The funny thing is that people in China use neither of these acronyms, they just refer to "the government" or "the party". This is probably the safest terminology to avoid being seen as biased one way or the other.
What's so interesting to me, is that even your choice of a three letter acronym, which literally means the exact same thing just with a different word order, is considered to be taking a side. It goes to show just how fraught conversation on China has become that it's even considered important.
It is the party's choice for its English language representation.
I'm not making any political statements here. I am suggesting that we use common nomenclature while pointing out a hazard of a specific instance of dated terminology.
My point was that turning one's choice of synonymous terminology into a marker of political bias is itself an interesting comment on how difficult it is for people to engage in curious discussion about China. Given that at HN we are expected to assume good faith, I think it's fair to assume that most people who use CCP (or CPC) are not deliberately trying to take a side, they are just using a convenient acronym.
Yet the comment I sacrificed Karma to inform of "potentially unconscious bias of language" was willing to offer nothing more than postulation that a political party is responsible for "hiding the data", and the repetition of the CCP identification.
Maybe you should have led with that?
Maybe OP disagrees on the party authority to define language including naming itself.
This is like making a statement about the demonrats and expecting to be taken seriously.
It has the intellectual power of intentionally misgendering someone as a means of insulting them.
There is a reason that neoconservatives like Mike Pompeo are revitalizing your preferred acronym.
Recall when BP changed their logo last: months after a horrible oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The singular reason why BP changed their logo was an attempt to trick the public. It wasn’t a changing of identity. Changing the CCP’s name when they haven’t even done it themselves would be the same kind of disingenuousness.
For an example, there are many similarly charged terms "commonly used" to identify geographic areas surrounding Israel, but in modern discourse we use "Occupied Palestinian Territory" since 1999.
North Korea remains North Korea. CCP remains CCP. Blackwater remains Blackwater, not Akademi or Xe or whatever bloody thing they're called now. I'm not going to just go along with whatever rebranding their PR agency told them to do.