A top economist has joined the growing list of China’s elite to have disappeared from public life after criticizing Xi Jinping, according to The Wall Street Journal. 

Zhu Hengpeng served as deputy director of the Institute of Economics at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) for around a decade.

CASS is a state research think tank that reports directly to China’s cabinet. Chen Daoyin, a former associate professor at Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, described it as a “body to formulate party ideology to support the leadership.”

According to the Journal, the 55-year-old disappeared shortly after remarking on China’s sluggish economy and criticizing Xi’s leadership in a private group on WeChat.

  • YeetPics@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    Xi is just a walking talking crying infant with an ego that can barely fit in mainland China.

  • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I already see tankies making up some of the most delusional excuses youve ever heard.

    • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      The most ridiculous I have heard is that when I pointed out that people had to wait for years to get a car, and bread lines were common, I got told that the scarcity in communist states is by design.

      SuRe yOu lIvE iN tHe CoUnTrYsIdE, bUt YoU dOn’T nEeD a CaR. JuSt WaLk oR gEt A bUgGy.

      • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Yeah over production of goods is a problem but the ussr was built different. Hungary(where im from) has the second best land for agriculture in all of europe only after ukraine and somehow we still had food rations. Same in ukraine too. They had it even worse.

      • Fox@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        8 hours ago

        ML anxious attachment style. Banning people for comments they make on other instances is some weeeird little dog behavior.

        • AmosBurton_ThatGuy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Already been down voted by a .ml user that got offended by me daring to insult their precious instance. Fuck .ml and their trash mods and admins lmao

          • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            At least they’re slightly better than Truth Social. Apparently that’s literally a completely defederated Mastodon instance.

    • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I’d prefer to redirect them to the north. Let them invade the fertile and undeveloped lands russia has neglected, and get back Yongmingcheng. It beats fighting every other country in the pacific - aside from North Korea.

      No one will care if China invades Russia. Do eet!

    • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      31 minutes ago

      I’ll have you know that America did some bad stuff so that justifies literally any amount of authoritarianism from China.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      13 hours ago

      I had the most hilarious discussion with a Tankie about China a while back. They refused to accept that China is pretty much communist in name only. I pointed out that they had billionaires, privately-owned companies, a stock exchange and private property, meaning you can earn capital in China.

      The Tankie actually said something on the lines of, “If you would JUST READ MARX you would know that earning capital is a fundamental cornerstone of communism!”

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        26 minutes ago

        I mean, you definitely should read Marx. China is Socialist, guided by a Communist Party. It hasn’t reached Communism, and when they tried to jump to Communism under Mao and the later Gang of Four, they ran into massive issues because the Means of Production weren’t developed enough.

        Marx maintains that the next Mode of Production emerges from the previous, dialectically. That doesn’t mean China needed to let Billionaires run rampant, doing whatever they want, it means that it was the correct gamble to heavily industrialize and interlock itself with the global economy while maintaining State Supremacy over Capital, focusing more than anything on developing the productive forces.

        Like it or not, the USSR collapsed due to trying to stay isolated from the West, which legitimately led to dissatisfaction towards the lack of consumer goods. They had strong safety nets and all the necessities they needed, but lacked the fun toys. The PRC watched this in real time, and didn’t want to repeat it.

        In that manner, the PRC is Socialist. It maintains a Dictatorship of the Proletariat over Capital, Billionaires fear persecution, state ownership is high and growing, the Proletariat’s real purchasing power is growing. The bourgeoisie exists, but has been kept no larger than can be drowned in a bathtub, in terms of power relation to the CPC, so to speak.

        There is risk of Capitalist roading, and the bourgeoisie wresting control from the CPC. This risk is real, and is dangerous, but it hasn’t happened yet. Wealth disparity is rising, so we must keep a careful eye on it.

        The greatest analytical tool of a Marxist is Dialectical Materialism. When analyzing something, it isn’t sufficient to take a present-day snapshot, you must consider its history, its relations to other entities, its contradictions, and its trajectory. Engels was a Capitalist, was Marx hypocritical for keeping Engels as his closest friend and ally? No. Class reductionism is dogmatic, we must analyze correctly.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          24 minutes ago

          Marx maintains that the next Mode of Production emerges from the previous, dialectically.

          Ah, okay. Well, the previous mode of production involved no private property and no accrual of capital. Now there is both. So do please point out where Marx talks about how things go from not earning capital to earning capital to not earning capital again.

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 minutes ago

            I did. Mao tried to jump ahead to Communism, without developing the Means of Production. This was misguided. Deng noted the failures of the Gang of Four:

            During the “cultural revolution” the Gang of Four raised the absurd slogan, “Better to be poor under socialism and communism than to be rich under capitalism.” It may sound reasonable to reject the goal of becoming rich under capitalism. But how can we advocate being poor under socialism and communism? It was that kind of thinking that brought China to a standstill. That situation forced us to re-examine the question.

