Mark Leonard (2013) China's ideological divides

In the past, Europeans assumed that as China became wealthier and more developed it would inevitably become more like [them]. This led to a lack of curiosity about China’s internal debates and an attempt to primitively divide its thinkers and officials into ‘reformers’ who embrace Western ideas and ‘conservatives’ who want to return to China’s Maoist past... The stereotype outside China is that Chinese politics has remained trapped in aspic even as the economy has been through radical changes. In fact, the country has gone from having a system animated by larger-than-life charismatic figures such as Deng or Mao towards the collective bureaucratic leadership of technocrats who exercise power according to strict term limits and are subject to regular reviews by their peers and constituents... [A]lthough China’s footprint will become ever more important for the world, the drivers of its internal debates will be increasingly domestic.

In the economic realm, the main divide is between a social Darwinist New Right that wants to unlock entrepreneurial energy by privatising all the state-owned companies and an egalitarian New Left that believes the next wave of growth will be stimulated by clever state planning. In the political realm, the main divide is between political liberals who want to place limits on the power of the state, either through elections, the rule of law, or public participation, and neo-authoritarians who fear these measures will lead to a bureaucratised collective government that is unable to take tough decisions or challenge the vested interests of the corrupt, crony capitalist class. In the foreign-policy realm, the main divide is between defensive internationalists who want to play a role in the existing institutions of global governance or emphasise prudence and nationalists who want China to assert itself on the global stage.

Mark Leonard (2013) Introduction to China 3.0
***CHINA 3.0

See also:
Mark Leonard (2008) China's new intelligentsia (Vietnamese translation by Pham Toan)
Trần Hữu Dũng (2009) Ổn định và phát triển: Trí thức Trung Quốc đang nghĩ gì?

James G. McGann (2012) Think tanks in China

[T]he changing landscape of China’s economy redefined the context in which think tanks function in China. This shift manifested itself in the National Co-operative Law. Implemented in 2007, the National Co-operative Law represented a mild liberalization for rural civil society. New co-operatives developed in evolutionary and peaceful ways, had great respect for private property, and were self-motivated and voluntary in nature (bottom-up process). This process contributed to the expansion of democratic concepts by giving citizens effective means to shape their future lives and their world. In this sense, the new co-operative movement helped to build and change civil society in China, making civil society institutions more of a critical dialogue partner with the state. As China’s market became increasingly free, think tanks too seized the opportunity to find private financial sources. They began to use media and overseas sources as outlets for civil society. Their scholars, looking to profit from their access to the media, began representing their own views in the media rather than those of the institution. Lastly, the newly acquired money and independence from government leaders allowed them to become financially autonomous and intellectually free. Today, Chinese think tanks fill a gap caused by the Cultural Revolution and other isolationist policies of the past.

The policy arena in China is becoming progressively open and there are an increasing number of actors involved in public policy decisions. This change has not only affected the domestic activities of Chinese think tanks, but has also had a profound impact on the influence of Chinese think tanks on the world stage. A Brookings fellow noted in a recent speech that more 13 and more representatives from Chinese think tanks are coming to the United States every week to meet with U.S. institutions to exchange policy ideas. 

The majority of Chinese think tanks are sponsored or directly affiliated with government agencies, such as the Development Research Center of the State Council and the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations... The Chinese government sees the need to increasingly heed public opinion in its decision-making and uses input from think tanks as a way of maintaining legitimacy through a more collective leadership strategy... The political stance of the leadership in China naturally affects the dialogue and freedom of Chinese think tanks, especially with regard to domestic social issues... despite the opportunity to pursue more liberalized research, the major focus of research institutions in China today is economics and international security concerns, two transnational factors that are extremely important to China’s future and political leadership.

James G. McGann (2012) Chinese Think Tanks, Policy Advice and Global Governance