When Xi took over a decade ago, some believed him to be a liberal reformer likely to further relax state economic controls. Instead, he single-mindedly worked to strengthen the CCP’s and his authority. While not a Marxist, since he recognizes that productive private business is an important CCP resource, he is a peerless Leninist. Engagement with the West spurred dramatic liberalization after Mao’s death but went into reverse after the Tiananmen Square crackdown and has been almost entirely routed by Xi’s essentially totalitarian campaign. There no longer is any space to believe or act differently than as is directed by the party, which these days means Xi.
His rise is an obvious tragedy for the Chinese people. Do you believe in God (meaning God the transcendent, not a man spouting political slogans who believes he is omnipotent, like, well, Xi)? Were you an independent journalist? Did you represent Chinese accused of a political crime? Were you naïve enough to believe that Beijing would preserve Hong Kong’s “one country, two systems” model? Are you a Muslim Uyghur or Tibetan Buddhist? Have you worked for an nongovernmental organization, urging government reform? Do you believe you should have some say over your government’s actions? Have you posted, or simply tried to post, criticisms of the CCP, Xi, or any number of other banned topics on social media?
If any of these cases, you’ve likely been threatened, disbarred, de-platformed, quarantined, detained, fined, reeducated, and/or imprisoned, perhaps more than once. Those guilty of the most serious crimes, such as denouncing Xi, receive lengthy prison terms. If you were able to flee, your family probably has told you not to contact them or has even disowned you; worse, PRC officials have called you to threaten them. Such is the price paid by Chinese people who do not recognize the new Red Emperor.
People outside of China also suffer, especially targets of the PRC’s territorial ambitions. Hong Kong was an inevitable tragedy, unquestionably Chinese territory “protected” by an unenforceable treaty signed by Beijing when it was weak, only recently emergent on the international stage. Policy directed toward Tibet and Xinjiang reflects brutal determination to suppress the slightest hint of separation, let alone independence. Taiwan is the main target of Chinese ire today, seen as an errant province stolen by Japan in 1895 and lost when Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalists fled from the mainland. Americans underestimate the PRC’s determination, shared by people as well as Xi, to force unification upon a free Taiwanese people. (Don’t understand it? Consider the nationalism behind America’s Civil War, which drove the North to refuse to allow the South to go.)
Yet for all the bad that has resulted from Xi’s ascension, he might turn out to be a boon for America in the burgeoning struggle between Washington and Beijing. No matter how competent, intelligent, and, most important, sentient the dictator — by all accounts, Xi is no Joe Biden! — one-man rule suffers from significant weaknesses. Xi’s PRC is no different.
First, as Friedrich Hayek wrote, the worst typically get on top. Authoritarian politics rewards a certain type of person. The willingness to coerce, and, if necessary, imprison and kill, poisons the entire political system. China suffered the very worst under Mao. Even Deng, who did so much to free the Chinese people and delighted American audiences when he visited, ruthlessly reestablished CCP political control in 1989. Xi’s repression is calculated and deliberate, but no less harmful to those targeted.
Second, seeming political stability is merely temporary. Having destroyed the party norms established by Deng and his contemporaries, who hoped to prevent another Mao, a bitter struggle for succession to Xi will eventually be waged in the shadows. Maybe Xi will eventually designate someone, but those chosen by Mao were felled, first by one another and then by Deng and his supporters. More likely, Xi will resist naming anyone, lest they become a threat to him. And what if Xi ends up like Hu, who, at 79, looks infirm and incapable? In the early 1980s, the Soviet Union shuffled along for years under the decrepit Leonid Brezhnev and two short-lived (literally!) successors, before the rise of Mikhail Gorbachev.
Third, there is no accountability. American politicians often get reelected despite disastrous records. Democratic systems, however, allow political elders to assemble and tell a leader (think Richard Nixon) that his or her time is up. Even more important, the public can toss a failure out of office: Ronald Reagan clinched the 1980 contest when he asked if voters were better off than four years before.
Fourth, it is a rare dictatorship that does not turn almost everyone in authority into yes-men. (Also yes-women, but in Xi’s China there are no women on the Politburo and few on the Central Committee.) Important issues get kicked upwards, delegation and discretion disappear, creativity and experimentation are spurned, and sclerosis overtakes the entire decision-making process. The consequences could be dire in a nation of 1.4 billion people. Middlebury College’s Jessica Teets observed that “centralization has also resulted in reduced local discretion for policy experimentation, rigid policy implementation without local adaptation, and decreased morale among local officials.” The result has been “loss of long-term innovation and citizen engagement.”
Fifth, no one is willing to tell, let alone able to convince, the boss that he is wrong. Everyone defers to the dictator, especially those closest to him with the most to lose if they fall from favor. Sycophancy will be particularly pronounced from those hoping to succeed him. Hearing only praise cannot help but inflate Xi’s assessment of his own judgment. Bigger mistakes, combined with more determined resistance to admitting error, are likely to result. And that will manifest itself in foreign as well as domestic mistakes — such as Wolf Warrior diplomacy, which won fans at home but generated animosity overseas.
Sixth, Xi’s Leninist political agenda, which seeks to make the entire economy a CCP tool, will slow his nation’s economic growth. The problems facing China are enormous: piles of bad debts, real-estate crisis, shrinking population, and mass expenditures to monitor, control, and punish the population. Increasingly intrusive politicized regulation adds another burden. Observed author Yuen Yuen Ang: “Forty-four years ago, Deng Xiaoping kicked off the period of ‘reform and opening up’ that transformed China from a poor, autarkic nation into an emerging global power. President Xi Jinping officially ended that era last week.”
Seventh, Xi’s march toward totalitarianism, with his regime determined to indoctrinate, regulate, and manipulate down to the smallest detail, is likely to clash with a more prosperous Chinese people’s desire to make their own choices. Xi’s police state increasingly insists not just on protecting its own authority but on remolding people into the kind of commie automatons it desires them to be. Many young Chinese resigned to political controls have grown angry at the CCP’s move to limit entertainment, humor, and such activities as LARPing, or live-action role-playing. After Shanghai restricted the latter, one Weibo user objected, “If you want us to become North Koreans, just say so.”
Finally, the PRC’s Xi-dominated autocracy has been losing friends abroad. Even countries that want the benefits of Chinese trade and investment — who can blame them? — are uncomfortable with Beijing’s human rights violations, intimidation and pressure, attacks on foreign sovereignty, and economic manipulation. America, despite its manifold imperfections and problems, looks more attractive to many.
The Russo-Ukraine war understandably is Washington’s most immediate foreign-policy concern today. China, however, is a much greater problem over the long term. And America’s greatest ally in meeting the China challenge may be China itself — at least, Xi Jinping and his quest for total control of the PRC. The U.S. obviously has much to overcome. But America’s free society is still a good bet to triumph in the geopolitical struggle to come.
