Talk:Hu Jintao/Archive 1

XI JINPING HAS NOT YET SUCCEEDED HU

Stop putting that he did! He was not yet succeeded, and we don't know for sure that Jinping will succeed him! Hcfwesker (talk) 16:50, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Is Xi Jinping ur friend? The right way to address him is by surname, which is Xi, not Jinping —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alec7412 (talk • contribs) 01:34, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Preliminary discussion

this is a very informative article. it characterized his rise in a clear fashion. something not easy to do considering that china doesn't not have a legislated and transparent leadership selection process

---

"Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou once jokingly said "I hope a Hu Jintao can one day be cultivated from among the youth of Taiwan." Could someone explain the joke? Mporter 07:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

---

this article was attacked , all title changed to "free tibet", i just remove them. Could anyone rewrite the title?

clever bunch aren't they?

---

The last paragraph in the "Background" section needs some reworking. Parts are poorly written or difficult to understand.

---

To my chagrin, I came to this article and found only the following, which I removed:

--begin quote--

Hello, at the end of the Leadership paragraph there is an obscene sentence appearing. Somehow it cannot be edited. Can anybody remove it ? Mat.

---

I've updated the article, given the developments at the 16th Party Congress

172

---

Changed all-powerful to powerful. The PSC is quite powerful but not omnipotent. The current situation in which an elder leader not in the PSC has great influence is not exactly uncommon.

---

Question: why is he regarded as a "man of considerable intelligence"? Who said so, and where is the evidence of his "photographic memory"? And isn't it entirely plausible that the "egalitarian approach" is just propaganda (just like American politicians pretending to be downhome country folk when they're plainly not)?

--Robert Merkel 23:48 Mar 20, 2003 (UTC)

---

He was elected President of the People's Republic of China on March 15, 2003, replacing Jiang Zemin.

Elected how? Surely not in a general vote by all Chinese adults.

Maybe via "democratic centralism", whereby some closed council of sorts with maybe a few hundred members had some sort of vote. Like a Parliament in a democratic country voting for their Prime Minister. Except in China, the general public does NOT elect members to Parliament.

Am I making too big a thing out of this? Oh, and who elected Hu? Those are my questions. --Uncle Ed

OK, cleared it up: he was elected by the National People's Congress. Very good question though. I also changed the President of the People's Republic of China article to clarify. --Kaihsu 16:40 Apr 16, 2003 (UTC)

thats how china's "democracy" works for you :) 74.112.123.80 22:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I dont know about China. But the ruling party in Vietnam (also a communist country) picks out a few candidates from their own party. And they let the people choose between those candidates. So technically, it's a "democratic election" but the choices are "filtered." And did I mention all the candidates are from the same party? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.104.229 (talk) 05:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

---

His open response in handling of the SARS crisis has been praised by both the Chinese people and leaders from around the world.

This is definitely incorrect: China's response to the SARS crisis has in fact been strongly condemned by the World Health Organization and others, and has not been described by anyone outside China as "open". It is true that Hu Jintao has taken some steps to alleviate these problems (sacking several ministers in the process), but on the whole the article gives the impression that everyone is pleased with the handling, which is definitely not the case. --Delirium 03:00 6 Jul 2003 (UTC)

---

moved here. Hu has not been characteristically cautious since his accession

China has a history of fallen heirs-apparent, which many observers believe explains Hu's characteristic caution. Communist China has been plagued with succession problems, with elder cadres, such as Deng Xiaoping, wielding behind the scenes power through younger protégés. Deng was able to anoint three party secretaries, and was instrumental in the ouster of two of them, Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang. His third and final selection, Jiang Zemin, won Deng's continued backing and was the only party secretary in Communist Chinese history to voluntarily leave his post when his term ended. Even Deng himself fell from grace as party general secretary(not the top communist post during that time) in the 1950s due this less than enthusiatic support for Maoist economic policies.

---

Roadrunner:

Good job reexamining the speculation of the China-watchers outside the PRC in light of recent developments. I guess the one thing about Hu of which we can still be certain is that he's always surprised dismissive observers.

Western observers have *always* underestimated the person in the shadows. I remember when people said that Jiang wouldn't last long. The reason for this is simple. In order to get to the top of Chinese leadership, you have to look weaker than you really are. Both Hu and Jiang are people that look soft-spoken and weak, until you challenge them, they will eat you for lunch.