            The PRC had eliminated Private Property, but were poor. The people were struggling. They had not actually developed the Means of Production to the level they needed to be.

            Here’s a Marxist “test,” if you will. If you take expert Marxists and place them in an entirely new Earth-like planet, with no tools, what would their course of history look like? Would they be able to achieve Communism through fiat, or would they have to go through similar stages of production as we did in history?

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 minute ago

              No you did not. You did not point to where Marx said it or what he said despite me asking you two multiple times. That is just a lie. You are clearly here in bad faith and this discussion is over. And I better not see this kind of trolling from you to other users.

      • JustARaccoon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 hours ago

        I mean you can still have private property under communism, it’s the capital making property that’s more owned by the workers themselves, but you can still own things under communism.

        Similarly, you can earn capital under communism too, it’s just that the tools for earning said capital aren’t owned by corporations under corporations under CEOs under the 1%. It’s not a cornerstone for sure, but it’s not like communism is anti capital and growth and owning things

        • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          60 minutes ago

          A bit nitpicky here, but personal property isn’t Private Property. That being said, Marx and Engels maintained constantly that Private Property cannot be abolished in one sweep, that goes fundamentally against Historical Materialism. Socialism emerges from Capitalism, you can’t establish it through fiat, hence why the Cultural Revolution wasn’t a resounding success. Mao tried to establish Communism immediately, misjudged, and then Deng stepped in.

          • JustARaccoon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Read a bit ahead if you may:

            Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labour of others by means of such appropriations.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              57 minutes ago

              Okay? That doesn’t change the summary about private property, which is a thing in China. It wasn’t under Mao, it is now.

            • Fox@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 hours ago

              And then the adherents fought over the means and meaning, and everybody else threw their hands up

              • JustARaccoon@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 hours ago

                Tbh Marx is intentionally questioning definitions and such so it makes sense, simplifying it down to terms we use isn’t very productive in that sense, because what he argues for is the abolishing of “private property” as we know it, but without removing the fruits of labour from its people, so if you and your mates worked for your house you can have it, until the moment you start making a business out of it then it’s less ok.

      • x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Private property as in land or a house? Because that’s not how it works in China. You can only buy it for a specific set of time. Besides that it is indeed just a capitalistic country with an oppressive state.

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        11 hours ago

        something on the lines of

        Any time someone describes something that happened on the fediverse without providing a link, they are misrepresenting what happened 100% of the time.

        • barsquid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Hahaha, are you saying that because it was you on the other end of that discussion? I know you love China so much that you are willing to praise their genocide of Uyghur people.

          Maybe you could distill the theory for us a bit so we can decipher why “socialism” is producing hundreds of billionaires.

          • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            Hahaha, are you saying that because it was you on the other end of that discussion?

            Not to my knowledge, but there’s no way for anyone to know what incident it’s referencing so it could be any conversation they had with anyone, or made up whole cloth. I say this exact thing every time I see someone claim something happened on the fediverse without providing a link 1 2 3, and I haven’t been wrong yet. And that’s not really surprising, why wouldn’t someone provide a link to something that made the other side look bad, unless it didn’t actually play out the way they claim?

            For example, when you say that I “praise the genocide of Uyghur people,” that is a lie, and it should be obvious that it’s a lie from the fact that you didn’t provide a link to it.

            I’d be happy to have a good faith discussion regarding China’s economic policies and how they relate to socialism. Just not with someone who I already know is going to lie, misrepresent whatever I say, and act in bad faith, as I know you will.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              56 minutes ago

              For example, when you say that I “praise the genocide of Uyghur people,” that is a lie, and it should be obvious that it’s a lie from the fact that you didn’t provide a link to it.

              That’s right! OBJECTION! is just a genocide denialist, like Holocaust denialists! Much better.

            • barsquid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              6 hours ago

              From the position of your acceptance of Uyghur genocide and pretending that China is anywhere near the left, it’s astonishing you are comfortable accusing anyone else of bad faith.

              There’s simply no way to have a serious discussion with you regarding anything about China. That’s why you have chosen the lemmy.ml instance, it is a hivemind of like thinkers all sheltered from the truth by fragile admins.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      Reminds me of the Clinton Death List, where anyone tangential to Bill and Hilary who had a bad turn was allegedly victimized to cover up an even more insidious crime.

  • helenslunch@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    People complain when Trump and Biden puts tariffs on Chinese products or try to ban Chinese software, or invest hundreds of billions into bringing manufacturing back to the US, but it’s like they just can’t comprehend what a horrific government China has, between an authoritarian police state and leveraging slave labor to take over global industries, they’re a huge threat to freedom everywhere.

