Bitcoin Forum

The roughly 3,000 delegates of the National People’s Congress, China’s legislature, voted almost unanimously on Sunday to end a two-term limit on the presidency, one of the main leadership posts held by Xi Jinping. While the overwhelming approval by the party-controlled congress was not a surprise, the repercussions go beyond just allowing Mr. Xi to stay on longer.

Here’s what is at stake, and why ending the term limit matters.

Why is the limit in place now?
One lesson that China drew from the upheavals of the Cultural Revolution was the danger of concentrating power in one supreme, unassailable leader who ruled for life.

In 1982, when China was recovering from that chaotic era, lawmakers approved a new Constitution that said the president and also the vice president “shall serve no more than two consecutive terms.”

It is sometimes said that Deng Xiaoping, who led China after Mao, introduced the term limit to prevent the top leader from again becoming too powerful. But that’s not entirely true. Back then the Chinese presidency was not such a powerful post. Deng wielded much of his power informally, without titles or term limits, and through his control of the military.

Even so, the politicians and legal experts who drafted China’s 1982 Constitution saw lifelong tenure as a recipe for tyranny, especially in a one-party state.

“If someone stays in office for 15 years, the people won’t dare express their opinions to him,” said Fang Yi, one of the framers of the Constitution. “The French president begins with one term of seven years, with an option for a second term. But that’s different. They have opposition parties who pick their faults every day.”

How did it become important?
The presidential term limit became more important in the 1990s, when Deng prepared to pass power to his successor, Jiang Zemin.

Under Deng in the 1980s, there was turmoil in succession, as two protégés were forced to resign following student demonstrations. Deng tried to ensure the success of his final choice, Mr. Jiang, by setting him up in China’s three most powerful posts: Communist Party general secretary, chairman of the commission in charge of the military and the presidency, which Mr. Jiang took over in 1993.

But Deng also wanted to ensure that Mr. Jiang did not stay on indefinitely. He started a succession cycle by also promoting Mr. Jiang’s younger heir-apparent, Hu Jintao.

Under Mr. Jiang and later Mr. Hu, a new norm formed. The top leader had clear authority because he held all three main posts. But he had to hand them to a successor after about a decade.

“The three-in-one leadership system and form — of party general secretary, state president and military commission chairman — is not only necessary but also the most fitting for a great party and a great country like ours,” Mr. Jiang said in 2004.

That arrangement allowed two of the most stable transitions of power in China’s modern history, from Mr. Jiang to Mr. Hu in 2002, and then Mr. Hu to Mr. Xi six years ago.

Is the presidency powerful in China?
In China, the political job that matters most is the general secretary of the Communist Party. The party controls the military and domestic security forces, and sets the policies that the government carries out. China’s presidency lacks the authority of the American and French presidencies.

This difference is reflected in language. In Chinese, China’s president is called “zhuxi,” which really translates as “chairman.” Foreign presidents get a different title, “zongtong.” So in effect, Chinese people are referring to Mr. Xi as the “state chairman,” though in English his title is officially translated as “state president” to put him on an even footing with other world leaders.

Still, the Chinese presidency is not entirely ceremonial. The president has the power, acting with the legislature, to declare war or a state of emergency. In times of crisis, disagreement between a party leader and president could cause trouble.

The presidency has become increasingly prominent thanks to China’s growing global stature. At home, Mr. Xi usually speaks as party leader; abroad, he appears as president, who is the formal head of state. Mr. Xi relishes the prestige of state visits to the White House or Buckingham Palace, which might be awkward if he were not president.

Why change the system?
The official Chinese news media have said that Mr. Xi wants to abandon the term limit so that he can keep his trinity of leadership posts. According to Xinhua News Agency and other party-run news outlets, having a term limit on just the presidency is unreasonable because neither of Mr. Xi’s other two major posts — party leader and military chairman — has a similar limit.

Of course, this argument does not address the other solution to that inconsistency: imposing limits on the party and military posts. His action leaves little doubt that Mr. Xi is clearing the way to remain top leader for a long time to come, and without clear rivals.

If the term limit remained, Mr. Xi would have to step down as president at the end of his next five-year term, in 2023. Any successor could potentially become a rival.

Mr. Xi seems determined to remain “three-in-one” leader because he sees himself on a historic mission to make China into a great power. Achieving that will take more than a decade, Xi has said.

