institutions, as well as maintain an image of governing continuity to avoid international credit devaluation. Contrast Taiwan (though not a nation) with the USSR. Taiwan's leadership change from KMT to DPP was smooth and consistent. There was little capital flight and indeed Taiwan's economy grew in 2000. On the other hand, the USSR actually ceasing to exist and collapsing completely collapsed the ruble and led to massive capital flight simply by changing names of companies. Name change leads to devaluation due to the delegitimacy of the government which mustn't happen.

3.) Everyone that was a victim of previous repression or mistakes must be old or dead. Note Taiwan's example. There was no economic disruption. This is in spite of 4 decades of heavy repression on Taiwan starting with the 228 massacre and all the way until the success of the 党外 movement. Everyone who was a victim of KMT atrocities died by the time they collapsed. In contrast, the USSR If CPC falls after 2030, when most victims of CPC mistakes had already died, then there is a high chance of continuous government under the PRC name. Otherwise, it would be like the USSR. The USSR collapsed at the worst time possible - right after suffering dual humiliations in the middle east during the Yom Kippur war and in afghanistan. This was a contributor to its separation into different states, but there is another factor.

4.) Ethnic minorities must be dispersed. In Taiwan, aboriginies are completely marginalized in society and dispersed throughout the island. In contrast, the USSR concentrated minorities together in their native republics thanks to Stalin's disastrous plan of deporting minorities to their old land. This is a major worry for China. The solution is to dilute the minorities by making sure no one region has a non-Han majority. As Tibet and Xinjiang develop and receive rail and air links to the rest of China, we should see Han majorities develop within 10 years as Uighurs and Tibetans move out to the rest of China seeking jobs and Han move in.

Going by these standards, China fulfills 2/4 standards of being able to maintain state continuity within a crisis leading to government collapse. Unlike in the Soviet Union, we have an overwhelming Han presence and our government institutions are nominally independent of the CPC (especially with the 2011 National Mobilization Law giving power to the Premier, a government position, the power to mobilize the military, confiscate foreign assets and impose conscription). However, unlike Taiwan, we have many minorities concentrated in large areas, and victims of CPC mistakes (from 1959, 1964, 1989) are still not old or dead yet.
 
we are on this track, and must build more nuclear weapons to ensure this.

Really? China has accrued a massive surplus and is now a creditor nation, it has not done this by building nuclear weapons. The difference between USSR and ROC is the difference between economics of utopia and markets, between the ideological rigor of totalitarianism and fearful politics of authoritarianism - China, one hopes will continue to bring greater prosperity to greater numbers of Chinese, with a emphasis on the practical and the ethical.
 
Really? China has accrued a massive surplus and is now a creditor nation, it has not done this by building nuclear weapons. The difference between USSR and ROC is the difference between economics of utopia and markets, between the ideological rigor of totalitarianism and fearful politics of authoritarianism - China, one hopes will continue to bring greater prosperity to greater numbers of Chinese, with a emphasis on the practical and the ethical.

That is a matter of economics and not military. The Qing Dynasty had 40% of the world's GDP in 1840 and was still bullied by the British Empire into submission. There are many past precedents where lack of enough weaponry (in this case, there is no better deterrent than more nuclear missiles) resulted in disaster for the nation undergoing the government change.
 
The Qing Dynasty had 40% of the world's GDP in 1840 and was still bullied by the British Empire into submission

This is not a worthy suggestion - it leaves out too much that is important in making sense of this.
in this case, there is no better deterrent than more nuclear missiles

Well, I hope there are other ways of thinking among Chinese - Precision weapon is not something one associates with nuclear missiles and it seems to me that we could make a good case that the trend towards greater precision with a view to preventing unnecessary deaths, may hold a lesson for us, for the kind of peoples we hope to be and kind of states we hope to create.

But of course I may be wrong.
 
This is not a worthy suggestion - it leaves out too much that is important in making sense of this.


Well, I hope there are other ways of thinking among Chinese - Precision weapon is not something one associates with nuclear missiles and it seems to me that we could make a good case that the trend towards greater precision with a view to preventing unnecessary deaths, may hold a lesson for us, for the kind of peoples we hope to be and kind of states we hope to create.

But of course I may be wrong.

The whole point of nukes is indiscriminate killing towards whoever wants to invade China. If it is precise it is no longer a deterrant because the leaders of the US regime would be able to go into hiding. WMD will really put the pressure on the US regime to not attempt any interventions.
 
"世界上没有永远的执政党." -蒋经国


I am a hardcore PRC nationalist and CPC supporter but I'm also realistic that no government lasts forever, including the US regime and the CPC.

Why do you put "US regime" at risk of violent change? Atleast, I won't.

They force the govt to change once every 8 years, if not sooner.

The system has lasted more than 200 years.

Same with UK - since the Glorious revoluation.

If people are not given an option for peaceful change, violent change will come .... some day.

That, you could probably take as the first condition.

The second condition would be this ---- Evil regimes tend to be short lived .... see Hitler or communist USSR.

More or less, if the above two conditions are satisfied, there is hardly a need for a violent change.

