Although modernisation in China resulted in dramatic social changes, huge geographical and social polarisation and increasing uncertainty of subsistence for many, it still can be seen as a success – the regime is stable. One of the determining factors for this is that changes increased the average life standard regardless to tensions. Another important reason is that dissatisfied people mainly attribute the responsibility for problems to local elites while the trust in the benevolence and competence of the central authority is mostly not broken.

"In China, one of our main problems is that there is no connection between intellectuals and the object of their worry – the people. This is partly due to the negative effect of the ‘Cultural Revolution' when same conditions were forced to both intellectuals and blue collar workers, which induced conflicts between the two social groups. In China, intellectuals either withdraw to their ivory towers, where they make research on scientific topics or become consultants of multinational companies, public organisations or maybe the World Bank". The author gives a picture in his essay on the situation, strategy and opportunities of Chinese intellectuals, especially the ones with critical attitude.

After the victory of the October Revolution, revolutionary socialist parties and groups all over the world tried to follow in their organisation structure the so called "Leninist party model". The author of the discussion paper argues that this special Leninist party model never existed – the Bolshevik Party followed especially organisation standards of western social democratic parties. What subsequent revolutionary movements regarded as the ideal model was in fact the simplified version of the Bolshevik Party's structure, which developed after the party had taken the power and which was infected with bureaucratic distortions. Insisting on this wrong organisational model has greatly contributed to the defeat of revolutionary socialism in the 20^th Century.

In his Capital, Marx throughout maintained the simplifying theoretical precondition that the value of labour is fixed and constant. However by this he mostly closed out discussing problems concerning class struggle and the organisational level of the working class from the analysis of capitalism in Capital. The connection, that increasing productivity results in proportionally higher profit only if the working class remains disorganised or its segmentation increases, receives little attention. Nevertheless, the capital immanently and necessarily aims not only increasing productivity but also deepening divisions among workers.