China's Decadence and the Military Purge

“In 1757, a firing squad executed Adm. John Byng on the deck of a Royal Navy warship for "failing to do his utmost" in pursuing the enemy during a battle in the Seven Years' War. As Voltaire put it, they shot one admiral "to encourage the others."

 

By that standard, military officers across China should be highly encouraged following Saturday's announcement that the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party had opened an investigation of two senior military officials. As waves of purges took down one senior figure after another in the People's Liberation Army, Gen. Zhang Youxia had seemed untouchable. Handpicked by Xi Jinping, Gen. Zhang was a member of the Politburo and as vice chairman of the Central Military Commission was second only to Mr. Xi in the military hierarchy. At a Saturday briefing for high ranking military officers first reported by the Journal, Gen. Zhang was accused of everything from conniving at corruption with family members to spilling nuclear secrets to the U.S.

 

Shocking as this news was, the commentary was even more ominous. As translated by the indispensable China-watcher Bill Bishop in his Sinocism newsletter, an editorial in PLA Daily, the army's newspaper, said that the two suspects had "seriously fueled political and corruption issues that affect the Party's absolute leadership over the military and endanger the Party's ruling foundation. They have caused immense damage to the military's political construction, political ecology, and combat capability construction, and have had an extremely vile influence on the Party, the state, and the military."

 

The implication is that, in addition to engaging in nefarious financial shenanigans, one of Mr. Xi's most trusted henchmen was plotting against him. Had a military coup been nipped in the bud? Was a group that tirelessly portrays itself as firmly united around China's supreme leader actually riven by faction and division? Did high-level officials with far more information than the average citizen harbor concerns about where Mr. Xi is leading the country?

 

Whispers and doubts will be circulating all over Beijing and at every level of party and army leadership, checked only by the paranoia of officials fearing for their careers and lives. Flattery and lies will proliferate in every official document and meeting as authorities strive to demonstrate their fidelity to the wisdom crystallized in the immortal texts of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era.

 

At a time when the unpredictability of the U.S. president, the incompetence of many Western leaders, and the political unrest and social conflict in many democratic societies raise doubts about the sustainability and effectiveness of liberal political institutions, the Chinese purges are a healthy reminder that other forms of government aren't without drawbacks. When President Trump threatens to invade Greenland, Republican senators can talk about impeachment. When poorly trained, badly led immigration agents under hotheaded officials fail to handle protesters in appropriate ways, the whole country knows what happened and the Oval Office cannot mute the resulting clamor.

 

In systems like China's, healthy self-corrective measures cannot function. The worse the party mishandles key situations, the more loudly and unanimously officials and the media must praise its leaders. Almost every family in China is blighted by the ruinous and inhuman one-child policy, which brought a demographic crisis down on the whole country. Yet nobody could oppose the policy when it was in force. Nobody can now demand accountability from the cruel and misguided leaders who imposed it. Scores of millions of families have seen their life savings trashed by an utterly predictable real-estate bust brought on by decades of misguided central government policy -- abetted by corrupt local officials and powerful interests. Nobody can say anything about that either.

 

Modern history can be seen as a series of contests between liberal societies and autocratic technocracies. From the wars between the highly organized French state under Louis XIV and Britain under William and Mary up through the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the U.S., liberal societies have faced challengers who trusted in the power of a supreme leader unfettered by the restraints of liberal society and civil dissent.

 

In the short to medium term, the techno-autocracies often did well. Louis XIV, Napoleon, imperial Germany, Hitler, Tojo and Stalin all had some good years. But time and again the poisonous isolation that absolute power imposes on its wielders blunted the edge of their insight and degraded the capacity of their societies.

 

The question haunting China today isn't whether Zhang Youxia sold military secrets to the U.S. It is whether the Chinese Communist Party is falling prey to the authoritarian decadence that brought so many of its predecessors to ruin and defeat.” [1]

 

All great countries go to ruin and defeat in a long term. Stop jumping from joy.

 

This statement expresses a cyclical view of history, arguing that all great nations eventually face decline and defeat over time. This idea is a common theme explored by historians, philosophers, and political scientists.

 

Key concepts related to this view include:

 

    Rise and Fall of Empires: The historical record is full of examples of powerful empires and nations (e.g., Roman Empire, British Empire, Qin Dynasty) that experienced periods of dominance followed by decline.

 

    Cycles of History: Some theories suggest that societies inherently follow predictable patterns of growth, stability, and eventual decay, often linked to internal factors like political corruption, economic strain, or social unrest, as well as external pressures like war or environmental changes.

 

    Philosophical Perspectives: Thinkers from ancient historians like Polybius to modern scholars have debated the inevitability of national decline and what factors contribute to it.

 

Whether this statement is an absolute "truth" is a matter of interpretation and ongoing debate, but it represents a significant historical perspective on the impermanence of national power.

 

1. China's Decadence and the Military Purge. Walter Russell Mead.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 27 Jan 2026: A13.