Last year, Mr. Xi showed his intent to stay in power by declining to promote a potential successor into the new Politburo Standing Committee, the party’s most powerful body. Mr. Xi and Mr. Hu both served political apprenticeships in the Standing Committee before taking over.

Will Xi will be leader for life?
Mr. Xi has produced plenty of surprises in his first five years in power, not least his decision to abolish the term limit before his second term as president had even started. So predicting Mr. Xi’s future steps isn’t easy.

Even so, The People’s Daily said earlier this month that ending the presidential term limit does not “imply a system of lifelong leadership.” The point seems to be that while Mr. Xi may be around for a while, he won’t be another Mao, who remained in power even as he grew ill and incoherent with age.

But Mr. Xi has not specified how many terms he plans on. Perhaps Mr. Xi himself does not have a firm idea yet. Or perhaps he figures he can enhance his power even further by keeping everyone else guessing.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/10/world/asia/china-xi-jinping-term-limit-explainer.html

I'm sorry that China is on its way to monarchy. But this is the decision of the Chinese people. I think that after such a decision there is no point in expecting changes in the attitude of the Chinese government towards cryptocurrencies. This means that China will continue to partially limit their use and significantly reduce the pace of development of the popularity of cryptocurrencies.

How do people see this panning out? It is interesting how Donald Trump is proposing greater term limits for political office, while in china the complete opposite is occurring with the further removal of term limits. Certainly there is a difference in methodology at the moment with china and america pursuing polar opposites.

How do people see this panning out? It is interesting how Donald Trump is proposing greater term limits for political office, while in china the complete opposite is occurring with the further removal of term limits. Certainly there is a difference in methodology at the moment with china and america pursuing polar opposites.

I don't know the relationship between Chinese politics and BTC digital encryption currency!

I just want to see that BTC can get a reasonable and legal status in China, which is a good thing for the people of the world's digital encryption currency.

It means that when Xi Jinping messes up (and he will, all leaders mess up eventually through either tiredness or hubris or both), they will have to assasinate him to remove him. Whereas before, it would have been a simple matter of saying, "your two terms are up, thank you for your service".

P.S. Donald Trump hasn't got a similar ability to extend term limits in the USA.

The two term limit is part of the Constitution - which means that to change it, you need two thirds of the Senate, two thirds of the House of Representatives AND two-thirds of the states to vote for it. It's pretty hard to do which is why the US constitution doesn't get changed much.

Would "Donald Trump is proposing greater term limitations" have been a better way to phrase it? There are no term limitations for congress or senate. Would introducing term limits be characterized as greater limits or fewer limits? The way things are now, many of them are in office forever. Not unlike what Xi Jinping could eventually become.

I'm wondering if this greater centralization of political power by Xi Jinping could decrease competition which could hurt china over the long term. Could Maduro and Kim Jong's centralization of power in venezuela and north korea be characterized by failure? If the answer to that question is: yes. Then could china face a similar precedent in the future by centralizing power under circumstances where there probably won't be enough competition to streamline operations or incentivize efficiency by those in power, given they're guaranteed their monopoly and likely have little or no motivation to improve circumstances?

Because china is brave and smart country and their leaders are not all corrupt and the development of china is so wide, that why more of their people are agree on what is the decisions of their government.

this may  cause a problem for bitcoin. if xi jinping decided to ban cryptocurrency, there is no way bitcoin could thrive in that market. it will be also hard to reverse this decision

They've already banned all crypto exchanges in country,now they are working on the methods how to prevent Chinese citizens to use international exchanges.Only thing working in China regarding cryptocurrency is mining,they allow that just because it make huge profit for them.Money that comes to country is not a problem, but uncontrollable cash outflow through cryptocurrency is unacceptable.

Because china is brave and smart country and their leaders are not all corrupt and the development of china is so wide, that why more of their people are agree on what is the decisions of their government.

I think xi jinping, like Russia's putin, can bring new development to the country!

But the BTC is hard to develop in China, where digital encryption requires a long legal presence in China.

Well, I have to confess I never understood that thing. Could anyone please explain to me in layman terms what this "uncontrollable cash outflow" means in practice? I understand when people buy gold and try to move it across the border because it physically leaves the country. But bitcoin is sort of transcendental in the sense it doesn't recognize borders anyway. So it kinda doesn't need to be moved anywhere since it's already everywhere, Jinping or no Jinping. Where's the catch here?

