This is a comm for news, information, and discussion on anything China and Chinese related.
Rules:
Imperialism will result in a ban.
Sinophobic content will be removed.
Since coming to power, President Xi has launched waves of anti-corruption drives, which critics say have also been used as a tool to purge political rivals.
if the rivals are actually corrupt, does it matter? Am I not allowed to prosecute/punish you for your corruptions because you are my rival, political or otherwise?
They always refer to these mystical unnamed "critics", but genuinely who are they even talking about? The Burger Freedom Society for Democracy and Human Rights House Foundation? Because it seems anyone can just say any bullshit and be a "critic"
It can be an issue if you're letting Your Guys do corruption while just purging opposition, but imo the more salient point here is that political enemies often can and should be purged (typically not via death penalty, but China typically doesn't actually kill them) and there's a conflation in western media between purging enemies to your political project versus purging political rivals who are obstacles in your personal political career.
Does Xi have political rivals? Like in the entire world? Who's stopping China from doing whatever the fr*ck the people's will is? Does Xi have checks and balances?
By its basic nature, China's system constantly produces enemies to socialism. No one but the most fanciful sinophiles [which I'm not saying you are, you're just asking a question] deny that, including China itself not denying that, the only disagreements are the extent to which it does that and how much power those enemies have, ranging from "they are totally contained and usually not that extensive" to "they functionally control the country but need to put on these shows to rein in their more unruly elements and preserve public confidence."
The purpose of a system isn't what it does, it's what western news media talking heads say it does. Sure, it looks like he's just getting rid of corruption, but he's actually just getting rid of his political rivals like a bad guy in gambo thrones!
Western media: China is one of the most corrupt countries on earth. So much for "communist" values. Pay to play rules the day. 
Western media after anti corruption drive: Xi is clearly targeting officials who threaten his power in his quest to become the supreme people's turbo dictator 4 life.
"What we are dealing with is an unfalsifiable orthodoxy so assiduously marketed that it has infected people across the entire political spectrum." 
Critical support for china, I always oppose the death penalty but if you're gonna use it this is when you should. This kind of thing is also the point I use when people argue over whether China is socialist: yes they have a mixed economy, but! People in positions of power, including the ultra wealthy (although I appreciate this guy is a politician, not a capitalist) are actually held to account at least part of the time. This shit never, ever happens in the capitalist countries because these corrupt elites are who the system is designed to serve. Yes, these powerful people still get away with it in china, because they are actually powerful, but there is at least some will to do something about it in a way that there isn't in our liberal democracies.
I used to think the death penalty was barbaric. Still do, but this is awesome
The workers can have little a barbarism as a treat
Socialism and barbarism? In this economy?
thank you mr wikipedia
honestly, forced labour for the rest of his life would be a more fitting punishment, imo
A Chinese official has been sentenced to death
without a reprieve
Unrelated to the article, but the ai advertisements on the bbc page aren't sending their best
Cw slop
Sometimes I wonder if I'm missing anything with ad block. Don't seem to be, it's just the same stuff from several years ago, now with AI incoherence attached.
GroundLber/
As someone who doesn't agree with the death penalty, I feel very conflicted about this. It's the BBC so there isn't a lot of details on how bad this crime is. (I mean corruption of that much is bad regardless, yes, but I just meant specifics). Like, is death really the only best way for this?
To clarify, though, I am an American, and we can't get our pedo, racist,removed, corrupted president to house arrest with everything laid out and well documented, so like I am not judging cause I feel like to do so would be the epitome of ignorance on my part. Just trying to seek understanding.
Edit: Thanks for the responses; I have a lot to chew on
I'm not keen on the death penalty myself but if a society is going to have it I'll respect them a lot more for using it on powerful and privileged people who deliberately hurt large amounts of people than for using it on mentally ill members of the underclass.
Idk, I think the death penalty is a much more appropriate penalty for white collar criminals than most other things. The amount of misery people can cause for nothing more than a number on a bank account, usually by people who never lacked for anything and knew in advance what would happen? That's the sort of shit that can only be prevented when death to oneself is the penalty.
A pederast, a murderer, a rapist won't be deterred by the death penalty and there's no meaningful redress from their deaths. A banker who sees another banker get fucking fried? Bet you he starts behaving a little better for a good while.
Edit: and you better believe rule compliance becomes a priority if the head of your department can get in deep shit for any corruption done under their watch.
A pederast, a murderer, aremoved won't be deterred by the death penalty and there's no meaningful redress from their deaths. A banker who sees another banker get fucking fried? Bet you he starts behaving a little better for a good while.
i know we have studies on harsher penalties not changing behavior for petty or interpersonal crimes but western countries don't punish corruption much at all so i don't know if there's anything from the academy on whether that applies to spreadsheet crimes. It certainly seems like it should deter, but it seems like it should for burglary too.
Harsher penalties on burglary would just make more burglaries end in murder. The prospect of 25 to life over stolen jewelry would certainly make one less inclined to leave witnesses.
not just the second-order effects. People who are doing crime for survival aren't really affected by penalties, nor are compulsive shoplifters.
It depends on the consequences of the corruption. If it was just typical graft and favoritism then prison and permanent blacklisting from political life is probably more appropriate. If it was looking the other way on safety regulations or the graft measurably caused death and considerable suffering through diverting resources from where they were needed to save lives, then it's murder or manslaughter and there's a point where that is appropriate to punish with the death penalty.
Especially since every decision would be formally on the record, as would its consequences. It's not like the shitshow that is trying to determine guilt at the level of a private individual where there's only circumstantial evidence. Most of the problem with the death penalty is that the legal system is a depraved, fundamentally illegitimate shitshow in the US (and most places) that cannot be permitted to have the authority to murder people based on whatever nightmare logic a christofascist judge decides to allow in court.
i think stable states should be able to not do the death penalty, but on the other hand i really don't care if it's white-collar criminals who had to premeditate and repeatedly double and triple down on what they were doing.
I think it's fine to object to this use of the death penalty as unnecessary while still acknowledging that it's vastly superior to the American system of no penalty for the rich.
Edit: I completely reject the idea that it's inherently "appropriate" to punish anyone with death on some kind of moral basis, even if circumstances (by which I mean instability) makes it pragmatically necessary in some cases for getting rid of people who represent excessive liabilities if the opposition releases them again (which is not China's situation. Still better this than letting him get away with it, I'm not saying it's a profound humanitarian issue or anything.
¥2 200 000 000/3.29 = $668 693 009
I think...
ⓘ This user is suspected of being a cat. Please report any suspicious behavior.
