Deng’s “lay low and develop the productive forces” strategy continued after him. It was extremely effective as evidenced by where China is now, but it was a long game and Jiang and Hu deserve credit for carrying it through, but it did require laying low. That’s reduced their footprint in Western media coverage.
Look for Jiang’s interview on the US TV show 60 Minutes. He quite literally took one for the team by kissing the ring of the capitalists. He had to patiently endure those fork-tongued fucks twist every word, every statement, and just patiently try to correct the record and keep smiling.
There’s footage of him going off at a Hong Kong reporter for trying to pull the same shit saying that an endorsement of Tung Chee-Hwa (first Chief Executive of Hong Kong after the handover) was an ‘imperial appointment’. Unfortunately the only copy I can find is from a China hate channel here.
Jiang is the polar opposite of everything the West’s portrayal of every single one of China’s leaders (as some kind of irrational, power hungry, thin-skinned egomaniac) makes him out to be.
So anyway, Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao were key players in the story of the PRC, but they weren’t the ‘playmakers’ that Mao, Deng and Xi have been. So they get overlooked in anglo coverage. (Like with most countries I guess. For example unless Bojo gets brought back, the next UK PM is going to be someone nobody outside the UK knows anything about even though he’s already been instrumental in fucking the country up as Boris’ Chancellor).
Also kind of related but it’s important to remember that these leaders are the heads of the politburo standing committee, and not the unfettered dictators that Western media constantly tells you they are. There are a lot of key figures that are completely invisible to the Anglosphere. Li Keqiang, for example, is leaving with the current changes but he’s risen through the party in the same ‘generation’ as Xi, and he’s been instrumental in the government throughout Xi’s tenure so far.
Deng’s “lay low and develop the productive forces” strategy continued after him. It was extremely effective as evidenced by where China is now, but it was a long game and Jiang and Hu deserve credit for carrying it through, but it did require laying low. That’s reduced their footprint in Western media coverage.
Look for Jiang’s interview on the US TV show 60 Minutes. He quite literally took one for the team by kissing the ring of the capitalists. He had to patiently endure those fork-tongued fucks twist every word, every statement, and just patiently try to correct the record and keep smiling.
There’s footage of him going off at a Hong Kong reporter for trying to pull the same shit saying that an endorsement of Tung Chee-Hwa (first Chief Executive of Hong Kong after the handover) was an ‘imperial appointment’. Unfortunately the only copy I can find is from a China hate channel here.
Jiang is the polar opposite of everything the West’s portrayal of every single one of China’s leaders (as some kind of irrational, power hungry, thin-skinned egomaniac) makes him out to be.
So anyway, Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao were key players in the story of the PRC, but they weren’t the ‘playmakers’ that Mao, Deng and Xi have been. So they get overlooked in anglo coverage. (Like with most countries I guess. For example unless Bojo gets brought back, the next UK PM is going to be someone nobody outside the UK knows anything about even though he’s already been instrumental in fucking the country up as Boris’ Chancellor).
Also kind of related but it’s important to remember that these leaders are the heads of the politburo standing committee, and not the unfettered dictators that Western media constantly tells you they are. There are a lot of key figures that are completely invisible to the Anglosphere. Li Keqiang, for example, is leaving with the current changes but he’s risen through the party in the same ‘generation’ as Xi, and he’s been instrumental in the government throughout Xi’s tenure so far.