4 ms·

Sure. Marxism doesn't compel their current behavior, and neither does any sane nationalism - however a shame culture (as China is) and nationalism can make for

Sure. Marxism doesn't compel their current behavior, and neither does any sane nationalism - however a shame culture (as China is) and nationalism can make for a volatile mix, as we've seen of late. But the CCP won't change it's current mix of stripes any time soon. Vietnam has gone through similar spasms, back and forth. They're assuming an existential threat from democracies that just isn't there. Internal division (which is a feature) prevents it, even if an elite class wanted an all out war of conquest, which they don't. They will experiment with their society; they might find a useful course. But I vote with Walter Kerr, that no society can be both very well ordered and very creative/innovative. Which really limits China on its current course even if they somehow avoid all the traps that human leaders' unconscious selfishness has set for them. How Not to Write a Play by former New York Times Drama Critic Walter Kerr came out in 1955 and is the best history of innovation I've ever read. It make it quite clear that periods of true innovation are quite rare, don't happen everywhere, and require disordered societies (to tolerate a writer who isn't going to pander to the prejudices and powers of the day, whatever they are.) Highly recommended. He was also the husband of the person who wrote "Please Don't Eat the Daisies." My guess is that the best-of-both-worlds society, and therefore the most likely society of the far future will be both Yin and Yang at the same time: having a large disordered creative enclave within a much larger well-ordered society that is isolated from the creatives (free speech within the enclave, only.)

AnimalMuppet 4y ago
Two comments. First, democracies are an existential threat, just not in the way you're thinking. If western democracy is obviously more functional than Chinese authoritarianism, that's an existential threat, not to China, but to the CCP. Also to Putin, which is why he's so insane about not allowing culturally-adjacent Ukraine to have a successful democratic government. Second, someone here on HN (too lazy to try to dig up who) said that Xi has the usual dictator-for-life's problem - people succeed by having Xi's approval, not by being better at their jobs than Xi is at his. This means that Xi hears more and more what he wants to hear, and less and less actual truth. The result is big decisions get made that don't - can't work, because they are not based on reality.
- Nomentatus 4y ago
  Good first point, although the CCP is very full of their progress, and don't believe democracy has anything going for them by comparison for a moment, right now. Good second point, too; he's definitely far removed from the masses now. So he isn't likely to be the change. Innovation by democracies - eminently disorganized societies for better and worse - could indeed be an existential threat to China's system (not the people) if China loves "harmony" just a little too much. (Harmony being their term, and not an entirely bad one.)
  - Nomentatus 4y ago
    Iran looks like its becoming a good test of the first point, although the Soviet Union was as well. Such systems can last decades, but no doubt, not forever without serious reform.

AnimalMuppet 4y ago

Two comments. First, democracies are an existential threat, just not in the way you're thinking. If western democracy is obviously more functional than Chinese authoritarianism, that's an existential threat, not to China, but to the CCP. Also to Putin, which is why he's so insane about not allowing culturally-adjacent Ukraine to have a successful democratic government. Second, someone here on HN (too lazy to try to dig up who) said that Xi has the usual dictator-for-life's problem - people succeed by having Xi's approval, not by being better at their jobs than Xi is at his. This means that Xi hears more and more what he wants to hear, and less and less actual truth. The result is big decisions get made that don't - can't work, because they are not based on reality.

Nomentatus 4y ago
Good first point, although the CCP is very full of their progress, and don't believe democracy has anything going for them by comparison for a moment, right now. Good second point, too; he's definitely far removed from the masses now. So he isn't likely to be the change. Innovation by democracies - eminently disorganized societies for better and worse - could indeed be an existential threat to China's system (not the people) if China loves "harmony" just a little too much. (Harmony being their term, and not an entirely bad one.)
- Nomentatus 4y ago
  Iran looks like its becoming a good test of the first point, although the Soviet Union was as well. Such systems can last decades, but no doubt, not forever without serious reform.