That may well be true, but that hardly applies to the current case of taking $325M in bribes

US folks will contort to the extremes about any discussion of gross illegal conduct in China.

This guy took $325M in bribes, embezzlement, abuse of power, and money laundering. And he did this as a public servant for over 30 years.

I say good on China for attacking such brazen corruption so directly. Violating the public trust should be extremely harsh.

▲

trhway 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>And he did this as a public servant for over 30 years.

and it was discovered just now? May it be that he played exactly by the rules, the real rules, of the regime - corruption being among the foundational rules of it - and thus it was going for 30 years? And right now he just got his turn like it usually happens in totalitarian regimes. The regime will for show find an excuse to execute you if you got your turn, corruption is just the easiest one.

Also note that corruption is for the officials, state treason is for regular citizens. Same as in Russia. The regime wouldn't want to create impression of political disunity among the officials.

>Violating the public trust should be extremely harsh.

definitely. The only question why the comrade Xi is still not executed?

▲

ToucanLoucan 5 hours ago | parent [-]

> and it was discovered just now? May it be that he played exactly by the rules, the real rules, of the regime - corruption being among the foundational rules of it - and thus it was going for 30 years? And right now he just got his turn like it usually happens in totalitarian regimes. The regime will for show find an excuse to execute you if you got your turn, corruption is just the easiest one.

Yeah, that would be wild if any of that completely unsubstantiated conjecture, bordering on fan-fiction, was what actually happened.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

White collar criminals often get caught later in their "careers" precisely because they do it for years and years and years without being caught. They get complacent. They get messy. Each round of embezzlement leads to a larger body of evidence that exists somewhere that becomes more and more damning as time goes on.

> The regime wouldn't want to create impression of political disunity among the officials.

In this thread we have dozens of examples of political officials being prosecuted. I'd strongly suggest you park your McCarthyism, take a break, perhaps go for a nice walk.

▲

trhway 4 hours ago | parent [-]

You really don’t know what you’re talking about, don’t you? You’re from a Western country, right?

>White collar criminals often get caught later in their "careers" precisely because they do it for years and years and years without being caught.

You’ve definitely never seen the castles and fleets of exotic cars that government officials in those countries manage to get on their meager government salaries. Yet you post such authoritative comments …

	▲	ToucanLoucan 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		If you have evidence as to any of the wild conjecture you're posting, you're more than free to provide it instead of just lobbing out accusations as though they change anything substantive about the arguments being made.

▲

libertine 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Well it isn't much contortionism when you look at the big picture you'll find that corruption is an institution in some countries.

For example, you're making an effort to try legitimize the regime by framing a factual gross illegal conduct as a overarching policy.

But is it like that when you observe the whole structure?

How wealthy are the ruling elites? Or for example, how has IP theft policy changed?

Or we can reframe this: how do we tell the difference between a genuine tackle on corruption, from a weed out of the system with a public display?

You have plenty of cases in other corrupt regimes when they want to seize assets from someone the regime wants to push away: it's corruption.

Which again, they could be very well be corrupt, but they are corrupt because they're part of the regime.

You'll probably say: "Oh but the USS!!!" Yes, there's some level of systemic corruption there, just not an institution - yet!

▲

anjel 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Intro to "moral hazard"