Read on Twitter
In my limited experience, on average a CCP member is more critical of the CCP then the average person in the People's Republic.
Possible explanations: an average CCP member is more educated than the average Chinese person, and they probably follow current affairs closer.
Possible explanations: an average CCP member is more educated than the average Chinese person, and they probably follow current affairs closer.
CCP is an organisation with more than 90 million members, with hundreds of thousands of subordinate organisations.
There are more CCP members than population of countries including Congo, Turkey, Iran and Germany.
There are more CCP members than population of countries including Congo, Turkey, Iran and Germany.
For the overwhelming majority of party members, they joined the party for upward mobility. Only a few thousand of the elite members have real power to steer the ship of state.
I think it's ridiculous to see these 90 million people as a threat.
I think it's ridiculous to see these 90 million people as a threat.
If we were in the 1930s/1940s than party membership actually means something. You joined the party out of conviction, you join to make revolution. Today, you join the party to get ahead on society, to make connections, to be better placed for some jobs.
Most of the brightest in China that wants to enter public service or get involved in politics join the party. Because China is a one party state and there are few other viable options for political participation.
Shock and horror, but the 90-plus million CCP members...
Shock and horror, but the 90-plus million CCP members...
come in all works of life. Like us, they are individuals.
In my view, party allegiance means very little to overwhelming majority of the 90 million. Ideological conviction is weak. After all, there is nothing coherent to buy into after the disaster of high Maoism.
In my view, party allegiance means very little to overwhelming majority of the 90 million. Ideological conviction is weak. After all, there is nothing coherent to buy into after the disaster of high Maoism.
What I'm getting at not that CCP members are good or bad people or that CCP pose no challenges, but rather that labelling 90 million people is an inherently impossible exercise.
Clear black/white labels can obscure as much as reveal.
Clear black/white labels can obscure as much as reveal.
There are legitimate issues re party membership, eg re part cells in foreign companies, for security clearance purposes, but these are specific issues.
Labelling 90-plus million CCP members as threats is going overboard.
Labelling 90-plus million CCP members as threats is going overboard.
By analogy (and yes it's imperfect), if you took issue with the German or Iranian govts, are you going to deem all Germans and Iranians as threats? Of course not, that's ridiculous.
But then you say that CCP members swear an oath, and that adds to the threat. The effect of the oath is individual, and I can say in my experience that most CCP members see the oath as just a formality, without the solemnity that some of us would subscribe to it.
If we are going to label all 90-odd million CCP members as threats, then how about their family & friends, totalling hundreds of millions of ppl, who are not party members? And how about the part of the Chinese population that support CCP policies and/or rule?
There is no easy and neat way of dividing the Chinese people and the CCP. The likes of Pompeo have made that artificial divide and indulged in the fantasy of a population ready to rise up to the regime. But that's nothing but fantasy.
See: https://oxfordpoliticalreview.com/2020/04/24/china-series-1/
See: https://oxfordpoliticalreview.com/2020/04/24/china-series-1/
We already see govts, politicians, media and others use Chinese ethnicity and/or PRC nationality as threat indicators (eg DOJ's China Initiative). This approach is morally questionable as well as counterproductive: https://www.thechinastory.org/the-u-s-china-initiative-from-review-to-reformulation/
