Got my copy of Charter 08, bilingual, with the names of 300 supporters affixed. At the very least it is food for thought and fodder for conversation and that can go a long way in a country where words, printed, spoken, recorded, sculpted, etched, molded, callagraphised, stamped, blasted, tatooed, broadcast and fired like blazing arrows into the throng are revered and reveled in.
Economic reform and opening has brought unprecendented development and wealth to this country and its people, and there is no reason to believe political reform and opening would not also herald a blossoming of civil society into a lush jungle of competing ideals, rife with creative energy fired by the zeal of a dynamic people. From the patter around the card table, to the the expansive conversations of well-watered meals, to discuss is to be in this country, to argue and concur, disagree, these are staples of existence in China. If there is any place on earth where democracy should rise up robust and squirming with its multitude of tongues, then it is surely here. Â
This country and its people have shown time and again that they thrive when allowed even a measure of the freedoms most in the developed world take for granted. Once the harshest strictures of a planned economy had been removed, the Chinese economy sprang to life and has been sprinting ever since. Should the political shackles come off, we might very well see the resurgence of widespread creative thought, a discourse across classes and generations and a peer to peer interaction on a civilisational level between the Chinese people and the rest of the world. China as a repository of philosophy, art and science as well as innovative thinking, needs the freedoms of democracy to truly assume its place at the vanguard of human progress in our time. Â
It has been standard CCP speak over the years, not to mention that of a number of Asian political leaders and organisations, to confront calls for political liberalisation and democracy with disclaimers that these are ill suited to the Chinese or Asian character. The Chinese characters for democracy, 民主, spell out clearly that democracy is under the ownership of the people, regardless of their character. To allienate the people from their rightful role in society is not a Chinese characteristic, but rather a telling sign of the flawed character of this nation’s leadership.
Gabriel, don’t hold your breath. Here’s why:
1. You are viewing China as an authoritarian state where popular opinion has no bearing on policy. In fact, considerable effort is made to shape popular opinion because it is simply not practical to govern the country without popular support.
2.Young Chinese people just don’t see the West as liberators nor do they see democracy as the way to go. There are significant generational differences in the view of the West. The generation born after 1980 didn’t live through the transition from the Cultural Revolution and came of age in a much more liberalized society. They already have significant personal freedom and economic opportunity and don’t want our democracy.
3. Popular support for the government is much greater than most Western people think. That needs repeating, Popular support for the government is much greater than most Western people think. You could argue that this nationalism arises from a biased education system and censored mainstream press. But the idea of a repressed populace straining to overcome their government is not correct.
4.To quote you, “there is no reason to believe political reform and opening would not also herald a blossoming of civil society into a lush jungle of competing ideals, rife with creative energy fired by the zeal of a dynamic people”. Emm, they already do this (the majority) about ways to strenghten and improve the goverment not ways to throw it out.
Read this open letter to Obama on Chinese relations; it clears up some usual misconceptions Westerners have about the land of runny yogurt.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rebecca-mackinnon/dear-president-obama-in-t_b_161417.html
also this article is the same vein
http://www.newsweek.com/id/151730/page/1
I would be curious to ask anyone which they would prefer – a benevolent emperor who holds all the power, is above the law, but does decent things for his subjects; or the freedom to choose their leader – for better or worse.
It’s a difficult decision, particularly while the emperor is benevolent. But winds change and benevolence wanes. With democracy comes responsibility, but also security and recourse from tyrants.
The fact that from China you cannot read that Huffington Post article of Rebecca lauding how little the West understands this grand nation speaks, to me, far more than her words.
Nedzer,
I cannot deny that the CCP enjoys widespread and tacit support amongst the people of China, after all, it is not the unqiue preserve of, say, Americans, to place their confidence in the hands of incompetent leaders, it’s a human thing.
I also agree that the Chinese do not want our democracy, they want their own. They want unfiltered access to information, newscasters that don’t lie to them, leaders that aren’t crooked and the dignity of citizenship that they know very well is enjoyed by people abroad.
Are you suggesting that gains in personal freedom and economic prosperity will keep everyone content for the long haul, or that these gains are even universally enjoyed throughout China? It strikes me as condescending to affirm that the post 1980 generation are somehow sated by their materialistic pursuits and unrequiring of the rights and liberties we westerners so cling to.
Ultimately, social justice is an insurmountable challenge for a government that maintains it’s grip on power in part through the denial of the rights of all or a part of it’s citizenry, and it is precisely the abscence of social justice which will continue to grind away at the image of the CCP and eventually force it’s leaders into a process of compromise for freedoms and rights that, ironically, they themselves have set in motion.
I’m not suggesting anything other than your article is just wrong (I wish it was right).