I think the explanation is very simple,at least for me.When some Chinese wants to move money (CNY) from China to another country they simple buy BTC or some other cryptocurrency,it is easy,safe and effective way of sending money without government knows where and how much money you sending.Since they can not control such transactions only way to stop people to convert CYN in crypto was to ban exchanges.If average Chinese can not buy BTC today,this means government has succeeded in its intention.

If average Chinese can not buy BTC today,this means government has succeeded in its intention.

Nope remember that once you are serving your term as president you will be under the eyes of your citizens as well as the media. Even if Xi Jinping can run and run again for president and their citizens are not seeing any development or progress during his term he will be inevitably replaced by the people. On its Bitcoin side we are seeing that Bitcoin's progress is greatly affected by news relating to China banning cryptocurrencies having a official statement from the President will surely erase the FUD.

I also agree with tee-rex that Bitcoin isn't actually something you move outside a country, but the main thing is that it's more the fact that not Bitcoin is the problem here, but still fiat is.

If you wire money to an exchange, it will likely end up in a foreign country, and if people massively buy themselves into crypto, exchanges will move even more of their capital away from the economy. I think that's the main concern.

Not only regular individuals want to store their capital in other countries, but businesses as well.

I think the explanation is very simple,at least for me.When some Chinese wants to move money (CNY) from China to another country they simple buy BTC or some other cryptocurrency,it is easy,safe and effective way of sending money without government knows where and how much money you sending.Since they can not control such transactions only way to stop people to convert CYN in crypto was to ban exchanges.If average Chinese can not buy BTC today,this means government has succeeded in its intention.

I'm sorry that China is on its way to monarchy. But this is the decision of the Chinese people. I think that after such a decision there is no point in expecting changes in the attitude of the Chinese government towards cryptocurrencies. This means that China will continue to partially limit their use and significantly reduce the pace of development of the popularity of cryptocurrencies.

China is trying its best to protect its domestic investment. Governments of other countries do the same. This is less evident because other governments are more democratic and cannot act by direct means. It is sad but I have to admit that China's policies in respect of the cryptocurrency will not change. This is evidenced by the vote at the Chinese people's Assembly for a life sentence for XI Jinping.

....

Not certain what implications this might have for bitcoin in china.  :)  There could be postives, or there could be negatives. It might be accurate to say eliminating Xi Jinping's term limit will represent a greater centralization of political power within china. That element could be interesting to discuss within a centralization versus decentralization perspective.  .

How do people see this panning out? It is interesting how Donald Trump is proposing greater term limits for political office, while in china the complete opposite is occurring with the further removal of term limits. Certainly there is a difference in methodology at the moment with china and america pursuing polar opposites.

This is very worrying there are several reasons of why there should be a limit to the amount of terms a person is able to serve, this will not create a monarchy this will create a dictatorship, the Chinese were already in a communist dictatorship but now it's going to be worse, the Chinese citizens need bitcoin more than ever but it's likely that more harsh laws are going to be put in place and harsher punishments to those that violate the law, I will not be surprised if these is a sign to the end of the Chinese economic recovery and this signals their fall.

Well, I have to confess I never understood that thing. Could anyone please explain to me in layman terms what this "uncontrollable cash outflow" means in practice? I understand when people buy gold and try to move it across the border because it physically leaves the country. But bitcoin is sort of transcendental in the sense it doesn't recognize borders anyway. So it kinda doesn't need to be moved anywhere since it's already everywhere, Jinping or no Jinping. Where's the catch here?

There are the limits on the currency which can be moved to the foreign country-currency. For example, a company or person could take out 5000 USD worth chinese currency per year. However with cryptocurrency you could bypass this condition/law and move any amount of money to other country. That is buy crypto-currency of desired value, lets say 20000 USD worth bitcoin or alt-crypto is purchased from chinese exchange and transfer that crypto to other person or receiver (receiver could be in any country). There is no control over transfer of crypto. So the term uncontrollable cash outflow.

In different countries, the attitude to bitcoin is completely different from the side of the government, so the time limits are being implemented in the United States, while in China they are abolished at all.