As riots shake China’s Guangdong province, and the kudzu-like growth that has catapulted the country into modernity starts to sputter, the case of Bo Xilai, and his wife, Gu Kailai, combines virtually all of the elements that are pushing the country into a crisis: official corruption, the growing income disparity between the party elite and the rest of the country, a faction-ridden Communist party leadership — and, not least of all, Mao’s ghost.
Just to recap the details of the case: Bo, formerly Communist party boss of Chongqing and a rising star in China’s political firmament, is now being held in secret, along with his wife — the latter accused of murdering a British businessman, Neil Heywood, who apparently functioned as a “fixer” for the family’s many overseas investments. Asahi Shimbun recently reported her “confession.”
Bo was summarily ousted from all his posts, and disappeared from public life — and now, fourteen weeks later, there is a dead silence coming from Beijing. For weeks, this scandal rocked China, where rumors of a coup were quickly quashed by internet censors, and a stream of denunciations of Bo issued forth from the party’s propaganda apparatus — and then, suddenly, nearly complete silence. What’s going on in the Inscrutable East?
Bo’s fate is likely the subject of a fierce debate within the top party leadership. Apparently he has some support among senior leaders, who no doubt have a soft spot in their hearts for a modern Chinese leader who would invoke the heroic tradition of Maoism, exemplified by Bo’s push for the singing of “patriotic” “red songs” from the old days of the Revolution. China may have gone capitalist, but there are still some old-timers in the top echelons of the party who take the ideological slogans of their youth seriously. The “reform”-minded officials, centered in Beijing, have the central party organization well in hand, but they are riven by factionalism, and it is not inconceivable that a politician like Bo could arise to challenge what is one of the most corrupt oligarchies in world history in terms of sheer scale.
Stories are now circulating about Bo’s financial empire, lorded over by his willful wife — another Chinese “dragon lady,” a ridiculous Western stereotype the anti-Bo forces in China (and the West) are not above exploiting. Yet the details are unimpressive: a couple of London apartment buildings worth somewhere around $3 million. There are vaguer accusations of Madame Bo managing to somehow take $6 billion out of the country — and when Heywood threatened to expose her, she had him poisoned. That, at any rate, is the official story. That this scenario sounds like the plot of one of those movies that never make it into the theaters and instead go straight to DVD is not a reason to rule it out, but count me as skeptical, to put it mildly.
On the other hand, if we look at the actual corruption that is an everyday fact of life in China — China’s own central bank recently reported that corrupt officials have spirited $123 billion out of the country — the alleged sins of Bo and his family pall in comparison. The real corruption scandal in China is that one cannot do business without paying off officials, and this is true in the internal market as well as for foreigners. China’s “princelings,” the sons of Mao-era party leaders, are China’s One Percent, and their money is driving up prices for high-end real estate from Manhattan to Malibu. Whereas factionalism in the Communist party used to revolve around ideological matters, with “rightists” and “leftists” contending for public opinion, today the factions are centered around competing financial combines, as the party bureaucracy sells off “public” property to the highest bidder and emerges as the new “capitalist” class.
This, of course, was the whole point of Mao’s “cultural revolution,” which was initiated on the premise that a new capitalist class was incubating in China — in the ranks of the ruling Communist party. Prominent party leaders were hauled up before the masses, made to wear dunce caps, and denounced as “capitalist-roaders” — among them Deng Xiaoping, who made a political comeback after Mao’s death and did indeed put China on the capitalist road. His successors, however, are taking a detour down Crony Capitalist Lane, and this is creating the conditions for a potential day of reckoning for China’s elite.
The regime is facing huge economic problems on the home front, one of the most volatile being the millions of migrant workers, some 16 percent of the population, who provide cheap labor for China’s export-driven economy. Social and regional tensions are exacerbated by this vast mobile workforce, who exist at the very bottom of the socio-economic ladder: a recent riot in Guangdong province is but a rerun of numerous previous incidents. The number of large scale riots and other examples of public “disorder” has increased exponentially since the early nineties, when 8,300 such incidents were recorded. In 2012, the number exceeded 90,000. Land seizures by party officials are often the cause.
