4 ms·

> So people are hoping that now the worst of it is done What is the basis of this hope?

by voisin 4y ago

lanternfish 4y ago
Presumably because Alibaba - the challenger that started this crackdown - is now slain. On a political level, there are only so many Chinese companies with enough power to actually threaten the CCP, and Alibaba is probably enough of an example to keep them in line - further crackdowns are probably unnecessary.
- re-thc 4y ago
  There's been lots of "crackdowns" before Alibaba. Maybe "slain" as well but no not the only victim.
- voisin 4y ago
  Must be nice for international companies to know that Chinese companies will always be restrained from becoming too large. It’s like they have to fight with one arm tied behind their back - get too big and your own government will cut you up.
  - kkarakk 4y ago
    xi jinping has been criticised for this but he's in his "my legacy lives on forever" phase of life. another decade and he's done - just consolidating power for his family at this point.
AbrahamParangi 4y ago
I think on some level people implicitly believe that the Chinese govt will choose prosperity over power because that's what they imagine they would do. I suspect that will never happen.
- samstave 4y ago
  Prosperity IS power, but the chinese have a bunch of evil morons (as do most governments) in place that are more concerned with personal wealth than long term prosperity -- however, ironically, they are succeeding in a long term plan to basically own manufacturing for the planet. The USA is different in that the political fabric is myopically focused on personal individual wealth growth in a very short sighted obsession with only being re-elected usch that they can insider graft/trade and expand personal/familial wealth. The fact that we dont even openly talk about this problem... is the problem. Nancy pelosi (and family, dont think for a second she doesnt share her insidere trading info with her close circle, including her son who has also grifting business in ukraine.) is a prime example.
- tpm 4y ago
  And I suspect you are right as long as current leaders wield the power. Periodical purges in all ranks of power and society are a time-tested feature of communist regimes. Without them the party cadres grow stale and lose their revolutional vigor. I can imagine it's a bit similar to how the free market works, with companies going bankrupt or taken over all the time, only there it's the changing conditions and the 'invisible hand of the market', while in communist dictatorships it's always intentional and directed (and way more brutal), because the rigid system does not self-regulate, at least not the way the leaders would like.
- toyg 4y ago
  No, it's because that's what the previous generation of Chinese leaders did. Post-Mao, party elites have largely chosen wealth over power at critical junctures, maintaining an overall equilibrium. Xi Jinping broke that setup: there is no elite anymore, only himself; and he's made a point that wealth cannot be used as a shield from his power.
  - bobthepanda 4y ago
    It’s interesting because the other contender for general secretary at the time, Bo Xilai, was even more outwardly Maoist. So I suppose something was bound to happen to that equilibrium.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
SilverBirch 4y ago
Well, the problem was that Jack Ma was getting so powerful by being in charge of a massive tech empire he was threatening the CCP's power. The remaining split up companies are no where near as big or powerful, are staffed largely by people who have been put in by the CCP, and now know what happens to people who criticise the government. They've made their point, so the question is... why not ease up a bit and let prosperity return. Look at the absurd hype around AI in the US right now, I'd imagine the CCP would be quite worried that they're going to lose a strategic position in this technology if they don't ease up. Also, they've just got to ease up at some point right?
- toss1 4y ago
  >>Also, they've just got to ease up at some point right? Nope. There is absolutely nothing (other than whatever good judgement they might have) that would prevent them from flying the entire craft straight into the ground. Agree that the problem for Jack Ma was he was becoming a threat to CCP power. He may have been able to pull it off and make a new countervailing power, but he spoke up too soon and CCP/Xi figured out the threat and took action. Maybe another player will be smart enough to stay below the radar for much longer, but it'll be years if not decades

> So people are hoping that now the worst of it is done What is the basis of this hope?

by voisin 4y ago

> So people are hoping that now the worst of it is done What is the basis of this hope?

Presumably because Alibaba - the challenger that started this crackdown - is now slain. On a political level, there are only so many Chinese companies with enough power to actually threaten the CCP, and Alibaba is probably enough of an example to keep them in line - further crackdowns are probably unnecessary.

re-thc 4y ago
There's been lots of "crackdowns" before Alibaba. Maybe "slain" as well but no not the only victim.
voisin 4y ago
Must be nice for international companies to know that Chinese companies will always be restrained from becoming too large. It’s like they have to fight with one arm tied behind their back - get too big and your own government will cut you up.
- kkarakk 4y ago
  xi jinping has been criticised for this but he's in his "my legacy lives on forever" phase of life. another decade and he's done - just consolidating power for his family at this point.

AbrahamParangi 4y ago

I think on some level people implicitly believe that the Chinese govt will choose prosperity over power because that's what they imagine they would do. I suspect that will never happen.

samstave 4y ago
Prosperity IS power, but the chinese have a bunch of evil morons (as do most governments) in place that are more concerned with personal wealth than long term prosperity -- however, ironically, they are succeeding in a long term plan to basically own manufacturing for the planet. The USA is different in that the political fabric is myopically focused on personal individual wealth growth in a very short sighted obsession with only being re-elected usch that they can insider graft/trade and expand personal/familial wealth. The fact that we dont even openly talk about this problem... is the problem. Nancy pelosi (and family, dont think for a second she doesnt share her insidere trading info with her close circle, including her son who has also grifting business in ukraine.) is a prime example.
tpm 4y ago
And I suspect you are right as long as current leaders wield the power. Periodical purges in all ranks of power and society are a time-tested feature of communist regimes. Without them the party cadres grow stale and lose their revolutional vigor. I can imagine it's a bit similar to how the free market works, with companies going bankrupt or taken over all the time, only there it's the changing conditions and the 'invisible hand of the market', while in communist dictatorships it's always intentional and directed (and way more brutal), because the rigid system does not self-regulate, at least not the way the leaders would like.
toyg 4y ago
No, it's because that's what the previous generation of Chinese leaders did. Post-Mao, party elites have largely chosen wealth over power at critical junctures, maintaining an overall equilibrium. Xi Jinping broke that setup: there is no elite anymore, only himself; and he's made a point that wealth cannot be used as a shield from his power.
- bobthepanda 4y ago
  It’s interesting because the other contender for general secretary at the time, Bo Xilai, was even more outwardly Maoist. So I suppose something was bound to happen to that equilibrium.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

SilverBirch 4y ago

Well, the problem was that Jack Ma was getting so powerful by being in charge of a massive tech empire he was threatening the CCP's power. The remaining split up companies are no where near as big or powerful, are staffed largely by people who have been put in by the CCP, and now know what happens to people who criticise the government. They've made their point, so the question is... why not ease up a bit and let prosperity return. Look at the absurd hype around AI in the US right now, I'd imagine the CCP would be quite worried that they're going to lose a strategic position in this technology if they don't ease up. Also, they've just got to ease up at some point right?

toss1 4y ago
>>Also, they've just got to ease up at some point right? Nope. There is absolutely nothing (other than whatever good judgement they might have) that would prevent them from flying the entire craft straight into the ground. Agree that the problem for Jack Ma was he was becoming a threat to CCP power. He may have been able to pull it off and make a new countervailing power, but he spoke up too soon and CCP/Xi figured out the threat and took action. Maybe another player will be smart enough to stay below the radar for much longer, but it'll be years if not decades