On December 13, 2025, the Chinese Communist Party’s official newspaper, “People’s Daily,” published an article titled “Making it Normal for Leading Cadres to Move Up and Down,” criticizing many officials within the party who can only move up and not down, showing mediocrity and incompetence, and unable to handle real issues. This article immediately sparked discussions both domestically and internationally. What exactly did “People’s Daily” say? Why did they publish this article at this moment? Are they praising Xi or “criticizing” Xi? Additionally, in the recent political maneuvers between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, Taiwan has quietly revealed five national security risks. Let’s delve into these topics.
“Autumn. Awakening”
Reaching into the clouds a thousand feet high
Dancing with the wind a hundred miles
Playing with dust for eternity
Awakening the path to heaven
– Tang Hao
Hello everyone, I’m Tang Hao, how are you all today?
Today we are going to discuss two topics with you:
Topic One: Controversy sparked by the Chinese Communist Party’s article, “Criticizing or Praising Xi Jinping?”
Topic Two: Taiwan’s Five Major National Security Risks – Finding the Right Solutions?
Let’s start with the first topic:
On December 11, the Chinese Communist Party’s official newspaper, “People’s Daily,” published an article in the ninth edition that sparked heated discussions domestically and internationally. The article titled “Making it Normal for Leading Cadres to Move Up and Down.” Just from the title, don’t you find it sensitive and absurd? Because the top leader of the Communist Party is one who can only move up, right?
This article is not lengthy, with just over 1300 words, so what is it about? In simple terms, this article criticizes the fact that many officials within the Communist Party ascend to positions but then become incapable or are found to be incompetent to handle major tasks. However, they cannot be replaced, leading to maintaining their positions without actually being effective – creating a situation of “zombie leadership,” with redundant and lazy officials everywhere, while their governance performance is dismal. On the surface, this article highlights the current characteristics and dilemmas of the Communist Party’s officialdom. However, in my view, there are many hidden messages worth exploring.
Let’s highlight some key points to see how the article unfolds. The article states, “In reality, there exist problems in some units where ‘doing and not doing are the same, doing more or less the same, doing well or poorly the same,’ leading to ‘bad money drives out good money.'”
This passage exposes a fundamental problem, that the Communist Party officialdom is filled with too many “useless officials” who did not ascend based on outstanding achievements or performance but rather through unconventional means and connections, leading to a situation where “doing well or poorly” doesn’t affect their positions – even those capable of getting things done are marginalized, resulting in a scenario of “bad money driving out good money.”
Why is this the case? Because they have powerful backers behind them, supporting them through “power-money exchanges” or “power-sex exchanges,” so they do not work diligently for the public but rather serve only the higher authorities. As long as they please the leadership, they can remain in positions without the possibility of demotion.
So why does the Communist Party officialdom experience “bad money driving out good money?” Using slightly more academic terminology, because the Communist Party system functions on a “power-distribution” basis rather than a “labor-distribution” basis, the amount of effort and work one puts in does not matter. What matters is the extent of one’s authority – the greater the authority, the more resources one receives, enabling a play of power without constraints.
Moreover, the Communist Party is a group that only emphasizes “struggle without scruples” and “results without ethics,” encouraging officials at all levels to frequently engage in illicit means such as nepotism, trading power for money, or favoritism toward leadership to achieve promotion. This results in a distorted culture where good and virtuous individuals are eliminated, while mediocre or immoral individuals ascend, establishing the Communist Party’s mechanism of “reverse selection.” This “reverse selection” mechanism is evidently causing trouble for the Communist Party.
Returning to the article, it states, “Currently, our country’s development environment is facing profound and complex changes, with strategic opportunities and risk challenges coexisting, uncertainties and unforeseeable factors increasing. There is an urgent need for a cadre team with excellent abilities and a solid work style.”
“Only by promptly utilizing cadres who are daring, willing and capable of carrying out tasks, while reassigning those who are idling, minding their own business, and shirking responsibilities, can we amass formidable strength to tackle difficulties and challenges.”
What do these two sentences reveal? They disclose that the ruling regime of the Communist Party is facing a severe test amid a range of issues including international politics, international trade, the Taiwan issue, and more importantly, domestic economic, livelihood, and employment challenges. These issues are still unresolved, and if they worsen, they could escalate public grievances to “civil unrest,” ultimately threatening the Communist Party’s regime. Hence, the Communist Party is eagerly seeking “cadres who are daring, willing, and capable of getting things done” to address these challenges.
However, they find that corruption thrives within the party, while governance talents are lacking. After all, even the top leader’s governance performance is evident to all. However, they too remain unmoveable.
The article concludes with the phrase, “When a virtuous person takes the lead, many virtuous individuals will converge, and a trend of respecting virtues will emerge.” In other words, “People’s Daily” indirectly acknowledges that the party lacks individuals with both virtues and talents – only individuals idling in their positions.
