>>46282
>Yet it still wants mass obedience.
As I understand, they are roughly comparable to a national body politic and civil-servant class. It has about 1 member for every 15 citizens. Membership has become a mark of prestige: people are attracted to it because that's where the best are (e.g. the highest performing university students, with a focus on technical fields like engineering). It is a meritocratic system based on very demanding exams that remind one of the ancient imperial examinations used to select the civil servants. It has its own "liberal", "conservative", etc. wings either in politics or economy and the acting members of government have their "constituencies". There are also other parties in the mainland (e.g. KMT still has a presence) and they hold positions in the civil service and (typically minor) government offices, although they are tiny by comparison
This suggestion that it is a kind of dictatorship exacting mass obedience is a distortion. Polling by US media indicate they have vast popular support nearing 90%. I think it is true that they want to keep the system as it is (otherwise they wouldn't censor media as they do; "govt-controlled media or media-controlled govt, choose one"), but so do a majority of the population
>The Leninist structure
>Its ambition of control is both Chinese and that of a Communist Party
This structure (as was implemented in china) also happens to have a resemblance to the govt organization of various periods in ancient china going as far back as 1900 years. Compare for example the politburo to the imperial advisors, the ministries/departments to the ministries, or the organization bureau to the ancient "Libu"
But for those associated to the western side of the hajnal division, or to right-wing parties that have been around since the cold war, or to universalist religious institutions, it is far more effective to stigmatize something by associating it with communism than with, e.g., monarchy. That was my original point: often when people rail about gomunist china this or that they are deliberately cashing in on decades upon decades of ideological cold war plus the (deserved) bad reputation in so far as economy and civil liberties is concerned. It is a form of emotional (sometimes self-) manipulation. But can I really blame them when they fucking call themselves the *C*PC? Well, in fact they don't say "communist", they say "共産" and if you look up those ideograms in a dictionary you will arrive to a meaning along the lines of "together productivity" or maybe "joint prosperity". Nonetheless, since it is their own choice to continue to stick to an idea so discredited among westerners and others under the west's ideological influence, no, I cannot blame them. Which is why I didn't belabor the point, I just "loled". In any case, after so much water under the bridge, I guess they will probably never be able (or even try) to disassociate themselves from that category: first, trying to do so could become a dangerous destabilizing spark (conservative politicians may seize the opportunity to advance their careers); second, even if they tried to do so, nothing would change in western perception