</b>China and Democracy: A Contradiction in Terms?

Merle Goldman began the discussion by noting that while the phrase "democracy and China" is not a contradiction, this does not mean that China will become a democracy in the near future. Nevertheless, there are certain conditions, she said, that may point in that direction. From a cultural point of view, China's Confucian legacy does not prevent the development of democracy. The other post-Confucian countries surrounding China – Japan, South Korea and Taiwan – have democratic political systems. There is also the Confucian emphasis on education that leads to social mobility, concern for equitable treatment of the population, and the responsibility of the Confucian literati to speak out against the abuse of political power. Turning to calls for reform in China over the past twenty-five years, Goldman stated that select groups of independent intellectuals, journalists, small business people, lawyers, and ordinary citizens have been calling for such political reform. She stated this is the subject of her new book, From Comrade to Citizen: The Struggle for Political Rights in China. Despite repression and constant harassment, Goldman asserted, the individuals and groups described in the book are now acting as independent actors, challenging the party and its policies, and attempting to assert their political rights. Equally significant, for the first time in the history of the People's Republic, there is a linking up of members of these groups with ordinary citizens. However, with the party's continuing use of violence and repression against any challenges to its political power, all of these movements in China thus far have been short-lived. On the other hand, it would be wrong to discount the impact of these various efforts simply because they are quickly suppressed. The fact that people are pushing the envelope is significant. However, in order for independent political actors and groups to survive and develop, they will need much more support from Chinese society and they will need laws to protect their activities. Nevertheless, concluded Goldman, the process of the transition from "comrade to citizen" in China has begun.

Suisheng Zhao agreed that since China began revamping its economy in the late 1970s, the pressure for political reform has been building. He pointed out that the current leadership of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), in trying to limit power by individuals without relinquishing overall Party control, has issued a series of laws and regulations. Some of these laws include two-term limits for the highest Party posts, and mandatory retirement for Party members. These laws are clearly intended to prevent power from falling into the hands of one individual, with the abuse of power that follows (read Chairman Mao). Thus, said Zhao, in China today the debate is generally over the rule of law (as defined by the Party) vs. democratization, rather than the rule of law as the basis for democracy, as we perceive it in the West. In detailing this point, Zhao noted that political reform has not only been hotly debated and broadly discussed among Chinese intellectuals, but also has become an official policy objective, listed on the agenda of the CCP, governmental meetings and official publications. Institutionalization of China's leadership system is one of the most important aspects of political reform and also a major effort to build a rule of law regime as it emphasizes the normative rules and procedure in the decision-making process. Another aspect of political reform is to build an institutional and legal mechanism to restrain government officials/cadres, making them more responsive to society demands and more accountable for their bad performance. In addition to the above, constitutional reform, including provisions that no organization or individual is privileged to be beyond the Constitution or law, and that emphasize the equality of all citizens before the law, has filtered its way into the public consciousness. Indeed, protection of constitutional rights has become a hot topic in China's media, as ordinary Chinese have developed an understanding of the legal rights they are supposed to enjoy. In conclusion, stated Zhao, political reform has created some cracks in the rigid CCP authoritarian system. Paradoxically, one of the main purposes of the reform, from the Party's legal point of view, has been to head off threats that might eventually increase pressure for democratization.

Richard Baum's remarks were read by Dr. Goldman. Baum asserted that Chinese leaders in recent years have adopted a variety of soft authoritarian measures designed to expand cautiously the arena of political inclusion, consultation, cooperation and feedback, without at the same time enlarging the scope of public accountability, responsibility or empowerment. Such measures have included the creation of provincial, municipal and county-level "e-Government" websites for the public dissemination of administrative information and solicitation of public feedback on government performance; expanded use of special offices to assist members of the public in reporting abuses of state power; and the providing of legal recourse for citizens suffering administrative abuse at the hands of state officials, formalized in the 1990 Administrative Litigation Act. Baum stated that early in the new millennium, with the risk-averse Jiang Zemin moving toward retirement, it was widely anticipated that his fourth-generation successors, Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao, might be free to pursue a more progressive political agenda. However, Hu dashed such hopes by making it clear in a September 2004 speech that there would be no diluting or relinquishing the CCP's 55-year monopoly on political power. By substituting paternalistic consultation for autonomous political participation, cooptation for representation, advice for empowerment, and consensus-building for the clash of conflicting interests, the CCP has arguably been able to avoid much of the putative clutter and chaos of democratic pluralism. In the short term, China's consultative Leninism – bolstered by robust economic growth -- has arguably extended the life span of China's authoritarian regime. But for how long, asked Baum? Citing evidence from a recent study which drew on data gathered from approximately 150 countries between 1970 and 1999, Baum stated that the conclusion of the study was that competent authoritarian governments that provide substantial economic growth and administrative goods, while effectively suppressing media freedom, unrestricted access to internet sites, and freedom of assembly, can delay the onset of democratization for up to a full decade or even longer. He concluded, by the evidence of this study, that China may already be living on borrowed time.


Yongming Zhou focused his attention on the internet and internet politics in China. He placed the politics of the internet in the context of the way the CCP handles all media, whether it is newspapers, magazines, TV, radio or the internet: the authorities attempt to control it. Thus, we should not be surprised at the Party and government attempts to control the internet, or the success they have had in controlling it to date. They have had much practice with media control. Another point Zhou made is that while Western concerns have focused entirely on the free use of the internet, that is, information transmission, another equally important aspect is that of information reception. Most internet users in China are male, under 30, and fairly well-educated. While they use the internet primarily for entertainment and not for information purposes, they are nonetheless fairly nationalistic. Many "netizens" interpret U.S. assertions of freedom and democracy as code words to advance a U.S. agenda at the expense of Chinese interests. The role of the internet in China has in recent months received world-wide attention because of news that Yahoo, Microsoft, Google and Cisco have agreed to help Chinese authorities block out unwanted information on the internet. Such attention culminated in a U.S. congressional hearing in mid-February, at which executives of the technology giants were summoned to Capitol Hill to face scorching criticism. Returning to internet use in China, Zhou noted that on the one hand, Chinese decision makers have treated the internet as an economic and social growth engine, and their proactive policies have promoted phenomenal internet growth. With the number of internet users at 110 million, China has the second largest number of such users in the world. On the other hand, the government has not lost much control of cyberspace. In fact, the Chinese state has developed a variety of means to control the content of the internet which, until now, has proved fairly effective. And, as we have seen, international technology companies have helped. Zhou concluded that one should be neither too optimistic nor pessimistic about the internet in China. It is a fact that the Chinese are accessing more and more information through the internet and satellite TV, as well as via the traditional media. The space for freedom of speech is being enlarged, and many Chinese see this as an irreversible trend and an ideal route for change. Yet it must also be realized that the internet is only a promising new technology, and that only by changing the whole political system can the internet be used freely.


Drafted by Mark Mohr, Asia Program Associate
Robert M. Hathaway, Director, Asia Program. Ph: (202) 691-4020