Bo appealed to some of these sources of rising discontent — to those who witnessed the degeneration of the Communist party into a kind of Mafia, and remembered — or, thought they remembered — a better day. His crackdown on China’s rampant gangster underworld — often linked to party officials — inspired widespread support. He stoked all those fires the central party leadership most fears — Maoism, nationalism, and growing economic inequality.
That is why he had to go: this nonsense about a murder plot is just for the tabloids. What’s telling is that the case shows no signs of going forward: for the first time since the Bad Old Days of Mao’s reign, there is a real ideological struggle going on behind the scenes. The fate of Bo and his wife is going to give us a good idea of who is winning the struggle, and the timing, in this case, is crucial.
The 18th national congress of the Chinese Communist Party is scheduled to begin in the autumn, and there the power will pass from one generation of party leaders — Hu Jintao — to the next: Xi Jinping. If the Bo Xilai matter is still up in the air by the time the congress convenes — which seems likely, given the official silence so far — China may be facing some interesting times once again.
Failure to resolve the issue in a timely manner means there is a real fight going on inside the CCP — at a time when China is beginning to feel the effects of the worldwide economic recession, and is facing new threats from abroad. The Americans are reorienting their entire “defense” strategy to focus on the Pacific region, and the brouhaha over the South China sea is reaching the boiling point.
In the field of foreign affairs, the Chinese have pursued a classic mercantilist policy, abjuring Great Power theatrics for the most part and playing a cautious role at international forums such as the UN. Yet if the Americans are determined to come after them, and intervene in territorial disputes between China and its neighbors, then the Beijing leadership will have no choice but to respond in like manner. Failure to do so means losing credibility at home with an already disgruntled and highly nationalistic populace.
China, America’s number one creditor, and supposedly the rising superpower of the future, is a paper tiger. Efforts by the neocons to make them into a replacement for the vanished Soviet threat seem doomed to failure when the Chinese spend a fraction of what we spend on “defense.” To put it all in perspective: the Chinese government spends more on its internal police than on their military, which should give us a good indication of what they’re really afraid of. And they have reason to fear.
China’s dictatorship is more brittle, and less resilient than the Syrian Ba’athist regime: one good tremor will shake up the whole system and threaten its very fragile foundations. Ever since the Cultural Revolution, the Chinese leadership has been successful at keeping a lid on powerful populist currents churning just below the surface of society, but their luck may be running out. Mao’s ghost haunts a country whose heedless and greedy rulers live in luxury and head up a “Communist” party no one believes in anymore: if they aren’t careful, the “princelings” may find themselves dethroned much more easily than anyone ever imagined. The Bo Xilai affair revealed the first cracks in the edifice: more are likely to appear as the pressures on the regime increase.
Read more by Justin Raimondo
- Two Cheers for ‘Isolationism’ – May 19th, 2013
- Our Civil Liberties, RIP – May 16th, 2013
- Raping the World – May 14th, 2013
- The Price of Peace – May 12th, 2013
- Boycott Israel? – May 9th, 2013





Articles to Start the New Week » Scott Lazarowitz's Blog
July 9th, 2012 at 7:06 am
[...] Justin Raimondo: Bo Xilai and Mao’s Ghost [...]
John V. Walsh
July 9th, 2012 at 7:34 am
Justin Raimondo is a brave soul to write about a culture and country so remote.
Nevertheless, he has written an interesting piece.
BUT I wonder whether the internal politics of China is of much interest to us anti warriors in the heart of the US Empire. To us the foreign policy is paramount. And I would argue that by virtue of its history, China's foreign policy remains defensive since the Warring States Period millennia ago. Consistent with that history, Mao was never very interested in "exporting revolution," and to this day China has no overseas military bases, quite remarkable for the world's second largest economy. As Mao said to Nixon, "China's army stays at home." Except for border disputes that remains true.
