In recent years, China’s economy has continued to decline while the domestic political situation remains delicate. Authorities have intensified crackdowns on freedom of speech, with even Hu Xijin, a long-time mouthpiece of the Communist Party of China, being targeted for his comments. Some analysts believe that as the economy sinks deeper into crisis, more taboos emerge in the leadership circle, reflecting a more authoritarian yet fragile nature of the Chinese Communist regime.
Hu Xijin, the former editor-in-chief of the highly active Chinese mainland publication Global Times, was reportedly put under “speech ban” since July 27. Liu Jipeng, former dean of the School of Business of China University of Political Science and Law, recently posted a video on Weibo confirming that Hu Xijin was silenced for three months until October 27. Hu, speaking through Liu Jipeng, expressed the need to thoroughly and accurately understand the meaning of the central party documents.
Hu Xijin’s trouble stemmed from his interpretation of the Third Plenary Session’s decision in 2013, where he highlighted the phrase “dominant public ownership” but noted that the recent report of the 20th Third Plenary Session omitted such wording. This led him to conclude that “the non-public sector economy has truly achieved equality with the public sector economy,” deeming the change to be significant. Radio Free Asia later cited analysts who believed that Hu Xijin had crossed the Party’s red line with his statements.
On July 30, Hu Xijin exclusively replied to Ta Kung Pao, a prominent overseas media outlet, saying, “I personally don’t want to say anything. You can see things on the internet, please understand.” This response further exacerbated his precarious situation.
A commentary published by Taiwan’s Up Media on September 14, authored by commentator Du Zheng, pointed out that even Hu Xijin had “violated Party rules,” suggesting that his long-established reputation as a mouthpiece led the Party to view him as being forgetful. Another perspective posits that the CCP is currently more authoritarian yet more fragile, unable to tolerate even a few words of common sense from Hu.
Du Zheng’s article argues that Hu Xijin’s questioning of the disappearance of “dominant public ownership” is related to the internal CCP ideological struggle. Xi Jinping, who leads economic policies, has been actively promoting reform and opening up but has paradoxically fostered a more closed-off system in practice, prioritizing political security over economic development. This has contributed to China’s economic stagnation, making Hu’s comments particularly sensitive.
Du Zheng emphasized that Hu Xijin is likely still professing loyalty outwardly despite inner dissent. However, being deemed a “Party person” by the CCP, the authorities are merely giving him a slight reprimand, as he will continue to serve the Party’s propaganda in the future.
American political and economic observer Qin Peng previously stated in a video program that Hu Xijin’s punishment signals that the CCP will not abandon the state-owned economy as the core. Despite the CCP’s deceptive claims of supporting private entrepreneurs, they always regard private enterprises as objects to exploit and control. The CCP fears that once private enterprises expand, they may seek political power or challenge central policies.
Liu Jipeng, who conveyed messages for Hu Xijin, also faced repercussions. After publicly advising stock investors not to enter the market at the end of last year, he was subsequently silenced on all online platforms and later stepped down as dean of the Capital Finance Research Institute of China University of Political Science and Law. On September 13, Liu Jipeng’s Weibo account displayed “currently under a speech ban due to violations of relevant laws and regulations,” without specifying the reasons.
Du Zheng’s article suggests that top leaders in Zhongnanhai, including Xi Jinping and Cai Qi, repeatedly emphasize the “Economic Bright Theory,” which is a disguised form of controlling speech. Liu Jipeng might have violated this guideline. However, over the past two years, China’s economic recovery has been difficult, with high local debts, a stagnant economy, intensified tax investigations, sales of state-owned assets, increased fines, tolls even on non-highway roads, and a continuously declining stock market, rendering the CCP’s “Economic Bright Theory” ineffective.
He stated that a poor economy threatens the CCP’s legitimacy and Xi Jinping’s hold on power atop the red regime. At such a critical juncture, the most taboo subject becomes the questioning of official discourse. Recent rumors about Xi Jinping’s health and unstable power are fundamentally linked to economic troubles. As the political and economic situation deteriorates, even Hu Xijin, who should have understood the CCP’s true nature, faced punishment for “recklessly criticizing the central authority,” highlighting the authorities’ intensified “silence all” campaign.
In the past year, several Chinese economic scholars were silenced for expressing opinions contrary to official stances. Apart from Liu Jipeng, individuals such as Dang Bin, Chairman of Shenzhen Eastern Harbor Investment Management Company, finance blogger Hong Rong, founder of financial research institution Gelonghui, Chen Shouhong, renowned commentator Shuipi, economist Ma Guangyuan, financial writer Wu Xiaobo, and former senior investment consultant of China Jiancai Wealth Securities, Xu Xiaoyu, faced similar restrictions.
An article recently published by The Economist highlighted a major issue facing China’s economy, characterized by strict control of information, highly centralized political control, and governance culture built on “fear.” In efforts to avoid embarrassment for its leadership amid a fragile economy, CCP officials have resorted to distorting information in reports. However, this path could potentially lead the CCP regime to replicate the downfall of the former Soviet Union.