-- User:Roadrunner

However, I restored some of the reasoning behind the speculation before the Sixteenth Party Congress, but qualified it in light on recent developments. 172 06:42, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

---

I readded his career background. Not sure why it was removed.

---

I remember the observers underestimating the "person in the shadows"; and I was one of them both times. In light of this hopefully my China-watching speculation will prove more accurate the third time around, when there's the shift to the "fifth generation." But I guess that caution should be the rule when speculating about the opaque inner-workings of the PRC leadership base. Perhaps with all this in mind, we should reexamine many articles on top CPC leaders (many of which were mostly written by me). A lot of those articles delve into a lot of speculation. And any observer would be naïve to assume that China-watching, like Sovietology, can ever be a science.

Your edits and comments are a good reason to start reminiscing about failed attempts to predict trends in PRC politics. I guess that going though old assumptions, and examining how off they were in retrospect, should offer other contributors cautionary words on writing content for articles on PRC politics.

Upon the surprise of hearing that Jiang was named CPC General Secretary, I figured that he was just a façade for the elders and that Li Peng (who'd really be wielding day-to-day power from behind the scenes). My guess was that they needed this amiable-looking "flower vase," who had a good relationship with foreign investors in Shanghai, working ties to a lot of key figures in the West, and nothing to do with the "butchers of Beijing," to be the acceptable public face for PRC abroad. While the latter might have been the case, I certainly figured that he’d be nothing more than a façade. I assumed that he was the compromise candidate hand-picked by the elders and Li merely because he wasn't a threat to anyone. After all, the China-watchers were assuming that this little-known Shanghai mayor and party-boss had no support base of his own, no grandiose ambitions of his own, and no known views of his own not in sync with the more conservative and cautious post-Tiananmen status quo. I figured that he would be far more hamstrung than Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang ever were, since the elders had reason to fear mishaps by the last couple of party chiefs touted as the heir apparent. If anything, I expected the octogenarian elders would let Li Peng gradually assume Deng's role. At the time, Li seemed like the only one trusted by a generation of underground revolutionaries in the leadership base tormented by memories of civil war and famine before 1949, the Cultural Revolution and reacting to the downfall of other Communist regimes with horror and great fear. After all, since he had just reacted so promptly and resolutely, and had shown his willingness from the start to maintain party rule by any means, he'd be the one really trusted to wield power.

Thirteen years later, some are suggesting that Li just hung on to the nominal number two party and state posts (until 2002 and 2002, respectively ) because the CPC wouldn't want to tacitly suggest that it had erred in 1989 (and in hindsight, I doubt that they had any other choice). But who knows is that has any basis in reality? In hindsight, I couldn't imagine how unlikely it would have seemed in 1989 to imagine that Jiang would be put on the same plain as Mao and Deng with his own "Three Represents" theory. I wonder if I could do some research and find out if anyone was predicting in 1989 that Jiang would be touted as a great Communist theoretician offering an updated reformulation of Marxism, following developments by Lenin, "Mao Zedong Thought" and "Deng Xiaoping Theory!"

Moreover, this was all based on a campaign around a theoretical justification for allowing once unsavory elements associated with the "advanced productive forces" to join the CPC! Seeing him stand in the Chinese limo in style of Mao and Deng on the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the PRC was a surprising power play, but nothing compared to ones afterward.

Before the 16th Party Congress, the specialists on PRC politics, the Western media, and business periodicals assumed in mass that Jiang's role would be analogous to Deng's, Hu would be a puppet, and Zeng would be the real heir. Perhaps PRC politics has gotten institutionalized and regularized to the point that there is a relationship between a cadre's real role and his administrative office(s). This has been a noticable trend for a couple of decades, but it's surprising how rationalized party practices and procedures seem to be now in relationship to just a short time ago. 172 11:57, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

---

There's no need to list the same pinyin twice, and WG is never used for modern PRC leaders; 9 of the top 10 results of a Google search for "Hu Chin-t'ao" are this Wikipedia article! Jpatokal 12:49, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

"Hu Chintao" gets 17 hits. "Hu Chin-tao" gets 58 hits. "Hu Chin Tao" gets 6 results. WhisperToMe 23:30, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

You really should stop adding extraneous content. 58 hits hardly warrant the addition of the transliteration into this article; in addition, no credible publication has ever referred to him in this manner (and if they did, then it was probably out of ignorance). --Taoster 02:41, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

Chart

Anyone with spare time mind putting up one of those charts/tables on the top right-hand corner of the article?