And before Columbus set sail, China with a fleet vastly superior to anything that the Europeans mounted for hundreds of years, explored at least as far as the east coast of Africa, and traded but did not conquer or enslave. Quite different from the Europeans – remarkably so. As Kissinger remarks in On China, China, unlike the West, has no "missionary" spirit. Its exceptionalism lies not in its desire to export its values or extend its control but in feeling that China is the best place in the world and that to live and prosper there is quite enough. This in turn may have a lot to do with the fact that China has no history of religion in the sense of a Guy in the Sky, who demands that everyone worship him (and it is always a him) in the way he reveals himself to the local favorite. (Buddhism is an import to China that is not deeply rooted and has no large following; and it is not even a religion in the Western sense of Judaism, Xtianity and Islam, the desert religions.)
Perhaps the desire of the French under Napoleon to export the values of the French Revolution or of the Russians to export the socialist revolution has more to do with their deep Western missionary tradition than anything else.
Finally, it is by no means clear that the Chinese economy is "sputtering." And we should wish it well, for a large and prosperous China is a boon to those hundreds of millions who once lived in abject poverty. More important, a large Chinese economy provides some balance to the US Empire and provides those countries that run afoul of the Empire an alternative. The ability of the Iranians to sell their oil elsewhere despite the economic war waged on it by the US Empire is a case in point.
The libertarian view that what happens in other sovereign states is none of the business of our government remains sound. Let us stick with that.
Macroman
July 9th, 2012 at 7:49 am
Did you mean "pale in comparison" rather than "pall in comparison?" Thanks for the article — your focus on this scandal has been very informative.
Solzhenitsyn
July 9th, 2012 at 2:03 pm
China will either go the way of Russia and adopt a system based off western democracies or have its own New Deal/ Neo-Maoist era. What's clear is that the Chinese people can't tolerate this sort of princeling oligarchy much longer. And no matter what happens, I think China will assert itself economically and politically. It will continue to build ties with Africa and Latin America, and if the second outcome happens it could start sponsoring Bolivarian-style populist politics all over the third world and forming closer alliances with states the US already doesn't like. I don't think that Beijing will allow their influence to be contained, and as we've seen in 2002, 2009, and possibly in 2012, the US will not tolerate another wave of "anti-imperialist" "rogue states". That's how a Second Cold War scenario could come about, especially if some or all of the BRICS go down this path. The difference is that now no state on earth comes close to American military might, resources, or existing regional ties. Whatever happens, we are indeed living in interesting times.
mlnw
July 9th, 2012 at 7:38 pm
Excellent comment. It is refreshing to read something with such a fine grasp of China's history and such sober judgment as to how we should respond.
Anna
July 9th, 2012 at 8:05 pm
In your dreams, Mr. Raimondo and Co.! Never again will the West manage to tear down a communist state, like in my country. Neither in China, nor even in Syria (the latter not socialist, of course).
And, mind you, you know nothing about the communist values, which are unattainably more just and lofty than the Western ones.
Then, you have tolerated you oligarchical princelings for centuries, letting them become the very soul of your country and the chief force of ruthless imperialist expansion and plunder. Deal with your cancerous growth before dictating to others. China, by the way, just follows your suit in this case, your country being the world's 'don'.
sherban
July 9th, 2012 at 11:36 pm
Excellent answer .For Raimondo capitalism is the supreme realization of humankind.So spoke his Zarathustra (sorry, von Misses).In my opinion a society should be weighed according with the quality of human beings whom it produces and not by the numbers of products one may buy daily.Here i want to remind what Fidel Castro said about G.W.Bush,president of US two times.Castro said that Bush has the intellectual level of a Cuban pupil in the 8th class.While corruption scandal in every domain:politics,finance,sport, break out every day in US and in the "free world" this article missed the real problems.