Talk:Generations of Chinese leadership/Archive 1

Junior Roles??
(Re: Second Generation): These leaders were also involved in the Chinese revolution but in junior roles.

Well, actually Chen Yun was a Politburo member since the 1930s until his death. Chen held sway over the CCP levers of power during the so-called "28 Bolshiviks" period (when Mao Zedong was incedentally discraced and removed from all effective decision-making in the Party). Additionally, Chen ranked fifth in the CCP power line (being a memeber of the CCP Politburo Secretariat, later the Politburo Standing Committee from 1950 to 1966, which would put him in the first generation in terms of power. He survived the Cultural Revolution relatively unscathed and with his Politburo membership.  If anything, Chen's power prior to the 1980s was arguably more significant than during his resumption of visible power following the fall of the Gang of Four, when his more conservative views on modernization were effectively cheked by "Paramount Leader" Deng.

Deng Xiaoping was definitely a first and second generation leader. Deng was an important military leader who is credited with the Huai-Hai victory, and Deng was present during the Long March. Following the creation of the PRC, Deng was assigned to be the senior leader of the South-West Military Region, a position of enormous importance and a demonstration of Mao's trust in his leadership. And with Mao's backing, Deng Xiaoping became the first PRC-era CCP General Secretary, in effect in charge of all of the CCP paper flow.

I know that this article follows the mainland interpretation of things, but Deng and Chen held as much power and had as much to do with the early formative years of the PRC as other leaders like Zhou Enlai, not to mention Zhu De (who became little more than a publicly-popular figurehead following the 1949 victory of the communists.)

Sometimes things don't always work out so neatly in history. Just something to keep in mind.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.171.249.285 (talk) 17:37, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Fourth Generation
The article states that the members of the fourth generation were born in the 1950s but the four leaders actually mentioned were born from 1939 to 1942. I can't access the Hong Kong Economic Journal reference. The leaders of the fifth generation mentioned in the article were born between 1954 and 1960, so maybe that reference belongs in the fifth generation section. Lexivore 22:15, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Chinese leadership?
Would it be a neutral point of view to call the leaders of the PRC Chinese leaders? The policy on Wikipedia is not to equate China and People's Republic of China. &mdash; Instantnood 21:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC) The title of this entry would better be changed to Generations of the PRC leadership, or perhaps Generations of the leadership of the Communist Party of China. &mdash; Instantnood 16:10, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Put it on Reqested Moves and make a case for it here. It does not sound like a bad idea. SchmuckyTheCat 15:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

This is good, though I prefer Generations of the PRC leadership. CPC leadership has to go back to early 1920s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.173.188.35 (talk) 18:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

What does this mean?
"These groups of leadership have each promoted an extension of the ideology of the former, which in some cases stirred away the direction of national development." Can someone change this to something less vague and weasley? I have no idea what 'national development' is. Do we mean communist development, or actual development in terms of living standards? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.223.213 (talk) 21:44, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Fifth Generation
Is it just mean or is it wierd to talk about something that doesn't exist like its around right now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.17.155.35 (talk) 10:11, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Updates
I've added a footnote in the opening paragraph. DOR (HK) (talk) 06:38, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Fourth Generations
Actually, CPC didn't use this phrase for Hu Jintao.--刻意(Kèyì) 01:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

WP:CRYSTALBALL
Comrades, today is 2010. I hope you are all aware of that. Inclusion of the fifth and sixth generations, which will come to office in 2012 and 2022 is a blatant WP:CRYSTALBALL. Prove me otherwise. --  李博杰   | —Talk contribs email 07:25, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It would be CRYSTALBALL in the sense that it is speculating on future events that haven't happened, but it is also not CRYSTALBALL in the sense that it is presenting the fact that there has been speculation on these events in the past. It needs to be better sourced, that is for certain, but that section should not be wiped out entirely. Colipon+ (Talk) 04:15, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