Thanks -Colipon 00:46, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

"Hu Jintao in Mao suit"

Valentino, why do you insist on adding that very highly doctored photo of him in a green Mao suit? His preferred/common style of dress is a black western suit. The photo of him in the western suit looks much less doctored than the one of him in the Mao suit. --Jiang 19:53, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Jiang, on what basis can you prove that the 'Mao Suit' photo is doctored? I added that picture of him right after he was made CMC chairman, as it matched the portraits of other prominent Chinese leaders (Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin) in their Wikipedia main photos. I'll stop adding it to the main page though, as I don't want to quarrel and make this issue bigger than it should be. --Valentino 03:03, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)

Unlike Mao and Deng, Hu appears in public wearing a black western-style suit and tie. I will be changing the Jiang pic to something less creative. The fact that the photo is doctored should be very obvious. --Jiang 05:57, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

OK, so I went to look for a similar picture to compare with the 'Mao Suit' pic (which I originally obtained from the China Daily), and I found this which almost exactly looks identical. I would have never ever thought that I would be fooled by a doctored picture! But alas, I have. Sorry about this, Jiang. By the way, if you want a decent photo of Jiang Zemin in a business suit, one can be found here. --Valentino 20:58, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)

In China there is no such thing as a "Mao suite", this is a western mistranslation and common error...it's correctly called and known as Zhongshanzhuang 中山装, which means "Sun Yat-Sen (Sun Zhongshan in Mandarin) suite". Both Mao Zedong and Chiang Kai-shek wore it as an homage to Sun, which has always been considered by both Guomindang (Nationalists) and Gongchandang (Communists) as the father of modern republican China. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alec7412 (talk • contribs) 01:23, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

NPOV problems

This article makes Hu seem too much like a democrat. Some of the stuff Hu has been doing hasnt been very democratic. See this article for example. --Jiang 06:34, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I removed "He is believed to be more liberal and open-minded than his predecessor." from the lead based on the above. There are some more recent articles discussing the same, namely, the tighter media controls enforced under Hu than under Jiang and Deng.--Jiang 05:28, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

can this be correct? am i crazy...

it states that Hu Jintao joined the Communist Party both before AND after the revolution...

Follow the links. He joined after the communists siezed power, and before Mao purged his opponents. I'll try to straighten it up a little for you. Think of the "Cultural Revolution" as a nice euphamism for "Stalinist Purges". --Uncle Bungle 17:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

International Incident

It remains to be seen if Hu is capable of managing the continued peaceful development of China without provoking international incident, while at the same time presiding over a unprecedented increase in Chinese nationalist sentiment.

That one statement ought to be the introduction to a whole section, not a passing remark in backgroud. Yall gotta back that up with facts. International incident with whom? Does that refer to the Japaneese textbook thing? (what a stupid reason for an incident, btw). --Uncle Bungle 17:48, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I don’t want to tarnish reputation of the last surviving civilization of the world, but I have to tell the truth of the current geopolitics. West colonized China. That is undeniable truth. But now, in turn, China starts aggressively colonizing the neighboring countries like Nepal, Bhutan and Lao, helping the notorious regimes like Burma, North Korea, Iran and Sudan, planning to create war with Taiwan. What is the civility of self-proclaimed cultured China? I see none. Businesses in China become boom because technologies and knowledge around the world flow into China. What are the greatest achievement and invention of China in the last century? I see none. Of course, printing started in China, but that was many centuries ago. Last half of the century, China only generated chaos and instability around the bordering countries by promoting now-defunct communism. Now what kind of system is China using to govern the country? One country, two systems? What a strange saying!!! 'It doesn't matter whether it's a black cat or a white cat; as long as it can catch mice, it's a good cat.' Who said these great saying in meeting of the CCP in 1962? “Cross the river by feeling the stones.” Italic text If China really wants to maintain its reputation, it must accept neighboring countries getting Democracy. Only capitalism helps China flourish. Agree or Not? Maung Reel of Burma. 27 July, 2007. (Bangkok)

Sorry, Maung Reel of Burma, but I really think you have crossed the line. This is not the place to discuss how China behaves. BTW, 'It doesn't matter whether it's a black cat or a white cat; as long as it can catch mice, it's a good cat.' Who said these great saying in meeting of the CCP in 1962? “Cross the river by feeling the stones.” Italic text. Whether you admit or not, they are truth. Also, don't talk about international relationship here before you know enough.

