沈大伟的新書發布會

choi

(1) 沈大伟：预测中国很有风险，也很危险. VOA Chinese, Mar 25, 2016.
www.voachinese.com/content/china-future-20160325/3254794.html

My comment:
(a) There is no English-language report (a news report or otherwise, such as outline of the talk) on the talk.
(b) BBC has a news report also, on this Mar 24, 2016 talk. See (2). There is NO need to read the rest of the BBC report. Neither VOA or BBC report says anything new, because Prof Shambaugh did ot say anything new -- since his ground-breaking piece in the Wall Street Journal a year ago.
(c)
(i) The trouble (for me) is I can not find the talk -- in what VOA calls 华盛顿智库威尔逊学者中心 and BBC identifies as 智庫威爾遜中心. But these are are the same. See Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wo ... Center_for_Scholars
(or Wilson Center)
(ii) Wilson Center
www.wilsoncenter.org

Click "EVENTS" in the top horizontal bar, and one find nothing for Mar 24.

(2) 沈大偉：我不是崩潰論者 中國應該考慮新加坡式民主. BBC Chinese, Mar 25, 2016.
www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/china/ ... h_on_china_politics

two consecutive paragraphs:

"沈大偉說中國政治通常在收放之間轉換。他說通常中國有6年到8年處於「放」的階段，之後兩年處於「收」的階段，然而現在中國已經處於「收」的階段第7年了。

"儘管他承認中國的經濟增速仍然十分顯著，但他說，「沒有政治自由化，我認為中國無法達到真正的經濟增長潛力。目前的滯漲將會成為新常態。」

(3) Andrew Browne, Writing China: David Shambaugh, 'China's Future.' China Real Time report, Mar 13, 2016.
http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealti ... augh-chinas-future/

Quote:

"When I used the term 'endgame' in that article, I was referring to a protracted process of decline of the party’s rule. This process in other Leninist party-states took years if not decades before these systems – the USSR and Eastern Europe — were so sapped of strength that they quickly crumbled when put under extreme stress. But the main thing to remember is that atrophy of these Leninist-type regimes, and we must view the Chinese system as such, is both inevitable and a drawn-out process. * * * I simply see the CCP, like all Leninist systems * * * I also think it imperative for analysts of China to view the CCP through comparative and historical lenses, because such [Leninist] systems and parties all pass through very similar and predictable phases. China may be distinct, but it is not unique.

"As I see it, the current political path of 'hard authoritarianism' simply leads to partial and incomplete reform and relative economic stagnation. Another way of putting it is that quantitative growth may continue, but qualitative growth [through innovation] will be limited.

"I believe he [Xi] is genuinely and deeply concerned about the weaknesses of the Communist Party—on this he and I agree—but he believes that rigid control is the solution, whereas I believe that a return to soft authoritarianism or evolution to semi-democracy is a much better pathway forward for China and the CCP as well.

Xi "is certainly very popular with the broad masses in China * * * Interestingly, however, Xi is not that popular with the elites of the country—both the political elites and the commercial elites (and one wonders about military elites). Xi’s signature anti-corruption campaign has directly impacted these elites.

Note:
(a) The new book is
David Shambaugh, China's Future. Polity, Mar 14, 2016.
(b) I pinpoint the date, to insinuate why Shambaugh let loose a burst of activities around Mar 14 -- ballyhoos for the book.