Joseph Kahn’s latest article in the NY Times hits the ground running with the first paragraphs.
When asked why China, with its surging economy and rising power, has not yet begun to democratize, its leaders recite a standard line. The country is too big, too poor, too uneducated and too unstable to give political power to the people, they say.
The explanation is often delivered in a plaintive tone: China really would like to become a more liberal country, if only it did not have unique problems requiring the Communist Party to maintain its absolute monopoly on power for just a while longer.
The case of Hong Kong suggests it could be a great deal longer.
I look at this article, and I’d like to quote just about every line. (Kahn, for example, refers to HK as “by far the richest place in which citizens do not have the right to elect their own leaders, with Kuwait, its nearest competitor, ranking 34th.”) So be sure to read the whole thing.
The money quote for me:
In Mao Zedong’s day, the problem would have been solved easily enough, by calling democrats counterrevolutionaries and mobilizing the masses to silence them. But China faces a conundrum today. It does not have a revolutionary ideology that its own leaders believe is superior to democratic rule. The masses are too busy making money to be mobilized.
So officials search for reasons why the time is not yet right, or the conditions are not yet suitable, or the procedures are not yet finalized. They present themselves as sympathetic to the democratic impulse who are troubled only by questions of implementation.
That’s important. The leaders send out signals that they’d like democracy, they really really would. But then for this reason and this reason and this reason it’s just not the right time, and besides, China is so big, it just isn’t feasible. Hah. It all goes back to the the first emperor: government’s role is to keep itself in power, not to do favors for its population. So democracy scares them shitless, as well it should.
But I went on at length about this just a few days ago. Read the Kahn article to see what one of the most respected correspondents in China has to say about the CCP and democracy — don’t just take my word for it.
1
By MJO
Scares them shitless? It certainly does Richard. Quite a few things scare the govt “shitless” these days and sometimes I think the country is only just being held together by crude nationalism, anti-foreign xenophobia and a massive victim mentality.
Real democratic reform in China would almost certainly spell the end of the communist dynasty. Even limited democracy within the Party itself would split the CCP into its various wings.
Any potential politician representing “change” to the CCP regine would win a landslide in a Chinese election. Then what would happen to the vested interests? The grey area where politics and business seem to merge? The prince-lings? The stacks of money, the mistresses, the regal lifestyle of the party leaders?
When the CCP talks about how China isn’ “ready” or “suited” to democracy and how the country is too big and too poor etc. These comments should be treated with the contempt they deserve.
Was China ready for a omni-potent Socialist dictatorship 50 years ago? The CCP managed to register almost every single citizen into a urban or rural Hukou and educate them in the weird and wonderful world of Chinese-Maoist Socialism easily enough.
April 7, 2004 @ 11:53 pm | Comment
2
By deepocean1974
i am a neo-con on China issue:get rid of CCP is the only way to achieve freedom in China.the only hope here in China is the muslim guys in Xinjiang ,they are brave guys-more brave than my HAN fellows-they can sacrifice themselves.let the Chnney guys communicate with them and construct a base in China.
April 8, 2004 @ 2:41 am | Comment
3
By vaara
“the richest place in which citizens do not have the right to elect their own leaders”
Insert snarky comment about the 2000 U.S. Presidential election here.
Actually, most parliamentary democracies don’t allow for direct election of leaders either; the majority party can appoint a new leader (and prime minister) without consulting the electorate at all.
April 8, 2004 @ 3:11 am | Comment
4
By vaara
(Obligatory disclaimer: The PRC is an evil totalitarian dictatorship, and the U.S. isn’t. Just thought I’d get that out of the way before someone accuses me of admiring Mao’s programs of mass murder, or whatever.)
April 8, 2004 @ 3:19 am | Comment
5
By The Gweilo Diaries
One Man, One Vote, and the Man’s Name is Hu Jintao
Joseph Kahn, in today’s New York Times: When asked why China, with its surging economy and rising power, has not yet begun to democratize, its leaders recite a standard line. The country is too big, too poor, too uneducated and…
April 8, 2004 @ 3:47 am | Comment
6
By dodo
i was attracted by the same article this morning. i think it’s a great one. it almost made me laugh when it said:
“In Mao Zedong’s day, the problem would have been solved easily enough, by calling democrats counter-revolutionaries and mobilizing the masses to silence them.”
so true, so ironic. i can laugh then cry. sigh..
April 8, 2004 @ 11:13 am | Comment