Should term limit for China's presidency remain the same, be extended, or eliminated?

They might've abolished term limits but it doesn't say they abolished terms nor the process of being elected.

I'm sure the communists thought this was going to show how good Xi has been for China and he has been a positive for the Chinese. Like I've been arguing in here, Beijing doesn't have a clue how others think. Clearly because Beijing had to respond to the negative reaction in the West, they didn't see this coming. And this is when Beijing is an embarrassment.

After some time, I see both upsides and downsides.

Upsides mentioned here, stability in policy and keeping experience with government and foreign affairs in play.

A downside I don't think has been mentioned on this thread: what will this mean for subordinates in e.g. Politburo? Will they work less hard, because they think they have "capped out" at their current positions? This may be a more subtle problem that is more difficult to deal with than Emperor Xi, who still has to agree with at least 5 other people in the Politburo SC when making decisions.

I'm not sure if this has being mention as I haven't read the thread in it's entirety but if you take this decision in a more global context.

That is to say in the current (global) political climate which is going through very rapid society, technological and political changes - automation, mass migration, underemployment and swing towards fringe politics all over the world - it makes sense for them to seek stability, especially where western powers are waning and/or domestic politics in flux. And, when they are none too friendly to China to begin with, it makes sense to seek stability in the longer term.

Of course it could very well be another ploy to consolidate their own power but rather than fall back on the usual hand wringing and condescension by the usual western pundits, but viewed in current geopolitic context there is valid reasoning behind the decision.

N00813 said:

After some time, I see both upsides and downsides.

Upsides mentioned here, stability in policy and keeping experience with government and foreign affairs in play.

A downside I don't think has been mentioned on this thread: what will this mean for subordinates in e.g. Politburo? Will they work less hard, because they think they have "capped out" at their current positions? This may be a more subtle problem that is more difficult to deal with than Emperor Xi, who still has to agree with at least 5 other people in the Politburo SC when making decisions.

Click to expand...

Extending beyond the current term limit doesn’t and shouldn’t mean president for life.

If other potential future leaders in waiting start slacking off because of this, they can easily be replaced in their existing roles by more hungry and disciplined subordinates of their own.

Besides, if anyone has the kind of selfish and undisciplined motivations and attitude as you described, it’s probably for the best that they get weeded out before they get the top job.

Since once they attain that ultimate position, they will be in the same situation of having capped out and have no further rungs on the career ladder to climb. And it will be so much worse for China if someone like that became president and decided he has achieved all his goals and effectively falls asleep at the wheel when the country needs him to be at his most focused and determined.

AssassinsMace said:

Like I've been arguing in here, Beijing doesn't have a clue how others think. Clearly because Beijing had to respond to the negative reaction in the West, they didn't see this coming. And this is when Beijing is an embarrassment.

Click to expand...

You are dangerously underestimating Beijing if you think they cannot see something so obvious.

I see it as Beijing not giving a single solitary crap about what the west thinks.

They are the leaders of China, and their only concern should be what is in the best interests of China, and not how to please the West.

The western media will piss and moan pretty much no matter what China does, and spin everything to show only the worst angle. It’s what they do.

The only way Beijing could please the West is to do things that benefit the West at the expense of damaging Chinese national interests. So I say that’s a mugs game, and Beijing is absolutely right on not playing it.

plawolf said:

You are dangerously underestimating Beijing if you think they cannot see something so obvious.

I see it as Beijing not giving a single solitary crap about what the west thinks.

Click to expand...

It seems that Beijing does not give a crap what China thinks either.

lucretius said:

It seems that Beijing does not give a crap what China thinks either.

Click to expand...

And you know how 1.3bn Chinese citizens think, how? Don’t assume that just because the western media only cherry pick the critical views to report on that it represents what the Chinese people think on the whole.

I would say that all experience and evidence points to Beijing not only caring, but is also far more responsive to what the Chinese people want than pretty much all elected democracies. Precisely because they cannot just glibly throw the ‘well the people elected me’ excuse that western politicians go to by default whenever you question their competence and performance.

Beijing is judged entirely on how well it is able to deliver the goods to keep the people happy.

That is not to say the this decision is automatically what the majority of Chinese citizens want either, because sometimes you need to make the unpopular choice in order to deliver the goods.

The point is that this is a hugely devisive event, so anyone who claims to definitively say what the Chinese people think about it are full of it. Since I would expect Chinese society to be pretty split on the matter, with many people holding conflicted views that may chance back and forth.

lucretius said:

It seems that Beijing does not give a crap what China thinks either.

Click to expand...

Did you get all your insight into this from the Western media? Cus the Chinese internet is clamoring with support. The people's admiration and approval of Xi crept up into the voting CCP members and that's what's making this proposal and the upcoming vote possible.

But if you're only reading the Western media, you'd think 1.3 billion Chinese are watching in helpless horror as they watch their country get hijacked. Next time, read primary sources, not secondary sources with a grudge against the primary sources...

AssassinsMace said:

They might've abolished term limits but it doesn't say they abolished terms nor the process of being elected.

Clearly because Beijing had to respond to the negative reaction in the West, they didn't see this coming. And this is when Beijing is an embarrassment.

Click to expand...

LOL..in the Western anti-China pundits wet dreams! Perhaps it's true for Japan and South Korea since they are weaker and cater to that kind of narrative behavior and reaction to Western media and criticism.

lucretius said:

It seems that Beijing does not give a crap what China thinks either.

Click to expand...

I am sitting in my Beijing home right now, I think Beijing is still part of China. What map are you looking at?