This is one of the more interesting graphs on CCP disciplinary enforcement I’ve seen in some time. “Hedonism and extravagance” are relatively well-defined offenses (essentially, abusing reimbursement policies and engaging in overly conspicuous consumption—this is why Chinese bureaucrats all wear Longines watches), whereas “formalism and bureaucratism” were, in the past, so poorly defined that they were effectively unenforceable. Since about 2018, there’s been a flurry of regulatory activity seeking to give those terms clearer definition, mainly focusing on “lack of concrete action when implementing top-down directives.” That’s still pretty vague to external observers, but the more interesting question is whether they can at least generate predictable standards of behavior to party insiders. The incredibly rapid growth of disciplinary cases against those offenses suggests, at least, that they’ve become well defined enough to permit large scale, top-down enforcement.