As it turned out, my earlier speculation on strange doings in China resulted in no obvious result. Commanders were fired, and life went on.
That’s life in a Communist dictatorship, but as in Russia, China already had a culture based on hushing up bad news long before the Reds took over.
The dynastic cycle in China frequently features self-deception as a sign that the government has entered terminal decline. The Imperial court is absorbed in its own affairs, and news of rebellion or invasion is simply unwelcome, and it is easier to suppress the news than deal with the problem.
The inevitable result is a calamity that sweeps away the old and ushers in the new, though sometimes the change is incomplete, and China remains fragmented until a new dynasty can consolidate power. Before writing Walls of Men, I was aware of this trait, but chronicling the various wars and campaigns in a concise history really brought home just how much of Chinese history follows this cycle.
Initially, the coverups are small, and inconsequential. A minor defeat is downplayed, or the reason for a rebellion is ignored. Classically, famine in China is associated with dynastic failure because China is so large, and it communications are so well developed (chiefly along rivers and canals), that a competent government can quickly move food from surplus areas to where it is needed. When that does not happen, when the famine is not mitigated, it shows that the Emperor has failed.
Of course, Communist China under Mao managed to do the one thing no dynasty ever did: preside over a nation-wide famine where no region was safe. So at least the Communists have that to their credit.
I mention this because there’s a new video discussing China’s economy, which seems to be in trouble. The video mentions an economics professor in China who has called the situation alarming, and – as one would expect – rather than address the actual problem, the professor has been deleted from social media and the internet. This is China’s new thing – virtual execution.
Whether the professor is right, there seems to be no question that China is in a deflationary cycle, which is the opposite of what one would expect of the government claims of GDP growth are true.
Just as with lying about famine, people losing their jobs in China are not going to buy the official line. Yet again, claiming non-existent victories is consistent with both Communist and Imperial Chinese practices.
One of the issues I mention in Walls of Men is what I call the Three Generation Problem, which primarily relates to military prowess, but can have other applications. Put simply, China does not now and never has had a strong military culture, but it has produced good generals during periods of frequent conflict.
However, once the war is won, the Empire is conquered and a new dynasty enthroned, by the third generation, decay has set in. The first generation is the conqueror, who won due to his prowess. His son also likely has military talent, having been a subordinate during the conquest or having to complete the conquest during his reign.
The grandson of the founder, however, will have been raised at court, with only tangential military experience. The children of the victorious generals would likewise shift into the esteemed civil service, escaping from the low status accorded to military men.
The failure of Chinese leadership in general seems to indicate that China’s military is likely something of a paper tiger. China is the land of Sun Tzu, but his famous directive to know oneself as well as the enemy seems to be honored more in the breach these days.
There is a cottage industry out there predicting Communism’s imminent fall, but I’m not ready to hop aboard. I think it likely, but I have no idea what the time frame is. Claiming that a deep recession (which is what makes a deflationary cycle) is strong growth seems to be a great way to accelerate towards that event.
Chateau Lloyd 
Leave a comment