Content area
Full Text
The aggressive and regressive changes in China in recent years have shocked the world. The sudden downturn of its economy in recent months has surprised perhaps even more, as it seems to contradict mainstream predictions not long ago. A primary reason these phenomena appear so unpredictable or incomprehensible is due to misconceptions about China's economy and polity. More fundamentally, it is because misunderstandings regarding the nature of China's institutions have persisted for decades among scholars, policy advisors, policymakers, and the media.
The most significant misconception about China is overlooking, mistakenly or deliberately, the nature of its fundamental institution's core: the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This Party is intrinsically communist and totalitarian. Both in practice and as highlighted in its constitution, the CCP exerts complete control over every aspect of society, encompassing ideology, polity, and the economy. According to the Constitutions of both the Party and the State, the CCP's ideology is rooted in Marxism, Leninism, and Mao Thought. The principles of such ideology aim to overthrow the bourgeoisie, replace the bourgeois dictatorship with the dictatorship of the proletariat (or dictatorship of people's democracy), and eventually achieve communism. Mao's famous words, which Xi Jinping has emphatically echoed and enacted, "the Party leads everything, everywhere," capture the essence of the CCP accurately.
Under the CCP's total control, or leadership, the fundamental institution of the PRC (People's Republic of China) regime is communist totalitarianism. The reason for not referring to it as socialism is because socialism encompasses a wide range of divergent meanings. It spans from the liberal democracies of Scandinavia and Western European nations to the regimes of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (the Nazi party) and the communist totalitarian regimes. Consequently, using the term "socialism" in discussions about institutions can introduce considerable confusion. I also refrain from describing the CCP regime as authoritarian. This is because authoritarianism, too, covers a broad spectrum of autocratic governments. Moreover, typical authoritarian regimes are not ruled by a party that can ban all other parties and independent organizations, controlling every facet of society. Confusing a totalitarian regime with authoritarian regimes not only obscures understanding but can also misinform policymaking, as seen in popular claims suggesting that economic growth can naturally lead to democracy. In reality, what that claim reflected...