"On different occasions, I have extracted three criteria from China's experience to comment on the ability of countries in the world to govern the country: (1) whether a country has political power that can represent the overall interests of the people. China has it, but many western countries such as the United States have long since lost it. (two) the government's ability to integrate and reform is strong or weak. (3) Whether the market role and the government role can be better combined. These three standards can be used to measure a country's comprehensive competitiveness and its future prospects."
In 1915, writing on the reasons for the demise of the Second International, Lenin has identified three signs if the revolutionary situation (paraphrasing here): (1) inability of the ruling class to maintain their rule in the same way; (2) unwillingness of the ruled class to be ruled in the same way; and (3) ability of masses to activate and change the status quo. Chinese leadership has been working very hard to insure that they can still do (1) by ensuring that (2) is irrelevant as standards of living rise, thus never leading to (3). Zhang's own trifecta of issues strikes me as similar to this thinking.
So Hong Kong is now governed by “patriots.” Interesting application of the term. Someone ought to put together a CCP lexicon to help the rest of the world understand how the Party uses words in creative ways.
Bravo to Representative Gallagher. I mean, where does the CCP find such chuckleheads as Zhao Lijian? Does he get paid to distract from the clownishness, really more the borishness, that increasingly defines Zhongnanhai? Once more I was reminded of this brilliant three-minute video clarifying the China and China-China debacle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5KEitxFxL4
From segment #3 on Zhang Weiwei:
"On different occasions, I have extracted three criteria from China's experience to comment on the ability of countries in the world to govern the country: (1) whether a country has political power that can represent the overall interests of the people. China has it, but many western countries such as the United States have long since lost it. (two) the government's ability to integrate and reform is strong or weak. (3) Whether the market role and the government role can be better combined. These three standards can be used to measure a country's comprehensive competitiveness and its future prospects."
In 1915, writing on the reasons for the demise of the Second International, Lenin has identified three signs if the revolutionary situation (paraphrasing here): (1) inability of the ruling class to maintain their rule in the same way; (2) unwillingness of the ruled class to be ruled in the same way; and (3) ability of masses to activate and change the status quo. Chinese leadership has been working very hard to insure that they can still do (1) by ensuring that (2) is irrelevant as standards of living rise, thus never leading to (3). Zhang's own trifecta of issues strikes me as similar to this thinking.
So Hong Kong is now governed by “patriots.” Interesting application of the term. Someone ought to put together a CCP lexicon to help the rest of the world understand how the Party uses words in creative ways.
Bravo to Representative Gallagher. I mean, where does the CCP find such chuckleheads as Zhao Lijian? Does he get paid to distract from the clownishness, really more the borishness, that increasingly defines Zhongnanhai? Once more I was reminded of this brilliant three-minute video clarifying the China and China-China debacle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5KEitxFxL4