[Quix]

Guess I disagree that they are not a totalitarian state.

Whim decisions at the top can still result in arbitrary deaths from the top down to the lowest rice paddy.

Granted, decisions are usually agonizingly methodical and pedantic by hamstrung group process.

But the corruption alone leads to plenty of totalitarian sorts of ruthlessness.

Add in the army and arrogance in the top levels of the Party and I think there's plenty of totalitarianism left.

[Enemy Of The State]

I agree with your assessments, its just that I dont think that China fits into the traditional meaning of a totaltarian regieme.

When Mao was in power, yes, but not now.

Again, I agree with your assessments, especially when it comes to the corruption that seems to flow endlessly from the top down but they have been doing their homework and things are slowly changing.

I would be more inclined to call Kim-Jong Il a totaltarian ruler. He could get away with an incident like Tiananmen, I dont honestly believe that the Chinese could pull that off again.

[logic]

"Whim decisions at the top can still result in arbitrary deaths from the top down to the lowest rice paddy."

And that's different that the Reno Justice Department how?

Remember Waco!! (we forgot the Alamo)