The Chinese Communist Party Since 1949

During the 1950s and 1960s, the study of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was an important part of Western scholarship on Econtemporary China. However, after the end of the Cultural Revolution in 1976, studies of the CCP decreased in numbers. Instead, the focus of the field shifted to studies of the state and structural and bureaucratic aspects of the Chinese polity. This focus included important works on decision-making structures in relation to, for example, hydropower management and foreign policy and gave rise to new concepts such as “fragmented authoritarianism.” In the wake of the Tiananmen debacle, many scholars declared the CCP had lost its legitimacy and was bound to wither away. It was only in the early 2000s that scholars began to realize that the CCP not only remained a crucial actor, but also that it had actually undergone a process of revitalization and renewal. Since the book Bringing the Party Back In, edited by Kjeld Erik Brødsgaard and Zheng Yongnian, was published in 2004 (Brødsgaard and Zheng 2004, cited under General Overviews), a number of important studies on the role of the CCP have appeared. They cover themes such as Party ideology, Party organization, and Party reform, as well as issues such as cadre management, which includes nomenklatura (a list of leading positions about whom decisions of appointment are made by the Party, as described in Nomenklatura); recruitment; and training. Even though the general consensus is that the CCP is the key factor in maintaining the Chinese power structure and making the political system work, there is disagreement as to the Party’s future. Some scholars are optimistic concerning the Party’s continued ability to adapt to the internal and external pressures generated by modernization and economic development, whereas others argue that the CCP is bound to constitute an obstacle to democratization and political reform and therefore will atrophy and eventually lose its monopoly of power. The author gratefully acknowledges the suggestions and comments of Huang Yanjie and Nis Grunberg.