Hu is 63, yet he looks 40!

How does Hugh make himself look so young? See when he was born? See how he looks though? How does he do it??? How does Hugh make himself look this good?

Contrast this to John Evander Couey. He's 46 but looking at him at first sight, you would think the numbers are switched on his age. --Shultz 11:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Also consider Kim Dae Jung. He's now 80 (74 when he met Kim Jong Il in 2000), yet in almost all photos he looks several decades younger than he actually is. --TML1988 03:51, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Hugh? --Sumple (Talk) 10:35, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Dyeing your hair does wonders for your looks. Vincent 23:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

A lot of Asians adopt English names. Therefore, is "Hugh" the English adaptation for "Hu"?

Hu is on first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.109.195.126 (talk) 00:09, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I know a lot of Orientals adopt names that don't sound similar too. At my high school, there was a Korean foreign exchange student named "Eun-jung Kim", but her English name was "Chloe Kim", even though they don't sound similar. It's preference, but Orientals take similar-sounding names too. So, does Hu sometimes go by Hugh, around westerners? --Shultz 11:40, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

disregarding the pejorative terms used in your post, and its nonsensical nature and irrelevance to this article, here's some information: 1. Hu is a surname, not a given name. 2. Hu is not pronounced like Hugh. and 3. does Jacques Chirac call himself Jack Shirack when he's in the US? I don't think so. --Sumple (Talk) 10:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Why does Hugh redirect to this article? I have never heard of him referred to by that name. theboogeyman 03:51, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

looks like Hugh Jintao's been successfully deleted. Cheers. --Sumple (Talk) 00:48, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for adding another note to a topic already done and closing on three years, but I think we should clarify and not just assume it's of a pejorative nature. Therefore:

-Asians, by the American connotations, do not adopt English names unless they are likely to interact more often with non-Asian persons. Therefore, President Hu would never require an English or Anglicised name. Likewise, this also means there need not be any correlation between names. Asian names have no connection with Western naming and so any attempt to bridge this is completely based on preference. In the example of Jacques Chirac, an anglicised name would be Jack if he were to choose it, however Jintao has no related English form. If the President were to choose an English name, he could choose either Hugh or any other just as your classmate chose Chloe.

-Shultz, you may also notice that you presented the correct format of naming with your Korean classmate, yet still assumed Hu was a given name for the President. I believe this could be the reason why your paragraph was viewed as pejorative, though I'd like to believe it was only careless in nature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.168.106.43 (talk) 04:46, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Vice-President

Who was VP of China before Hu? Colipon+(T) 08:42, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I believe that it was Rong Yiren.

No it is Xi Jinping now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.122.37.65 (talk) 00:35, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Lets add some truth behind the man.

We could mention all sorts of acts in violation of human rights. The people have the right to information, well the rest of the world does.

Hu Jintao is a modern day Hitler. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Freedomintibet (talk • contribs) .

I agree Hu jintao isnt a kind person i personally have so amny issues that i cant really begin to discuss it im just expressing my oppnion on him sorry if i offend people

You are entitled to have your own opinions toward Hu, but calling him a "modern day Hitler" hardly qualifies for "some truth behind the man".

Many people seem to confuse Hu Jintao with the Chinese government in its entirety; which is a fallacy. It is unreasonable to hold Hu responsible for every action that the Chinese government takes. Hu is the centerpiece of the bureaucratic machine of the Chinese Communist Party but by no means its absolute dictator.

