WikiLeaks: China's Politburo a cabal of business empires

Telegraph ^ | 12/06/10 | Peter Foster

[TigerLikesRooster]

WikiLeaks: China's Politburo a cabal of business empires

China's ruling Politburo is a cabal of business empires that puts vested interests over the needs of the poor and curtails media freedoms to avoiding having shady business deals exposed in the press, according to a leaked US government diplomatic cable.

By Peter Foster, Beijing 9:00PM GMT 06 Dec 2010

The damning description of China's secretive leadership machinations also described how the descendants of China's Communist revolutionaries – known as "princelings" – derided officials from less august revolutionary backgrounds as mere "shopkeepers".

The assessment of what motivates China's opaque top-level decision-makers was relayed to Washington in July 2009 in one of the 250,000 cables published by the WikiLeaks website.

"China's top leadership had carved up China's economic 'pie,'" the US embassy contact said, "creating an ossified system in which 'vested interests' drove decision-making and impeded reform as leaders maneuvered to ensure that those interests were not threatened." The US embassy contact also asserted there were no "reformers" within the top Communist Party leadership, only competing factions that sought to protect their business empires from attack by in-coming leaderships.

[TigerLikesRooster]

When vested interests trump anything else, it would lead to a disaster eventually. We see it in the still-unfolding current financial crisis.

[TigerLikesRooster]

P!

[Wolfie]

They should change the name to Congress.

[resistance]

Congress’s top leadership have carved up the USA’s economic ‘pie,’” the US embassy contact said, “creating an ossified system in which ‘vested interests’ drove decision-making and impeded reform as leaders maneuvered to ensure that those interests were not threatened.” The US embassy contact also asserted there were no “reformers” within the top Communist Party leadership, only competing factions that sought to protect their business empires from attack by in-coming leaderships.

Fixed it!

[Little Ray]

This is supposed to be surprising?

I think China has always been run this way, with occasional interregnums.

[TigerLikesRooster]

There are people who think, “This time it is different.”

[Uncle Ike]

” Congress’s top leadership have carved up the USA’s economic ‘pie,’” the US embassy contact said, “creating an ossified system in which ‘vested interests’ drove decision-making and impeded reform as leaders maneuvered to ensure that those interests were not threatened.” The US embassy contact also asserted there were no “reformers” within the top Communist Party leadership, only competing factions that sought to protect their business empires from attack by in-coming leaderships. “

there were no “reformers” within the top Republican-Democrat (Republicrat) Party Establishment, only competing factions that sought to protect their business empires from attack by in-coming leaderships.

Fixed it again.....

[Uncle Miltie]

I keep liking the unvarnished truths finally spoken through Wikileaks.

[TigerLikesRooster]

LOL. Actually, RINO’s try to turn Sarah into one of shopkeepers, if I can borrow Chicom parlance. So far she is not ‘cooperating.’

[Little Ray]

I’m guess I’m one of ‘em.

The Chinese have endured as a nation and people under such a system for thousands of years. It might be oppressive, but, in the long run, it seems to work.

More and more I see the US as a falling Roman Empire: Bankrupt, with an overstretched military, invaded by barbarians, citizens anesthetized by bread and circuses (or “American Idol” and “Dancing with the Stars”), etc. We all know how that ends, but I keep hoping...

[TigerLikesRooster]

It might be oppressive

Its maintenance cost is loss of lives anywhere from 30% to 70% of Chinese population during inter-dynasty period.

[PapaBear3625]

The word which describes China's current situation is "oligarchy", where an entrenched elite runs the country for its own benefit. This increasingly describes the US as well, but that's another story.

The Chinese "princelings" are effectively the new nobility of China, each guarding his own feudal turf.

[LomanBill]

Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Ba’al
—The Woo?

[r9etb]

Its maintenance cost is loss of lives anywhere from 30% to 70% of Chinese population during inter-dynasty period.

I seem to recall Chinese politics during that period were dominated by "Warlordism;" and from that perspective the current Communist era begins to look like one of the shorter-lived dynastic systems that achieved "one China" status for a while.

One wonders when these factions will finally revert to classic Chinese form and go to war with each other. I have to think it won't be all that long....

[Little Ray]

Okay, so I understated things a bit...

I can’t imagine how a nation survives losing 70% of its population.

[Little Ray]

Part of my view of China is shaped by a historian who called the establishment of Communism in China the “Peasant Dynasty.”
From a SF/Future History point of view, I see an empire ruled by an emperor called a Chairman and served by Ministers drawn from a nobility called the Commissioners.
Or something along that line, anyway.

[AndyJackson]

Look at it from the point of view of the 30% who remain living. Life goes on. In fact, I can imagine lots of places in the US that would be a lot more pleasant with 70% less population. DC is one. LA and NY are others.

[AndyJackson]

The entire article is a wonderful discourse on how economies can go wrong. The irony that we are looking at ourselves in a mirror, as other posters have pointed out, should not be lost on anyone.

[Cacique]

btt

[TigerLikesRooster]

The worst of such episodes is the population dropping from 60 million(end of Later Han Era) to 8 million(somewhere near the end of Three Kingdom Period.) Jin Dynasty unified China for a short period, before it was destroyed by civil war(Eight Princes Rebellion.)