If a nation has these .... it doesn't need to indulge in any of the four conditions you projected:(i) forcible ethnic dispersal, (ii) building nuclear weapons, (iii) history of evil acts erased with time and (iv) maintain a look and feel of continuity during violent change, when actually everything has changed.

Really, none of the four is needed.

In fact, the process of achieving the four conditions involves evil (e.g. forcible ethnic dispersal) .... it will contribute to violent change.


The buidings which survive earthquakes are built to be flexible and movable .... than built to be so rigid that they refuse to move when earthquake comes.

------------

Just exchange the status of USA and China ..... so that China were the sole super power and USA was making huge exports to China and boosting it's economy. How would chinese (atleast those found on these forums) would have responded? Something like this:

1. We must ban all imported manufactured items from USA. This way there economy will collapse and without the economy they will never be able to challenge us.
2. USA is a closed .. complete informational secrecy. It's but obvious that they have some sinister plans against us. True, we don't have a proof --- but that's just because of extreme informational secrecy.
3. See the pattern, USA is buying up debt in Europe, buying up land and mineral resources in Africa and Australia. Again pointing to something sinister in in the works. USA needs to blasted, right now. The rest of the world can be made to fall in line, since we're the sole super power. And even it doesn't fall in line ... well, who cares.
4. This is the time to blast USA --- we're the sole superpower and we rule the world today. If we don't act now, USA could be standing parallel to us. Before USA become big enough, let's blast USA with our supercarriers, submarine launched nukes .... NOW. A minor 2 or 5 nukes from USA hitting mainland China is no concern. We should be willing to absorb that for our long term supremacy.

Contrast this with how USA deals with China in the true world. Economic rules remain the same .... markets work the same way, even if USA (the nation) doesn't win in this market. But, US companies work to optimisation ..... cheapest sourcing, where ever in the world. Best possible return on stocks, profit maximisation. Buy the best you can afford ..... boost standard of living.

Chinese govt tends to put China (as a nation) before Chinese citizens. Building 3 trillion dollars of US dollar reserves, earning paltry 1-2% return per annum ! They don't want to maximise profit potential. But, they want to retain the "nuclear option" of selling dollars to trigger a collapse of US at an opportune moment. (God knows, how it helps them).

The chinese govt tends to view it's economy as the biggest bomb they've built ..... and they feel good threatening to explode this bomb on the world.

Economy as a bomb ?????? -- wasn't it supposed to bring happiness to the common people.



I can go on an on.... but probably I've already communicated what I wanted to.

There is a change needed in China of today ..... God knows how it will come.

Could be peaceful, could be violent.

Btw... USSR escaped with low costs. Perestroika was a lesser trouble than ... say, the Russian revolution (1918).
With hardly any blood shed.

Russia is on a much smoother journey .... than USSR ever was.
USSR was all about the nation ..... never about the citizens.

PRC is all about Q#$Q#$%J@ ...... not about %^&**$$^H.
 
Today‘s political situation is the historical inertia. China is large country and its public power runs based on its own mechanism. Changes are, as it were, always occurring. It just less noticeable especially for people from outside world who barely know a thing about China and its culture.
 
Why do you put "US regime" at risk of violent change? Atleast, I won't.

They force the govt to change once every 8 years, if not sooner.

The system has lasted more than 200 years.

Same with UK - since the Glorious revoluation.

If people are not given an option for peaceful change, violent change will come .... some day.

That, you could probably take as the first condition.

The second condition would be this ---- Evil regimes tend to be short lived .... see Hitler or communist USSR.

More or less, if the above two conditions are satisfied, there is hardly a need for a violent change.

If a nation has these .... it doesn't need to indulge in any of the four conditions you projected:(i) forcible ethnic dispersal, (ii) building nuclear weapons, (iii) history of evil acts erased with time and (iv) maintain a look and feel of continuity during violent change, when actually everything has changed.

Really, none of the four is needed.

In fact, the process of achieving the four conditions involves evil (e.g. forcible ethnic dispersal) .... it will contribute to violent change.


The buidings which survive earthquakes are built to be flexible and movable .... than built to be so rigid that they refuse to move when earthquake comes.

------------

Just exchange the status of USA and China ..... so that China were the sole super power and USA was making huge exports to China and boosting it's economy. How would chinese (atleast those found on these forums) would have responded? Something like this:

1. We must ban all imported manufactured items from USA. This way there economy will collapse and without the economy they will never be able to challenge us.
2. USA is a closed .. complete informational secrecy. It's but obvious that they have some sinister plans against us. True, we don't have a proof --- but that's just because of extreme informational secrecy.
3. See the pattern, USA is buying up debt in Europe, buying up land and mineral resources in Africa and Australia. Again pointing to something sinister in in the works. USA needs to blasted, right now. The rest of the world can be made to fall in line, since we're the sole super power. And even it doesn't fall in line ... well, who cares.
4. This is the time to blast USA --- we're the sole superpower and we rule the world today. If we don't act now, USA could be standing parallel to us. Before USA become big enough, let's blast USA with our supercarriers, submarine launched nukes .... NOW. A minor 2 or 5 nukes from USA hitting mainland China is no concern. We should be willing to absorb that for our long term supremacy.