LOL, so much of a typical POV. -- G.S.K.Lee 12:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I think we should add some truth behind the man by calling him Hitler, what, not NPOV enough for ya? Yea well that's because you are a communist sympathizer, freedom is the ONLY way ;) Yongke 17:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Nonsense, before you reach any conclusion, please give the facts. Don't try to fool others with your ideas, give the facts as truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.250.4.101 (talk) 16:44, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

why I see so much prejudice towards everything in China in this topic. It seems that Communist party is born evil and China lacks human rights. I tell you they are all fake. I am a common person in China. And Most of us love our president Hu. This is true! We do not lack any human right and I don't feel any limit in China, maybe our law or rules are too strict with the criminals but on the contrast, we are protected! PLEASE DO NOT BLINDLY BELIEVE YOUR MEDIA! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.31.16.23 2 (talk) 18:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

AM also a civilian in china.I dont think our system is perfect.BUT IS DISCUSSIBLE. My brother above appears too idealism. We chinese is not idealist but optimist.Our state is not great enough.While,we can made the GREAT WALL,we can make a great country,worthing to live.Just try to respect the earth you are never put your feet on.

China will be a great country when it is democratic. A country in which citizens cannot freely express and exchange their views with each other and with outsiders, is by definition not a great country. A leader who doesn't trust the judgement of his own people is by definition not patriotic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.212.36.188 (talk) 19:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The above "unsigned" commenter maybe should wait to know something more about what he pretends to talk about. Maybe less TV and newspapers and more travels and real experiences would help him/her [[User:Alec74 01:29, 20 Dec 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alec7412 (talk • contribs)

S-protect

This article seems like a strong candidate for semi-protection. - Eagle^(talk) 17:34, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree. YCCHAN 20:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

You can hardly justify putting a protection on this article unless someone actually defaces it to a large degree. Until then, there's no reason to attach a protection against an article that is bound to draw heavy POV from either side of the argument, doing so would only cause more problems and undermine the very idea of wikipedia Nebuchanezzar 12:00, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you understand the philosophy behind semi-protection? Its not based solely on the degree of vandalism but the occurance that it happens. Based on the history of edits, a lot of vandalism come from unregistered users. Of course, I'm not labelling every unregistered user is a vandal but semi-protection would put an end to it. After a while when everything dies down, then remove it. YCCHAN 20:02, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Fourth president?

I don't think Hu Jintao should be called the "4th president of the PRC". He is the leader of the "fourth generation", but not the fourth person to hold the position of the presidency (I may be wrong, but I believe that he would be the 6th - after Mao Zedong, Liu Shaoqi, Yang Shangkun, Li Xiannian, and Jiang Zemin).

Indeed you are right: [1]. --Sumple (Talk) 02:49, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Media section

The following section was removed by an anon user without explanation. It does need to be cleaned up some and have sources cited for all the facts and opinions before it goes back in. -- Donald Albury^(Talk) 11:27, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Media

At the same time, Hu has contradicted some initial expectations that he was a closet liberal. Hu was a pragmatist and hard-liner as far as any effort of political reform is concerned. Observers have noted that under Hu, censorship of the news media and harassment of dissidents has become more severe and frequent than his predecessor . Although his son-in-law, Mao Daolin used to be CEO of Sina.com, a well-known internet portal of China, Hu obviously has no taste for the free flow of information on internet. Blocking of websites takes place more frequently, among which include websites such as Nytimes.com, Washingtonpost.com and Wikipedia. Furthermore, while Hu has attempted to make decision-making more transparent and to increase rule of law he has also explicitly stated that his goal is to strengthen and make the party more efficient rather than weaken the party or move toward a pluralistic political system. In December 2004, the Hong Kong magazine Open quoted an alleged instruction by Hu to propaganda officials in September in which he wrote that, when managing ideology, China had to learn from Cuba and North Korea. Although North Korea had encountered temporary economic problems, its political policies were consistently correct. Open also quoted Hu as calling Mikhail Gorbachev, "a betrayer of socialism".

Birthplace?

Currently the page says Hu was born in Jixi, Anhui. However, from all available sources that is only his ancestral origin.[2]. The official biography on people.com.cn doesn't say where he was born [3]. Some sources say he was born in Taizhou, Jiangsu: [4], others say he was born in Shanghai: [5]. [6], [7].

I am leaning towards the opinion that the balance of sources favours the conclusion that he was born in Shanghai. What does everyone else think? --Sumple (Talk) 11:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

He was born Taizhou, Jiangsu. Sources tell me, his birthplace is often not known to public since Jiang Ze Min was born in Jiangsu as well, for political reason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hng0 (talk • contribs) 13:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Selection of Photo?