Therefore, the article suggests, “Pushing for the normalization of leading cadres being able to move up and down, the key focus and difficulty lie in solving the ‘being able to move down’ issue. Promptly reassign those cadres unsuitable for their current positions.”
Furthermore, it emphasizes the need for the entire cadre team to deeply understand that positions are not “iron seats.” Those lacking virtue or talent, those who don’t take on tasks or act, will be reassigned.
The logic behind these statements is valid. However, the primary question raised is whether this is yet another instance of official jargon of saying one thing and doing another. Why is “Xiong Yizun” still in power after thirteen years if change was imminent?
In light of the above analysis, I believe there are several significant underlying messages in this article:
1. The Communist Party acknowledges the failure of the “14th Five-Year Plan.”
First, the Communist Party indirectly admits the failure of the “14th Five-Year Economic Plan,” placing the Chinese economy in severe conditions of currency tightening, real estate collapse, weak domestic consumption, and significant foreign capital flight, leading to rising public dissatisfaction. The “15th Five-Year Plan” is set to launch soon. Therefore, the Communist Party is hastily organizing teams to rescue the economy and the regime.
2. The Communist Party faces a “talent crisis.”
Secondly, the Communist Party is now officially embroiled in a new crisis, a “talent crisis.” Marxism discusses the “economic determinism,” mentioning that if the lower economic levels are mismanaged, the legitimacy of the upper political authority is at risk. However, currently, the Chinese economy is at a virtual standstill, with no solution in sight. The one who truly understands economics, Li Keqiang, was “disposed of” in 2023 due to contradictions with Xi Jinping, leaving “Xiong Yizun” as the remaining overseer of the Chinese economy. Seeing Li Keqiang’s fate, who dares to speak the truth or achieve tangible results under “Xiong Yizun”? This is why the Communist Party faces a dearth of talented individuals, a consequence of their own making.
3. Beijing shifts blame on others.
Thirdly, “People’s Daily” chose this particular time, as the end of the “14th Five-Year Plan” nears, to publish this article with the likely motive of aiding Beijing in shifting “policy failures” onto lower-level government departments. The responsibilities for China’s economic deterioration in recent years will likely be shifted onto lower levels, with claims of “It’s not the Emperor’s incapacity, but the overwhelming obstacles caused by the people.”
However, I believe that “People’s Daily” is a top-tier propaganda mouthpiece of the Chinese government, possessing keen insights into public sentiment. It’s highly unlikely they were unaware of the potential repercussions from publishing this article. Titled “Making it Normal for Leading Cadres to Move Up and Down,” common citizens would undoubtedly find this glaring, as “Xiong Yizun” himself embodies being able to move up but not down!
From this perspective, one cannot help but suspect whether “People’s Daily” is seizing the opportunity to either “backhandedly criticize” or “praise” Xi Jinping? What are netizens saying? “Are they talking about Xi Jinping?” “Are they hinting at Xi Jinping’s departure?” Is this an act of supporting Xi or undermining him?
Furthermore, in October this year, CCTV employees disclosed widespread discontent towards “Xiong Yizun,” with reports stating that “no one within CCTV respects him.” If this sentiment exists in CCTV, could it also permeate within “People’s Daily”?
Moreover, the talent and economic crises within the Communist Party will not be resolved solely by allowing officials to move up and down. The party operates on mechanisms of “reverse selection” and “mutual protection among officials.” With policies at the top and countermeasures at the bottom, what lies ahead is an increase in officials falsifying data and achievements to deceive superiors, ensuring maintenance of their positions. In simpler terms, as long as the party clings to this “power-based” struggle system, the entire Communist government will only accelerate in aging and zombification.
Recent political maneuvers between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait have been intense, revolving mainly around the Kuomintang (KMT) Chairman Zheng Liwen’s preparation to hold a “Zheng-Xi Meeting” with Xiong Yizun next year. Media reports emerged about the Chinese Communist Party presenting conditions to the KMT for organizing the “Zheng-Xi Meeting,” calling for the fulfillment of the “Three Tickets,” sparking significant controversy, although both the KMT and Taiwan Affairs Office later denied these claims.
Is this incident real or fabricated? As they say, there is no smoke without fire. How both the KMT and the Communist Party will act next will unveil the truth. However, this event highlights at least five risks for Taiwan in the political maneuvers between the two sides. The first three risks are related to the Chinese Communist Party and the opposition party, while the last two risks are linked to the ruling party.
1. The Chinese Communist Party demands the KMT to block Taiwan’s military procurement from the United States in the Legislative Yuan. This has already occurred, with the blue and white alliances blocking Taiwan’s NT$1.25 trillion special national defense budget twice. This aligns well with the first ticket under the “Zheng-Xi Meeting.”
