« Tobacco in China (Part 3): Counterfeiting and Smuggling | Home | Taiwan Says 30% Of Mainland Electronics Substandard »
Democracy Is Dead: The Meaning Of China’s Successful Rise
By Paul Midler | November 4, 2007
Some time ago, I told a friend that China’s success would one day lead newspapers to declare that, “Democracy Is Dead!”
We had been taught in school that democracy/capitalism was the only successful political model and that other systems simply didn’t work. A piece has been written on the subject by Howard French in the International Herald Tribune. He raises the thoughtful question: “What If Beijing Is Right?”
The money quote:
“What if politics with a capital “P” could be eliminated altogether…and a secretly selected circle of wise men…could proceed straight to policy formation and execution based purely on their own…assessment of the nation’s needs and priorities? In such a world, long-term strategic planning could be carried out forthrightly and without the distractions and abrupt course changes brought about by that inherently unstable system known as democracy, with its fixation on rival parties and alternation.”
On whether China’s closed decision-making process is better than a democracy, I think China’s own history suggests the extent to which authoritarian rule can either be fantastic, or go horribly wrong. With no fear of opposition, Chinese emperors have historically either done good, or bad. While the quality of leadership today can be considered fantastic, we don’t have to look much further back in time than Mao Zedong to find a bad example (an estimated 20-40 million deaths can be seen as the result of unchecked authoritarianism). I can see how many would look to China’s speedy ascent and declare that this system works well enough. But in some way it reminds me of the fellow who on a sunny day declares that umbrellas are no longer relevant.
[Chinalawblog.com picked up on the article, check their website for comments, also]
Topics: China |
November 4th, 2007 at 9:21 pm
“The quality of leadership today can be considered fantastic”??? Paul, you shock and scare me!
A Central Government that has a tenuous grip on the country at best and whose policies are at the whim of provincial/township/village warlords that still smack of feudal China of long ago?
Yes, the Chinese can have a bridge or subway system put in without months of annoying community imput debates or environmental assessment reports/lawsuits (see how f**ked up Hawaii is with its “Super Ferry” recently) but what about core, basic human rights? Chinese don’t deserve it because too many are poor and undereducated as Chinese and Western “academics so often like to say?
Don’t believe the hype. As James Mann says in “The China Fantasy”, what makes us (”enlightened” Westerners) arrogantly think that the vast majority of the Chinese people agree with all this and consider the ruling class (yes, they ARE an elite caste) spokespersons for them?
This new “Communist Dynasty” is nothing more than that and only reserved for the privileged.
November 4th, 2007 at 9:22 pm
Nevermind…you didn’t delete it…
November 4th, 2007 at 9:37 pm
What I mean by “fantastic” is that they are smart. We can disagree with their policies, of course. And China has most certainly grown by leaps and bounds. The only question is whether the “closed” system is really better than others.
It is true that without political opposition more can get done, but that doesn’t make the system better. China’s current model is not a very good check against tyranny.
November 5th, 2007 at 1:44 am
I always wonder at some who tie democracy and capitalism to each other so tightly. Yes, they are semi-related and can be complementary. But you can have one without the other. China has the capitalism - and it is driven by the authoritarian government. And the money is not distributed well. This system cannot prevail. A measure of a society can be defined as 1) looking at the lowest person in that society and 2) if the truly bright and gifted are free to excel. Neither are strong points in the current system. The poor are horribly educated fed clothed as are the sick. The truly intelligent or gifted if not born to money wind up where?
November 5th, 2007 at 6:43 am
Yokie - Comments appreciated. I am familiar with the idea that democracy and capitalism are not necessarily linked. Didn’t mean to make a particularly big deal out of that one. Not sure what you think of the idea that while China is “capitalist”, its government shows a willingness to steer the economy in ways that a country like the U.S. would not. Also, I have heard many say that while the U.S. claims to operate under capitalism, it has elements of socialism mixed in (your making me think back to books I read 20 years ago, painful). Think social security.
November 5th, 2007 at 6:44 am
What about this issue of America’s “system” being better than China’s “system”? Is China’s rise proof of anything at all?
November 5th, 2007 at 11:25 am
Democracy is not a magic elixer,and it’s very easy for a democracy to be tyrannical (”mob rule”) and not have a free market.
Note that the longest living democracies (US, UK, Australia, etc) had a long experience of a consistent and relatively fair rule of law first.
So I’d right now having a consistent and reasonably fair rule of law is more important in China right now than being able to vote.
Long term, a free market economy will do better than a oligarchical or command one.
November 5th, 2007 at 1:12 pm
Thanks for comments. My vote is for an open system. Even more important than rule of law might be freedom of press.
November 5th, 2007 at 7:29 pm
Agree with you on the press issue Paul. Without any true check and balance system in China, the only hope for some sort of “watchdog” function with a bite is a free and independent press. But this probably won’t happen in our lifetime ;^)
November 7th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
I have been following this discussions and have read many positive and negative comments about China. I currently live in China and have been here for about 5 years and because my life-partner is a Chinese I have had a very behind-the-scenes look as to what happens here. Contrary to what most people in the west believe most Chinese are very happy and proud of their government. The Chinese are not dumb, they are fully aware that the press is government controlled and that their civil liberties are limited, but the reality is that for most of them making money is more important that being politically active.
That is especially true in Shanghai. In Beijing, where people would be expected to be more politically active, they use political “access” and “influence” for personal financial gain. That is what the luxury market in Beijing is larger than in Shanghai. The Beijingese love to waste money, especially the government’s money. One would think that people in poorer parts of China would go up in arms if they find out; well they all know about it. Why don’t they do anything? It is not that they are afraid of the “dictatorial Beijing monster,” who would come crashing down on them. On the contrary, many of them want become active in the Communist Party so they can enjoy those perks as well.
As long as they can improve their income and lifestyle every year, they will approve of the Government. This “Communist Dynasty” is not so bad for most of the people in China, changing it will bring instability and uncertainty. Why would the Chinese want to become unstable and uncertain when they have had 30 years of continuous growth? They went through the Japanese War, Second World War and then Civil War which almost destroyed the country. The Cultural Revolution was also a huge mistake, but that is what you get when you have farmers running the country. Even the modern Communist party has stated officially that it was a mistake.
I by no means fully agree with how many things are run here and there is a lot of things which need to be improved, but Rome was not built in a day. It will take time for things to develop and we, westerners, may not agree with the final outcome, but even in the west there is no one system that is above all. The America system does not fit everywhere. there are other government types such as in the UK, France, Germany, Spain and even Japan. They all have drastic differences in their systems , but they all work. China will have it’s system, whatever it will be. Maybe more democratic maybe not. If non-democratic systems were such a bad thing, why is the US supporting Saudi Arabia and other dictatorships around the world?
The US only has a problem with a totalitarian regime if they have money and could become a counterforce or compete for natural resources, it’s that simple. Most Americans have never been to China and have forged an opinion based on what Fox news tells them. Sad.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
Ramon - But what about the protests? What about the stories of Christians who are persecuted? Labor law complaints? I hear what you’re saying, but what about the other stuff? China is a very big and complex place, wouldn’t you agree?