  • cygnus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    141
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    19 hours ago

    If you think the Chinese economy is bad now, wait 15 years. No amount of sending economists to the gulag will hide this disaster.

    Edit: tankie downvotes are like nectar of the gods to me. Your precious CCP will wither like a plant in the desert.

    • ThirdWorldOrder@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      I’ve already been banned from Hexbear. Bunch of assclowns over there.

      Edit: and now lemmygrad

        • Shard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Arbitrary bans from overly sensitive mods? Straight to Jail.

          Made a comment about tankies in lemmy getting mad over some news about China getting hit with influence ops by the US. Believe it or not, ban.

          • ThirdWorldOrder@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 hours ago

            It’s okay man, it takes me a few seconds to scroll through all my bans. It’s funny because all these pro China dweebs are living in the USA. Can’t even commit to the bit and just sit there all day posting anti USA or western stuff. They are obnoxious.

            • barsquid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 hours ago

              They are privileged children sheltered from reality by mommy and daddy’s money.

          • barsquid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 hours ago

            That’s easy mode, since Rule 2 is basically “don’t write a fact about China.”

            • ThirdWorldOrder@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              edit-2
              9 hours ago

              They are cosplay commie instances, and they all live in western countries especially the USA.

              I browse by all and don’t usually check what instance I’m commenting in. They will swarm like fire ants if you don’t chirp like them. They also have very thin skin so I don’t think they would make good comrades if they ever reach their Utopia.

              I won’t even get into the Hexbear because that’s too easy, but look at the mods for USA at .ml

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        27
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Why do you think Israel needs a fucking iron dome? Bunch of virgin clowns in here.

        This you?

        • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          50
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Even then, it isn’t healthy, just healthier. The USA is still going to going to experience economic issues of a growing elderly population, it just won’t be as bad.

          • Shard@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            12 hours ago

            This is the new normal for highly developed economies. The best they can hope for is a 1 to 1 replacement of their population. We’re not likely to see another baby boom occur.

            We’re not going to see a typical population pyramid any more. Because that means a large infant death rate and either war, disasters or a massive suicide epidemic cutting away the young adult population to get the pyramid shape.

            • zbyte64@awful.systems
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              11 hours ago

              Given that the amount of habitable land will decrease causing mass migrations, you don’t need a 1 to 1 ratio to maintain a population size.

          • cygnus@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            41
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            18 hours ago

            The US have the benefit of essentially limitless immigration that they can adjust at will. On the other hand, China’s leadership, being Han supremacist, is not receptive to immigration at all.

            • rammer@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 hours ago

              The US have the benefit of essentially limitless immigration

              Except that even in the Americas the population is declining. There is a limit to it. The US can outlast many other countries because of immigration but it too has to face the same problem as everyone else.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              10 hours ago

              The US have the benefit of essentially limitless immigration

              glances at US immigration policy

              Does it?

              China’s leadership, being Han supremacist, is not receptive to immigration at all.

              Wit drier than a lint trap.

            • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              15 hours ago

              Immigration definitely helps, especially compared to China. I’m just noting that there will still be some decrease in the ratio of retired workers to current workers.

            • Ferrous@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              17 hours ago

              Have you… have you seen how Americans have been talking about the border? Especially this election cycle? I don’t know if would characterize either party’s constituencies as “receptive”.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 hours ago

            it just won’t be as bad.

            glances at Ferguson

            glances at Columbia

            glances at the NYC subway

            How bad are we talking?

          • cygnus@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            21
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            18 hours ago

            Basically, yes. The sides are nearly parallel, which is great. Compare with China’s, which forms a steep V. Once GenX hits retirement age they are completely screwed. The CCP’s recent push for “traditional family values” and increased birth rates is no coincidence.

      • Eheran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        19 hours ago

        The birthing rates are only dropping, in 15 years all of those people will be to old to work but there are not nearly enough to replace them.

          • takeda@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            18 hours ago

            996 = working from 9am to 9pm, 6 days a week, work schedule practiced currently in many companies in China

            7-10-7 = I’m guessing 7am to 10pm, 7 days a week because of worker shortage?

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              10 hours ago

              Old enough to remember people talking about a 4 day work week and complaining about how many bullshit jobs our economy is swamped with.

              But I guess we actually do have a sever labor shortage and all that surplus manufacturing jettisoned out into the global market simply isn’t enough.

          • cygnus@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            18 hours ago

            996 is a term the Chinese use to describe working 9am to 9pm, 6 days a week.

  • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Guess Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey was closer to the real story than the originals by Milne…

  • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Truly no emperor has ever worn such fine clothes as our beloved Xi. This will absolutely never backfire on them