The simplified chinese translation for "Generations of Chinese leadership" is suspected to be inaccurate.
Discussion in Chinese wikipedia mentions about the translation in this article, "中国共产党领导人世代", was never used in any of Chinese content found. Is there any sources about this translation? Please join this discussion by write down your idea here or by clicking 维基百科:頁面存廢討論/記錄/2012/02/27#中国共产党领导人世代 to join the discussion in wikipedia-zh, thank you. --shangkuanlc (talk) 09:07, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Regardless of the outcome on the Chinese project, the Chinese text here lacks a citation. Grammatically it sounds more like Sino-Japanese than Chinese, and I suspect that may be the origin of the term. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 14:42, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * A more usual expression in Chinese for this concept seems to be 中国共产党领导集体, which is not a literaly translation of "Generations of..." but instead means something like "Collective leaderships of the Communist Party of China", but it seems to be a term actually used in China. If there is no objection I will substitute the term along with an explanation as to usage. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 14:46, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * While in English the chronological leadership groups are commonly referred to as "generations of Chinese leadership", there is no exact equivalent expression in Chinese. The usual term in official discourse for such a group is a "leadership collective", which are counted in generations. Thus, for example, the "first generation" of leaders identified below are labelled as "the first generation leadership collective". In official discourse, they are also not viewed as leaders of the state (the People's Republic of China), but rather leaders of the party (the Communist Party of China). In the Communist Party's official discourse, the "generational" division and identification of the "core leader" for each of the first, second and third generations was set down during the leadership of Jiang Zemin. This division and identification was not uncontroversial at the time, since the party had hitherto regarded his immediate predecessors as the party's general secretary, Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang, as its leaders, and regarded Deng Xiaoping as the "power behind the throne" rather than a formal leader. Jiang's successors have maintained this generational division, but have retreated from identifying a "core leader" in the fourth generation, and the succeeding general secretary Hu Jintao has never been identified in official announcements as the "core" of the fourth generation.

Roadrunner (talk) 06:51, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Removed this as it is inaccurate. It is true that the officially the leaders are not referred to by generation, but I count 2,900,000 Google hits for 中国五代领导.  So it is quite frequent in the Chinese media to refer to leaders by generation number.

Roadrunner (talk) 06:51, 9 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Also, there as a discussion on this topic a few months ago on the Chinese wiki, and the decision was made to keep the article Roadrunner (talk) 06:55, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Roadrunner, 中国五代领导 does not even make grammatical sense in Chinese, patching a few words together and counting the G-hits does not prove that combination of words are actually used in that order in Chinese. The characters you have chosen are all out of the long form used by the Communist party itself, i.e. "the xth generation of the leadership collective of the communist party of China", "中国共产党的第X代领导集体", so it is neither here nor there if you are trying to prove the descriptio is wrong.
 * I urge you to read more carefully the text you removed: it does not make the point that you seem to think it does. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 14:16, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Name for third generation and before
Is there some pithy name for the third generation and before, in line with "Hu-Wen administration" and "Xi-Li administration"? At the very least, I want to know how to entitle an article for the Jiang Zemin days (Jiang-Li? Jiang-Zhu?), while emphasizing collective rather than individualistic leadership. I understand that transfer of power was not so smooth back then, but I wonder if there is some anachronistic back-projection or historiographical convention we could use. Shrigley (talk) 22:51, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I think not, and the reason for that would of course be that the "Hu-Wen Admin" actually started a new trend in Chinese politics. What would you call the First Generation? In my mind, I just say "毛的中国" because really he's the only one that remained constant... 邓 was still powerful when 江 took power, but you wouldn't list him as part of the administration. But if you find something, I guess it would help make the article clearer. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:03, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "Mao era" and "Deng era" might be the equivalent. Jiang was a transitional figure, at least for the first part of his general secretaryship, and the "Jiang era", while seen, is not commonly used. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 16:04, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Timeline in Section about Sixth Generation Leadership
Reviewing this page, I wanted to suggest revisions to the leadership timeline that appears in the section about potential members of the Sixth Generation. As is, the timeline is confusing to non-specialist readers. There is no explanation for the different color codes, nor why pre-1949 leaders are also listed. At the very least, a description should be added to the timeline's page, identifying the leaders and why they are grouped into different colors (what does red, blue, and yellow signify; hardliners and moderates? It's unclear). Also, inclusion of the current fifth-generation leadership beyond Li would be helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scipio82 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Generations of Chinese leadership. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111006004033/http://www.eai.nus.edu.sg/Vol2No1_BoZhiyue.pdf to http://www.eai.nus.edu.sg/Vol2No1_BoZhiyue.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:47, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Ren Bishi
Where is Ren? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.34.149.131 (talk) 20:57, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:04, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Chinese leaders.jpg