The article's selection of a photo of the current Chinese leader with an American flag behind him is misleading and could give the incorrect impression that the Chinese government is subservient to or in an affinity with the U.S. government.

John Smith's, I am not the same user as the man who originally changed the photograph on this page. I shall sign off this time to prove it. Just because public opinion was swaying against you (as it so often does as revealed by your talk page), you cannot simply erase all legitimate discussion about an issue. Please don't censor other people's comments just because you think Hu Jintao needs to smiling in a photograph. Restore everything you deleted (or if you prefer, I will post the discussion you deleted again). --203.218.90.66 02:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the two photos of Hu with George Bush are a bit USA centric. One would be enough to emphasis the fact he's important in global politics, United States being very dominant. But it would also be good to see Hu with another important leader from the asia region, the president of India for example, although I'm not sure there is already a photo available of Hu together with Smt. Pratibha Devisingh Patil —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyberroadie (talk • contribs) 10:59, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, why do we need two photos of Hu Jinato with Bush? can we not get rid of one of them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.39.240.133 (talk) 01:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

It used to be worse, the main image once featured Hu Jintao in front of an American flag 128.84.219.124 14:05, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

The wrong link

The link of Jixi is total wrong.Hu's family is from Jixi(績溪)in Anhui Province, but the link is to Jixi(雞西) in Heilongjiang Province.

Taiwan

I really fail to see how these two events (the 2005 Anti-Secession Law and Lian Zhan's visit to China in the same year) can be interpreted as China using both a "hard" and "soft" approach in its stance on Taiwan. If anything, a visit by the Chairman of the KMT to China should be read as another version of the "hard line" stance on Taiwan--i.e., as a further insult/threat to the ruling DPP leadership. Nostalgiphile 11:12, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed that. Readin (talk) 16:59, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

flag icon

Isn't the flag icon wrong as the PRC flag didn't exist then? Speedboy Salesman 13:49, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

• There is no need to add the flag icon at all.--24.86.195.145 15:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Confucian?

Is Jintao Confucian, Taoist, Confucian and Taoist, or atheist? His politics are reviving traditional Chinese culture and religions. He's also quoted Confucius.

One must register as an atheist to gain membership of the Chinese communist party. Therefore, it is very likely that Hu is officially an atheist. However, he may hold some religious beliefs privately but these are unlikely to be made public so long as China is a communist state. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.88.232.113 (talk) 16:31, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Tibet

Shouldn't there be a bit more on his involvement with the brutal repression of Tibet in 1989? This guy is no innocent. Just another politician with blood on his hands.. and a lot of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.179.47 (talk) 22:46, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I don’t think the indepence or it is under the control of dalai can solve the Tibet's problem.I don't blieve Hu is a compeletly innocent politicor.But who is？Of course not Dalai! Why so many people jion in the activity which is harmful to Olympics？ In fact,it is just a matter of China own! And it dosn't matter with others sure inclde olympic games, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.225.151.84 (talk) 16:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I think the people who pro-free-tibet should learn the real history by your own! Dalai Lama has become a tool to attack China by some western plots, just like FaLun Gong, the evil! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.31.16.232 (talk) 18:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I seriously do not see the point of a huge free Tibet subsection in every china related article. i realize that tibet and the dailama can be a very popular topic but is not relevent or central to the subject matter a lot of the time. good day —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.138.77.193 (talk) 23:17, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I might agree that a huge free Tibet subsection in every China-related article might be inappropriate. But in this case, Hu's actions in Tibet were an important part of his career and development into China's political leader, and the discussion of it would be more relevant than a mention of Tibet on other pages. Just because something was over-done elsewhere doesn't mean it should be omitted when relevant here. --Don't believe everything you think. (talk) 18:20, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, it seems talk about China without mention Tibet is some kind of Political incorrect. Enough Tibet, Enough Dalai Lama! —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Early life

Really a call for anyone who might have more information on Hu Jintao's time at Qinghua. We know he stayed on as a political instructor after graduation in 1965, which puts him at the center of the GPCR's first pitched battles, between engineering and geology students (being used as proxies for top leaders). Somewhere -- I can't find the reference -- there was a mention that Hu actually went to jail, and elsewhere (unrelated to Hu) that there was only one faction leader who was jailed after the Qinghua battles stopped. Could this be Hu? DOR (HK) (talk) 08:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Found it! Few Americans realize that both China's current president, Hu Jintao, and premier, Wen Jiaobao, were Red Guards in the late 1960s -- the much feared student movement that unleashed Mao Zedong's Cultural Revolution. Hu once belonged to Tsinghua University's "4.14" and Wen was in Beijing Geology College's "East is Red," both important Red Guard groups. I'm not sure it is reliable enough to cite, but it is worth following. Source: http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=7ebfad0d574b4aae0952413bb3f11451. DOR (HK) (talk) 08:43, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

User DOR, many Red Guards ended up in Down to the Countryside Movement, it would be very interesting to read more about Hu and Wen's life as Red Guards. Arilang ^talk 04:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Although, bear in mind that it is virtually compulsory for young people in the CR to become "Red Guard", the other alternative is, maybe, labour-camping or being driven to do hard works in the countryside. Yifanwang99 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:46, 23 July 2009 (UTC).

Ancestral home

In this link: http://209.85.141.104/search?q=cache:LFjy1fSDg3cJ:english.peopledaily.com.cn/data/people/hujintao.shtml+hu+jintao&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=au&client=firefox-a

President Hu is a native of Jixi, Anhui Province. But this wiki article says he's from Jiangsu. --Zhongxin (talk) 06:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Reconciliation visit to Japan

I added this, since it was 10 years ago that the first visit by Chinese leader did happen: On May 6, 2008, Hu Jintao started the first reconciliation visit to Japan in 10 years, as he was greeted at Tokyo's Haneda airport by Japanese Foreign Minister Masahiko Komura. Jiang Zemin visit to Japan in 1998, was overshadowed by quarrel on whether Japan had adequately apologised for invading China in the 1930s. --Florentino floro (talk) 10:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I understand that this visit is somewhat unusual, but we obviously can't have every visit to a foreign country listed here in the article. What makes this one notable enough to warrant inclusion? maxsch (talk) 15:54, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Taiwan section not about Hu

About half the Taiwan section seems to be about relations between the two countries rather than about Hu. Perhaps those paragraphs belong elsewhere.

"Lately, Hu has shown his true colors, bringing out Maoist idology and Cultursal Revolution jargon. He is a nationalist socailist."

This is obviously someone's non-neutral POV input, it clearly has several misspellings. Here is another example of POV:

"He failed miserablly in Tibet, that is why there is trouble there now. His mini Cultuaral Revolution in Tibet has done more harm then good. it is part of the chinese misconception that their 5,000 year backward culture is superior to all the minorities."

First, Chinese culture is not actually as long as 5000 years, thank you for promoting the number; Second, at least most Chinese don't believe something human created created human, which is relatively not backward considering half the population of United States still believe so.--Haofangjia (talk) 22:48, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

As for Tibet, genetics shows that 5000 years ago Chinese and Tibetan might be one people. Maybe, Tibetan culture is as backward as Chinese one. --Haofangjia (talk) 22:50, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

CHinese culture is definitely not backwards and Hu is definitely not a socialist. The PRC Is actually right of the US economically.Teeninvestor (talk) 21:36, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Guizhou History

There isn't seem to much English material on President Hu's time in Guizhou as governor or party chief. Is there someone who can find out more. --Zhongxin (talk) 06:54, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you?Colipon+(T) 20:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

References

There are no references for this article. How can this be fixed? There are so many statements in this article that were made (particularly about his early life) that are not easily verifiable.

Atheist

Where is the source for him being atheist? I know the PRC is officially "atheist" (supposedly) but England is officially "Christian" with the establish church being the Anglican Church. That doesn't, however, mean that all English leaders are Anglicans or indeed Christians.

Any source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.64.11.226 (talk) 17:35, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Hu is Communist. He has to be atheist to become a Communist Party member which is stated in the Chinese Communist Party Rules. But I think the rules are in Chinese and cannot serve as a source.--Tricia Takanawa (talk) 18:44, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Why not just say his religion is Communism which is kinda religion?--Tricia Takanawa (talk) 18:44, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

In an article like this it's probably best to just leave religion out all-together. Colipon+(T) 21:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Political in-fghting

There are even western media report about the fighting between 太子党 and 团派, anyone interested in it? Arilang ^talk 04:05, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Can you give a source? A lot of these reports are rather sensationalistic. Colipon+(T) 21:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

@Colipon, sensationalistic or not, these political infighting is for real, and often is of the magnitude you die or I die level. 团派 was even given a English name: Tuanpai or something like that.

Most of the reliable source would be from Boxun.com or Epochtimes (Falun Gone website) and in Chinese. I would try to seach for English sources and put on talk page for discussion first.

At the moment this article read too much like things from CCTV.com.cn or People.com.cn Arilang ^talk 16:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Tuanpai

• Hu's Policy Shift and the Tuanpai's Coming-of-Age Hoover Institution.

• China’s Team of Rivals Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive

• China: Riding Two Horses at Once Brookings

• Hu's powerbase Youth League on the rise in China Reuters

• China picks core new leader By Willy Lam Asia Times Online Arilang ^talk 16:51, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I am not opposed to inserting informative information. Maybe you can do a little write-up compiling these sources? Colipon+(Talk) 00:11, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Better image?

Can we please try and find a better image? I mean this one has a partial image of the U.S flag in the background. jackchen123 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.158.156 (talk) 09:53, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

First Name Use

Hu Jintao is referred to throughout the article as simply "Hu" rather than "Jintao." Is this proper for the President of a nation (it may just be some rule in Chinese I am not familiar with). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Siddharth9200 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

It cannot possibly be more clear than stated in Line 1 of the article: "This is a Chinese name; the family name is Hu." HkCaGu (talk) 01:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

He has been referred to by the Australian media, politely, as "Mr. Hu". As for referring to a person by their family name without a title, I understand that this is common practice in India and so it might be in China. Darcyj (talk) 13:56, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Chairman of the Central Military Commission?

Why is Hu Chairman of the Central Military Commission of CCP AND of PRP when they both link to the the same article? Are they two separate positions? If so, shouldn't there be 2 separate articles for them? 01:49, 5 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.173.95 (talk)

They are essentially the same position, but differ in formality. The composition of the two CMCs are exactly the same. However, the CPC position is elected by the central committee, while the national position is appointed by the NPC. These elections occur about six months apart. So there will be a time where two people are formally at the helm. Colipon+(Talk) 16:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Paramount Leader

Doesn't this make Hu Jintao a dictator/fuhrer? Completely undemocratically "elected" head of a single party dictatorship. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.212.153 (talk) 19:12, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, have you ever seen a "dictator" that is expected to leave office at the end of his term? Are you at all aware that a man needs significant support in the legitimately elected NPC as well as the Politburo to take on either of the party and state positions? Political systems can't simply be split into "democratic" and "undemocratic" like the way you imagine. The average Chinese citizen may have significantly less influence on how they are governed than than average US citizen, but the system has its democratic elements as well, which allow the concerns of the public to be heard and addressed by the government at each level. Please, just because you feel the need to declare your political allegiance and to strengthen your belief in your own political system, does not mean you have to do so on Wikipedia, and certainly does not mean you can do so without so much as learning enough about the topic first. Hackers on steroids (talk) 01:50, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Chinese Mass Murderers Category

Under Hu's rule in Tibet during the late 1980's and early 1990's, unthinkable acts of violence and destruction were carried out. Further, he instituted martial law and murdered thousands for political motivations. Now as the leader of China, Hu has continued to suppress human rights in Tibet, and enacted policies to further the genocide. Genocide is pretty much mass murder on a large scale. There is no reason not to list him as a mass murderer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JewishLeftist (talk • contribs) 00:55, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

First show a reliable source for this. The china portal (talk) 12:33, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Reminder: this is a biography of a living person William Avery (talk) 12:54, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

It's surprising his actions in Tibet are not mentioned at all though. They are controversial but also important in his life because they won him the support of Deng, and are indirectly the reason why he made it to the top. There are plenty of reliable sources for that. Laurent (talk) 13:15, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

They are mentioned but in a somewhat unexpected way. The article says "During the 1960's he was a strong follower of Buddhism, even preaching the Buddhist principle in Tibet for three years"......I tagged it for 'citation required'. Sean.hoyland - talk 06:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Hu Jintao/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Fairly good. Although lacks some organization in recent chronology. Colipon+(T) 03:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 03:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 14:59, 1 May 2016 (UTC)