In a Republican primary in Michigan in August 2026, a “life is stranger than fiction” episode unfolded.
A Mr. Thomas Smith, who is a local small-batch salsa creator, won a major upset victory over a Mr. Amir Hassan, US Navy veteran officially endorsed by Trump.
What was strange was two-fold: first, Thomas Smith quit before the election as he failed to raise money and interest; second, Amir Hassan was much more favored in theory.
Hassan was a navy vet and well-respected conservative who raised 50 times more money than Smith. Trump even went on the stage to rally for him a week before the primary.
However, Smith’s name remained on the ballot due to a missed deadline to withdraw.
Then came election day. Smith received 50% of the vote against Hassan’s 33%.
Election experts attributed Mr. Smith’s electoral success entirely to his Anglo-Saxon name over his opponent’s Arabic-sounding name.
The irony is Hassan is an African American without any Middle Eastern background. He is a Christian.
Talking about rallies, it never fails to amaze me how politicians in the US seem to spend more time campaigning than governing.
And where do the crowds find the time to attend these rallies from their work at Wal-Mart or McDonald’s?
When it comes to elections and political rallies, the US leads the world in entertainment value.
Rather than a popular contest, politics in China is the exclusive domain of the Communist Party (CPC).
For better or for worse, the last thing the Party wants is to provide entertainment.
It is considered serious business for serious people.
John Thornton, chairman of Brookings Institution, described the closest thing to the CPC in the West is the Catholic Church and the West Point.
They are top-down organizations driven by mission, discipline, and meritocracy.
I don’t fully agree with Thornton because the Party is vastly bigger in scale and complexity. But it is an easy analogy for a Western audience.
Thornton was a former Goldman Sachs president and the rare foreigner who worked closely with Chinese leaders like former Premier Zhu Rongji in the 90s and 2000s.
He knew what he was talking about far better than the talking heads on TV who, in all likelihood, have never visited China.
Here is a short clip of his discussion of the Party.
With no campaign rallies or TV adverts, how does China select its leaders?
This essay explores the system, structure, and nuances of China’s leadership selection process from an outsider perspective.
Though not a Party member, I have studied and lived in the system all my life.
I’ll also describe the career path of some of the most senior national leaders to highlight how the system works in real life for the last 40 years.
It took quite a while to research and write the piece. Hopefully it captures some key characteristics of the Chinese political model little known in the West.
Given the scope of the subject, I have split my essay into two parts in order to do justice to its complexity and to avoid putting my readers into a coma:)
I’ll publish the second instalment tomorrow.
Fundamental logic of leadership selection
The first thing distinguishing the Chinese system from the West, with the US as the prime example, is the different logic for choosing leaders.
In the West, popularity and rhetoric win election. In China, competence and performance are the core for selection.
The Chinese system prioritizes meritocracy over popularity and substance over form.