The assumption that Xi has departed "too early" from Deng's doctrine is just a blind wishful thinking based on the assumption that there is factions in CCP strong enough to alter the course.Not really, many factions within the CCP believe that China should still be binding its time and laying low. Moreover, China should be submissive towards the US. China’s foreign policy was long influenced by Deng Xiaoping's doctrine, “hide your strength and bide your time”. Don't underestimate the numbers of top leaders within CCP that still wanted to cave in the trade war.
Mr. Xi believes it is time for China to take center stage in the world. Many of his policies such as South China sea, belt road initiatives, Xinjiang, and Asia Infrastructure Bank have contradicted Deng Xiaoping's doctrine. Chaos in HK and slowdown in economy would have made Xi look weak and vulnerable. I don't believe there could be a coup but many tycoons in HK have strong ties with many top leaders in China so Jimmy Lai might think there is a chance.
I would like to point out Deng's doctrine is not only 韬光养晦(hide your strength and bide your time) but also 有所作为(aim to achieve something big).
From my perspective, Xi departed or not departed from Deng's Doctrine isn't that big a deal. As for factions, there are no ideological factions within the party that I know of. That doesn't mean there are no factions and different in interests.The assumption that Xi has departed "too early" from Deng's doctrine is just a blind wishful thinking based on the assumption that there is factions in CCP strong enough to alter the course.
There are different opinions within CCP, but anyone forming a faction that oppose the decision that has been taken by the majority is a rebelling and certainly ended up in prison for life. We have good examples, many of them. Effectively, the party is well unified.
It is a mistake to assume that it was Xi who turned policy. Many of his acts are continuation from Hu Jintao, just not in that name.
Did Xi contradicts Deng's doctrine by doing something more assertive? No, because as you as said, Deng's doctrine includes "doing" as well. It is only the timing to be debated. Even that, it was not Xi but Hu from 2008 began turning assertive. But because that was the last 2 years of his time and only the beginning, it did not generate much noise.
- Asia Infrastructure Bank, was proposed in 2009 under Hu Jintao's administration.
- OBOR was the continuation and expansion of "great development of the west" under Hu Jintao. "great development of the west" was to build up infrastructure of China's west. Then what you may ask. Of course the natural next step is to expand that further west.
- Xi is tough on Xinjing, but Hu was the one who crashed riot in Lahsa. Same iron-fist, same policy.
The whole thing should have told everyone two things.
A background knowledge in Chinese political norm, faction-ism (literally partisan struggle 党争) was always something the state will try to exterminate. Negative example are the Song dynasty and Ming dynasty, which became part of text book to later Emperors. Party (党) as a western imported terminology is nothing the Chinese favor, China only kept the word but has since given Chinese meaning.
- CPC is not a personal party, it is a team leading party that peruses agenda over decades. Hoping one individual act favorably (to some direction) is just naive.
- There are different opinions within, but there is no factions, unlike the western parties (strictly speaking, CPC does not see western political parties as real parties).
The poll was also commissioned by a group with a vested interest in having the poll produce a result in one direction.Good analysis! And yes, the British had planted the seeds of this long time ago. Noticed though, the British is harping on about democracy only just before their rule comes to an end! Mmmm!!!
See this clip about, (and for those who don't speak cantonese) the speaker mentioned two things of importance.
1st, he said, when ever Joshua Wong and his backers and the MSM keeps on about Hong Kong's lack of freedom! And portrait an image of Hong Kongers living in China akin to 1984 orwellian type of society!
Yet no one noticed or mentioned, how much FREEDOM Joshua and his cohorts have by flying around the world to garnish support from western nations. Or that they come and go within Hong Kong to canvass for votes with the types of freedom some western nations can only dream about!
The speaker also said the riots of the 60s, he said of the people that took part in that riots all got criminal records and as such are banned from government post and jobs until 97, when China gave them armistice!
Sorry. It said the file is too big to up load
What question?And you keep repeating the same thing again and again and refuse to answer even a simple question.
What else is evidence but observation? If you think observations are worth little, then you deny all legal proceedings, all judgement, all science.And your conclusion is based upon a mere observation that there are less people at the protests.
But as I have said many times, the election does not prove that the majority of Hong Kongers support the cockroaches. You keep attempting to assert that, and I keep demonstrating that your logic is faulty.Let me repeat a simple fact again. The pan-Dems camp won the election. The pan-Dems camp still supported the rioters.
Oh, I have little doubt the riots will continue to happen, as long as the CIA can pay the cockroaches. I am simply saying that most Hong Kongers hate the violence.The riots will continue.
That is an interesting point. You could be right. The CIA, MI6, or other dirty tricks organizations in the West may have been planning the riots for when Hong Kong returns fully to the mainland. But by having the riots now, twenty-seven years too soon, the dirty tricksters are prematurely revealing their plans and giving the mainland practice in countering them. The impatience is very like Trump.I do get a feeling though that Beijing is looking at Hong Kong and thinking Taiwan. In that sense, The West may well be revealing decades worth of planning and network building in a scenario that is not really paying off. Politically Hong Kong is quarantined and there is no danger of the infection spreading to the mainland.
Hong Kong is then a lab rat and Beijing is watching closely as to how the infection spreads within its host.
Indeed. The UK may be attempting to replicate the Northern Ireland pattern. They are definitely attempting to make religion as important and divisive in Hong Kong as it is in Northern Ireland, but I do not think they are very successful. Religious feeling is too weak in HK.Sadly too much to be able to post about at present, but given the role played by the UK in all this, the Chinese way well like to take a UK example to compare with Hong Kong. I am think specifically of Northern Ireland and the Troubles. All the ingredients for rival sectarian paramilitaries are there, simply substitute 1C2S for the Good Friday Agreement and LegCo for Stormont and you should be able to work out where I am coming from. In short that the Bullet and the Ballot Box is a great slogan but impossible to turn into policy, once you are elected.