Contrast this with how USA deals with China in the true world. Economic rules remain the same .... markets work the same way, even if USA (the nation) doesn't win in this market. But, US companies work to optimisation ..... cheapest sourcing, where ever in the world. Best possible return on stocks, profit maximisation. Buy the best you can afford ..... boost standard of living.

Chinese govt tends to put China (as a nation) before Chinese citizens. Building 3 trillion dollars of US dollar reserves, earning paltry 1-2% return per annum ! They don't want to maximise profit potential. But, they want to retain the "nuclear option" of selling dollars to trigger a collapse of US at an opportune moment. (God knows, how it helps them).

The chinese govt tends to view it's economy as the biggest bomb they've built ..... and they feel good threatening to explode this bomb on the world.

Economy as a bomb ?????? -- wasn't it supposed to bring happiness to the common people.



I can go on an on.... but probably I've already communicated what I wanted to.

There is a change needed in China of today ..... God knows how it will come.

Could be peaceful, could be violent.

Btw... USSR escaped with low costs. Perestroika was a lesser trouble than ... say, the Russian revolution (1918).
With hardly any blood shed.

Russia is on a much smoother journey .... than USSR ever was.
USSR was all about the nation ..... never about the citizens.

PRC is all about Q#$Q#$%J@ ...... not about %^&**$$^H.

Do you really think the US, as a nation state, will last FOREVER?

I see nothing wrong with putting the nation before the citizens. All countries in industrialization do this. Do you think British Empire gave a sh@t about its citizens? No, it throws British soldiers away like trash and losing tens of thousands in small wars to crush rebellions in South Africa, never mind India. Did US care about its citizens in 1900-1960? No, it did nuclear testing and bioweapons testing on its own citizens. Germany, US, UK, Japan, USSR, none of them cared about their citizens during their industrial periods. In this historical context, China is doing above average.

I'm just asking, why do you think these criteria are not necessary? Every regime change in history without these has been accompanied by civil war. The partition of India, collapse of Qing Dynasty, USSR collapse, all of these were failures compared to SK and ROC. USSR walked away "lightly" because it had a strong enough military to deter outside interference. China during the 1937 didn't have a strong enough military to fight Japan, and during a time of government instability, was invaded.

BTW, doesn't the PAP in Singapore also face the same problems? Buying billions in F-15s and F-16s that aren't even in Singapore? I think you should worry about the backlash against the PAP after both Lees are gone, or maybe Lee the 3rd would take over?
 
I'm all for flooding Tibet and Xinjiang province with Han Chinese people. All provinces in China should have Han Chinese as the majority. ^^
 
The CCP plans to have a ruling party that is composed of many subparties, like a coalition. That way it is more democratic since the parties cooperate and work with each other to run the country.
 
USSR is a bad example. Upon its collapse, it lost half of its population, a quarter of its territory and its industrial base went to sh!t. Because of the collapse economy, its military fell into disrepair and only a fraction of it remained functional. Current day Russia is dropping conventional military programs to concentrate on nuclear weapons. A strong military won't save you if you don't have the economic might to support it. It would wither away like the Soviet armed forces.

Victims of wrongful repression should be given proper apologies and compensations if neccessary, not brushed under the carpet like nothing happened. Justice always come before a show of harmony. You have to admit your mistakes before overcoming them.

People should be allowed to choose where they live without government telling them. Laws of the land should apply equally to everyone. If Han people want to move into Xinjiang/Tibet, they should be allowed to. If Tibetans/Uyghurs want to remain in their home province or move out, they should also be free to do so. Freedom of movement of citizens should not be restricted by the government. Again, the emphasis is equality before the law. No one should be allowed to displace you, no one.

The CCP plans to have a ruling party that is composed of many subparties, like a coalition. That way it is more democratic since the parties cooperate and work with each other to run the country.
You're a funny guy.
 
But the key point is no one can further take away territory from the USSR.

In China every regime change has been accompanied by severe territory loss and slaughter of people by foreigners. With a strong military and nuclear forces that will never happen again.

I think the CPC is preparing for its own "collapse" already. Note the National Mobilization Law, passed 2010.

??????? ???????????-???? ??

国家国防动员委员会 - 维基百科,自由的百科全书

The power of mobilizing the armed forces is given by the State Council and Central Military Commission to the National Mobilization Council.

The head of the NMC is Premier Wen Jiabao and Defence Minister Liang Guanglie. This is significant, because Wen and Liang are both not top CPC officials, with Wen himself only ranked #3, but having the power to mobilize the army.

This seems to be preparing for the gradual transition of the party military to the state military, which itself is a necessary precondition for the return of Taiwan.
 
Mind you, ROC 1987 was NOT the collapse of the regime, but merely implementation of its constitution under normal conditions. KMT stepped down briefly as a political party, but there was no regime change. The collapse of USSR should be more appropriately compared with the collapse of ROC in 1949.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)


Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom