Relatedly, could moves like this actually encourage some sort of reaction by the people against their authoritarian government?
Until recently, the power in China was divided between several people in the Standing Committee, loosely organized into two factions. The two factions alternated every several years (not based on elections but just a pre-agreed schedule). This was intended to prevent the leader from doing something too crazy even by CCP standards, like say another cultural revolution.
Now there's no alternating between factions because there's only one faction left. And, the power of the Standing Committee is much weaker. Xi has much more power than any leader for the past couple decades.
The risk of some insane decisions by Xi is therefore much greater: it's a lot more difficult for the rest of the party to stop him.
Of course, if you think Xi is a good leader, who is likely to help make China more prosperous and a more enjoyable place to live in, it's possibly a good news. But even then you should be worried about succession: how to prevent some insane leader from taking control of all this power in the future?
Let's say Xi has hypothetic son Xiao, a spoiled brat whom he's going to pass on the country in 2042. What are the chances that he'll be stopped by such a clause when he removed the terms limit in the first place?
There are still intra-party factions. Xi’s anti-corruption drive is an effort to defang them. An arguable strength of China’s one-party system was that it had an odd sort of internal democracy, neatly contained to the party elite. Xi is disabling that internal disagreement, which bodes well for short-term stability but points, long-term, towards China becoming a normal sort of dictatorship.
When people in western governments started to form conflicting opinions, they'd say, let's create different parties and compete with each other.
When people in Chinese government started to form conflicting opinions, they'd say, let's keep the conflicts internal and unite under the same party.
Or during the Tiananmen massacre.
In both cases, for reasons unknown, thousands or more (hundreds of thousands) got slaughtered. Most had nothing to do with it.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/china-surveillance-came...
If the Chinese government is able to "kill" (not necessarily in a metaphoric way) any small groups organizing against the government, then it will be very difficult to change this.
If Putin succeeded in becoming a dictator in Russia, I think it's going to be easier for Xi to become a dictator and maintain his power in China.
I'm afraid it may be more likely for some of the Chinese elites that secretly hate and oppose Xi to start something up than for the population to rise at this point in time. Maybe in 20 years, the frustration in the population would bubble up and they could do something about it en mass. Or China could become a bigger version of North Korea.
The advancements in technology don't really seem to be on the people's side either, other than censorship-resistant (a key point, as not all are) blockchain technologies. But I'm not sure these P2P technologies will advance fast enough to stay ahead of Surveillance AI.
Not sure what this means... In what sense is Putin not a dictator already? Despite the illusion of free elections (almost universal in dictatorships), widespread vote tampering, the imprisonment of opponents and prohibition of alternative parties make his rule absolute.
1. USA - Trump
2. Turkey - Erdogen
3. Russia - Putin
4. India - Modi
Meanwhile Macron won a highly contested race in France against a far right candidate, Merkel did something similar.
When the democracies in the world are in such disarray and can't band together to collectively act as a check on authoritarianism, it emboldens the latter.
Even with media censorship, the Chinese government has to react to people's comments (and a lot of times, much faster and effective than western governments, contradictory to what western media wants to believe)
Often times the reactions are short term and not very good solutions either. See China's economic policies after 2008 that helped keep the economy afloat but have caused much concern from many well-known economists.
Let me just say that personally I think China has done a fantastic job of industrializing rapidly, lifting millions from poverty and destitution. I have serious concerns about the same ideas working to push China into the future though; which is why its very important to foster creativity and allow dissent even though its uncomfortable for those in power.
One thing that often comes to mind is how upto the 17th century Chines economy was the biggest and its military and Naval might were unparalleled in the history of the world (except perhaps the Romans before). Then an inward focused policy of sealing the country against contact with the outside weakened the country into destitution. So bad political policies have real consequences and this news makes me much more concerned that they will be repeated.