The Chinese Communist Regime is on the Brink of ‘Disintegration,’ Says Leading China Expert

Epoch Times ^ | 12/6/2019 | Frank Fang

[hinckley buzzard]

The Party controls the Army and the Army has all the guns. The Party has greater surveillance and control of civilians than the Nazi Party ever dreamed of having. But the Gestapo had the whole nation under its thumb.

I don’t see where China has any reason to disintegrate, although it may have some turmoil around succession if Xi is forced from office.

[Mushinronshasan]

If China runs out of communists, can we send them ours?

[samadams2000]

What happens when 1 billion people try to run through the eye of a needle? It’s not pretty.

[SeekAndFind]

It’s not as if we haven’t heard this “Chicoms are doomed” predictions before from so-called expert China observers.

One of the most notoriously wrong “expert” is Gordon Chang who actually lived in Shanghai and Hong Kong.

He predicted a collapse of the Chinese economy as far back as 2004. He even wrote a book entitled, THE COMING COLLAPSE OF CHINA.

Didn’t happen. Yet, here we are in 2019, Gordon Chang is still being given column space in our newspapers and even airtime by Fox, and he’s still predicting a collapse! How many times should a man cry wolf before we ignore him?

[youngidiot]

They’ll invade Taiwan

[neverevergiveup]

I just can’t see this ending well.

[Blurb2350]

Wow, just think if Chinese communism were to collapse under Pres. Trump just as Soviet communism collapsed under Pres. Reagan! But, alas, it’s highly unlikely . . . The wicked Democrat Party wouldn’t allow it.

[Mariner]

He correctly identifies China as the Nazis of our day.

[MadMax, the Grinning Reaper]

4. Red China may artificially resemble the old feudal kingdom’s but with modern weapons, transportation, communications and control of, plus a massive police force/Military, the Red Chinese Communist Party and it’s enforcement arms ,will crush as any opposition in blood and not give a Damn. After all, Michael Bloomturd and Joe Biden deny that RC is threat.

[Zhang Fei]

[The Party controls the Army and the Army has all the guns.]

---

Neither the Party nor the Army are monolithic. Each member will parrot the political line of the moment, but looks to his own personal advancement. (Think of how Yeltsin, a member of the Soviet nomenklatura, came to power. Ideology is just a veneer for individual struggles over personal power and prestige). Regicides are fairly common throughout Chinese history, many perpetrated by powerful courtiers close to the throne. The First Emperor’s heir was killed by his closest advisor, Chief Eunuch Zhao Gao. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhao_Gao#Coup_following_Qin_Shi_Huang’s_death Deng Xiaoping came to power via a coup, at the expense of Mao Zedong’s hand-picked successor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hua_Guofeng#Ousting_and_death

[Chewbarkah]

The Man with the Gold makes the Rules, i.e., in the long run, economics triumphs over politics, even if the two influence each other. As China diversifies wealth and economic resources into many hands, and thus many power-centers, inevitably a central authority cannot maintain control over politics. When and how the CCP collapses is the real question.

The Chinese people, including especially those who hold substantial wealth, have historical reasons to fear the chaos that would ensue without the CCP anchoring the system, even of that anchor is a millstone dragging them down. Uncertainty about what would follow (national disintegration?; back to warlords and constant civil war with foreign powers intervening?; how would economic structures and institutions work?; would a Chinese model of self-government work?) This will act as a brake, since many will have to weigh the advantages of “freedom” against potential anarchy. I find a lot of zigzagging and fraying at the edges more likely than a precipitous collapse.

[Zhang Fei]

[One of the most notoriously wrong “expert” is Gordon Chang who actually lived in Shanghai and Hong Kong.]

---

Gordon Chang is an expert only if expertise is conferred via DNA (he’s half Chinese, via his dad) and business experience. Whereas Waldron has been writing monographs on China and translating obscure historical works from the original Chinese for maybe 50 years.

[SuperLuminal]

IMHO, this qualifies as “Fake News”...

[mrsmith]

Not on point.
Feudal governments can always crush dissent.

But that’s not a “feature” of feudalism... it’s a “bug”!
Feudal regimes end up going “too far”.

[Reverend Wright]

only if there is an economic collapse first

[Robert DeLong]

Very good interview. What I found rather amusing though is through out the interview Dr. Waldron makes the point that time & time again people were mistaken about how China would not change as they perceived, in their delusions, that China would change. Then he ends it all saying he hopes China will change themselves. Almost as if he too has delusions himself. 8>)

[Zhang Fei]

[Then he ends it all saying he hopes China will change themselves.]

---

The unstated theme, for a guy like him who knows everything there is to know about Chinese history, is that he hopes that change will be in a direction that is advantageous for US interests. Change is endemic to all civilizations and China is no exception, having gone through thousands of years of tumultuous changes. In the realm of change, the 20th century pales compared to the 19th, during which China may have lost as much as 1/4 of its population in the course of multiple large scale revolts.

[Robert DeLong]

Yeah, but it was still an ironic end to his interview. 8>)

But I really enjoyed it. The truth is though most countries do not change on their own. Russia did, and the U.S. may end up doing the same. But the list of those who did is quite short, I'm sure. I don't see China adding its name to that list. 8>)

[PGalt]

C’mon now. Our eugenicists/puppets were trying to catch Islam’s, Russia’s and theirs.

[Zhang Fei]

[The truth is though most countries do not change on their own.]

---

If by that you mean the players change, but the game remains the same, I’d say you’re right. It’s more likely that Xi Jinping will be toppled than the guy who replaces him will introduce systemic change. Although he may topple Xi on the basis of promising systemic change to his coup confederates. Still, Yeltsin did promise a lot of things to the Soviet generals who backed him, only to disappoint and demote them to powerless sinecures after he took power.