Xi Jinping’s Shift: From Pragmatic Authoritarianism to Mao-Style Totalitarianism

China’s political trajectory under President Xi Jinping is increasingly diverging from the pragmatic authoritarianism of its post-Mao reform era, according to a new analysis that frames his rise as a structural inevitability within the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) system. Two recent books—The Broken China Dream by Minxin Pei and Institutional Genes by Chenggang Xu—argue that Xi’s consolidation of power was not an accident but a logical outcome of the party’s institutional design, which has now steered the country toward a restoration of Mao-style totalitarianism.

The shift away from Deng Xiaoping’s pragmatic reforms—marked by economic liberalization and political centralization—has been accompanied by a tightening of ideological control, expanded surveillance, and the institutionalization of Xi Jinping Thought as the guiding ideological framework. Analysts suggest this turn reflects a broader reassessment within the CCP of the risks of unchecked market-driven reforms, particularly in the face of domestic instability and geopolitical pressures.

Structural Inevitability or Deliberate Consolidation?

The analysis, published in Project Syndicate by Steve Tsang, a professor of contemporary Chinese studies at the University of Nottingham, draws on the two books to argue that Xi’s political ascent was not a deviation but a reinforcement of the CCP’s historical tendency toward centralized power. Pei and Xu contend that the party’s internal mechanisms—such as the rotation of leaders, the suppression of dissent, and the cult of personality—have consistently favored strongmen who can maintain stability, even at the cost of economic or social flexibility.

“Xi’s political ascent was no historical accident, but a structural feature of China’s political system,” Tsang writes, emphasizing that the CCP’s institutional genes predispose it toward totalitarian governance when faced with existential threats, whether internal or external. The books highlight how Xi’s policies—from the anti-corruption campaigns to the suppression of civil society—align with Maoist-era tactics, albeit with modern technological tools.

Economic and Geopolitical Implications

The restoration of Mao-style totalitarianism carries significant implications for China’s economic model and its relationship with the United States. Under Xi, China has pursued a dual strategy: accelerating technological self-sufficiency through state-led industrial policies (e.g., “Made in China 2025”) while simultaneously cracking down on private-sector dissent and foreign influence. This approach has intensified tensions with Washington, particularly under President Donald Trump, whose administration has framed China as a strategic competitor rather than a potential partner.

Recent clashes between U.S. Secret Service agents and Chinese security officials during Trump’s summit with Xi in Beijing—reported by Fox News—underscore the growing friction between the two superpowers. While the exact details of the standoff remain unverified, the incident reflects broader strains in U.S.-China relations, exacerbated by Beijing’s tightening grip on political and economic levers.

Domestic Challenges and the “China Dream”

The books also examine the domestic challenges facing Xi’s vision of a “China Dream,” a nationalist revival aimed at restoring the country’s global standing. While Xi has overseen rapid infrastructure development and military modernization, critics argue that his policies have stifled innovation, suppressed social mobility, and deepened inequality. The CCP’s reliance on ideological cohesion over economic pragmatism risks undermining long-term growth, particularly as demographic pressures and debt levels weigh on the economy.

Minxin Pei, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, has previously warned that China’s economic slowdown—combined with political repression—could trigger social unrest, mirroring the instability that led to Mao’s downfall. Chenggang Xu, a professor at Peking University, similarly argues that the CCP’s institutional rigidity makes it ill-equipped to adapt to the complexities of a modern, globalized economy.

What Comes Next?

As Xi enters his third decade in power—having already broken the two-term precedent set by Deng Xiaoping—the question of succession looms large. The CCP’s historical pattern suggests that leadership transitions are managed internally to avoid power vacuums, but the party’s current trajectory raises questions about whether future leaders will continue Xi’s totalitarian path or seek a return to reformist pragmatism.

For now, the analysis underscores a clear trend: China under Xi is not merely a rising power but a state increasingly defined by its ideological revivalism. Whether this model proves sustainable—or whether it will face the same challenges that plagued Mao’s era—remains an open question with global repercussions.