It assumes (wrongly) that there is not popular support for the governement here.
Chinese people (the majority) do not want democracy and this society is not heading towards it. I wish it was but it’s not.
This is a common misunderstanding amongst Westerners.
Sadly it is actually heading the opposite direction on two fronts.
1. Peoples opinion.
2. Government censorship.
Ryan, “the fact that from China you cannot read that Huffington Post article of Rebecca lauding how little the West understands this grand nation speaks, to me, far more than her words.”
That’s very true but not really the point – the point being Gabriel thinks democracy is coming to China soon.
read this, for example
http://www.newsweek.com/id/151730/page/1
oops I posted that link twice
I couldn’t say if it is or it isn’t coming. History makes fools of those who try. But the article doesn’t speak to contentment with politics, it speaks to a feeling of improved national identity. China is finally moving past the black and blued ego from the 19th and early 20th century – once she has her pride, her liberty won’t be far behind.
I think Gabriel has it right when he said “the Chinese do not want our democracy, they want their own.” It’s a bit culturally-centric to assume that the right of the people to choose their leaders is a “Western” thing that a nation would accept or reject based on compass points.
Let us say someone threw a shoe at Bush , how would the media in China cover that?
Now what if someone (let’s say in England) threw a shoe a Wen jia bao? How would that be covered? We may never know.
I’m sure it would be covered with “open discourse across classes and generations and a peer to peer interaction on a civilisational level between the Chinese people and the rest of the world”
Ryan – The bruised ego of China has grown into a nasty nationalism, and will evolve further.
I say again, China is not moving toward openess and democratic tendencies, it’s going the opposite way with the full support of its people.
Casting an eye to the future, one is either overwhelmed by the prejudices of the past, and embittered, or encouraged by the breaches of light through the monolith, and emboldened.
“Casting an eye to the future, one is either overwhelmed by the prejudices of the past, and embittered, or encouraged by the breaches of light through the monolith, and emboldened”
What a stupid comment – we are all either A or B, black or white, overwhelmed or embittered. Yep, we’re all either bitter or bold, sheesh. Don’t throw labels at people.
The facts (and there are many) are the Chinese Governement is pulling back it’s social freedoms and the people are more nationalistic and supportive of this than at any other time. I keep repeating this, but you seem unwilling to acknowledge it. You write an article about the coming sunshine, flowers and rainbows, when in fact there is some serious bad weather here now. Weather that is a lot darker and stormier that last year or the year before and it’s getting worse. This is an observation based on fact, it’s not a judgement or opinion on my behalf it’s factual. If that makes me embittered in your eyes, so be it.
Go do some research.
Lighten up man, spring’s on it’s way
I can’t there’s a big worm under Shanghai and it’s sinking the city, I tell you – SINKING THE CITY!!!
I’ll flog the dead horse one last time…
As regards the internet being a source of dem*cracy to come, in China I would argue the opposite – The government is well positioned to prevent any outcry from growing too voluble. Although internet clampdowns are imperfect, its weapons include a firewall that effectively blocks foreign Web sites by groups like Amn&sty Int*rnational and F*lun G*ng, and a number of Chinese-language media sites in Taiwan, to name a teeny tiney few. Algorithms weed out postings that include words like “demo*racy,†“Dal*i L*ma†or “Tian*nmen ma**acre.â€
When those fail, the legions of censors employed by privately owned Websites are ready to step into the breach.
Then there are the untold thousands of paid commentators who pose as ordinary Web users to counter criticism of the government. Known
derisively as 50 Cent Party members, these shapers of public opinion are often paid a small sum, 50 Chinese cents, for every posting.
This year includes the 20th anniversary of the crackdown in Tiananm*n Squ*re and the 50th anniversary of the
Tib*tan upr*sing that led to the D*lai L*ma’s exile.
Reb*cca MacKinn*n, an assistant professor at the University of Hong
Kong’s Journalism and Media Studies Center, has no illusion about the Internet as a vehicle for political reform. The Web may be a hurly-burly of opinion and criticism, she said, but the moment that participants talk about organizing, the conversation — and the site — are shut down.
“All this Internet discourse has not brought China closer to democracy than it was 10 years ago,†said Professor MacKinnon, whose expertise includes Chinese bloggers and Internet censorship.
In some ways, she said, the government uses the Internet as a pressure valve that allows aggrieved citizens to blow off steam before their fury comes to a head.
“One can make the argument that the Internet enables the Communist Party to remain in power longer because it provides a space for people to air grievances without allowing real change,†she said.
They used to have a wall around Berlin and an iron curtain sheethed half of Europe, now the Checs hold the presidency of European Union and Ukraine has Brussels on it’s mind. All good points Nedzer, but I’m holding my breath.