2. Preventing any legislature that may restrict mainland Chinese spouses from moving to Taiwan or limit mainland investments in Taiwan under the guise of “national security.” This is currently happening.
KMT legislators recently proposed amending the Nationality Act to allow mainland Chinese spouses to run for public office in Taiwan without renouncing their Chinese citizenship. It should be noted that this is not discrimination against mainland Chinese spouses but a warning that the channel for relatives from China to Taiwan has become a critical infiltration method for the Communist Party to penetrate Taiwan’s political sphere.
One might ask, if the Communist Party hopes for mainlanders to run for public office in Taiwan without renouncing their Chinese citizenship, do they allow Taiwanese nationals who do not renounce Taiwanese citizenship to run for public office in China? If they fail to do so, on what basis should Taiwan accommodate the Communist Party’s demands? It’s essential to remember that the Philippines recently had a city mayor revealed to be a Communist spy, involved in human trafficking. Taiwan must remain vigilant based on this precedent.
3. The Communist Party demands the KMT to eliminate all systemic factors that are unfavorable to “China’s reunification” through action. Though this condition lacks specifics, it likely aims to dismantle mechanisms that deter Taiwan’s guard against China, making it easier for the Communist Party to infiltrate and weaken Taiwan. While both the KMT and the Communist Party denied these “Three Tickets,” their actions will reveal the truth.
4. The ruling party’s satisfaction with governance falls short of public expectations. According to a poll by “Beautiful Island Gazette,” President Lai’s governance satisfaction stands at 40.9%, with dissatisfaction at 53.3%. This discontent has continued for five consecutive months, with dissatisfaction exceeding the majority. The primary reasons behind this extend beyond the political dimensions and into the unfulfilled economic and livelihood expectations of the majority, driving dissatisfaction in economic and internal policies.
Reflecting further on President Lai’s efforts in fostering national unity, he may believe that establishing national consciousness is the first step towards countering external threats. However, stabilizing the economy and livelihoods, gaining higher public trust in governance, addressing economic and living standards, before promoting a more robust national consciousness, might be more conducive to national security. After all, if most people perceive Taiwan’s economy and quality of life as robust, who would easily believe the Communist Party’s united-front narratives? The recent failure of the major recall indicates a wake-up call.
5. Taiwan’s government appears unable to establish an effective communication channel and trust with the Trump administration.
As many are aware, the Trump administration recently released a “National Security Strategy,” elevating Taiwan’s security position to unprecedented levels. Apart from recognizing Taiwan’s semiconductor advantages and its strategic position towards the Second Island Chain, it emphasizes the need to “strengthen U.S. and allied capabilities to deter any attempts to seize Taiwan.” This is good news for Taiwan.
However, Taiwan’s government seems unable to effectively communicate with the Trump administration due to the Democratic Progressive Party’s past governance leaning more towards the Western left. Thus, the Biden administration, following a similar leftist route, has fostered good relations with the Tsai Ing-wen government. Whereas Trump represents traditional right-wing ideals, disfavoring the leftists, coupled with Taiwan’s media outlets aligning with Western left-leaning media in attacking Trump, how would Trump view the ruling party in Taiwan? Ponder upon this question.
Therefore, the current government brought right-leaning media “War Room” reporter Natalie Winters to Taiwan for an exclusive interview with Hsiao Mei-chin. This move signifies that the Presidential Office of Taiwan detects a divergence in policies with the Trump administration and seeks to proactively bridge these gaps, establishing communication channels – a well-executed move.
Nonetheless, it remains to be seen whether the Taiwanese government understands that though “War Room” is hosted by Steve Bannon, Trump distanced himself from Bannon early in his first term, albeit Bannon’s consistent efforts to support Trump’s causes. Trump maintained a significant distance from Bannon. The current Attorney General of Washington, D.C., Jeannie Pirro, disclosed in a book that Trump found Bannon offensive due to Bannon’s affronts towards Trump’s family, an act Trump could not tolerate.
Therefore, for Taiwan’s government to establish stable communication with the White House, grasping insights from conservative factions within the United States is essential, necessitating exploring alternative channels for better chances. For example, the English Epoch Times recently interviewed Kash Patel, a confidant of Trump and the current FBI Director, which Trump shared on social media.
In conclusion, the Taiwanese government’s initiative to liaison with the White House is appropriate. However, in terms of decision-making and strategic thinking, there is a need to transcend past left-leaning circles, establish alliances with the right partners for deepening U.S.-Taiwan relations and reducing Taiwan’s national security risks.
To subscribe to “Crossroads of the World” Clean World Channel: [link]
To subscribe to the YouTube channel: [link]
Tang Hao’s poetry collection: [link]