Jump to content

Democracy in China

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ideological debate over democracy in China has existed in Chinese politics since the 19th century. Chinese scholars, thinkers, and policy-makers have debated about democracy, an idea which was first imported by Western colonial powers but which some argue also has connections to classic Chinese thinking. Starting in the mid-eighteenth century, many Chinese argued about how to deal with Western culture. Though Chinese Confucians were initially opposed to Western modes of thinking, it became clear that aspects of the West were appealing. Industrialization gave the West an economic and military advantage. The Qing dynasty's defeats in the First and Second Opium Wars compelled a segment of Chinese politicians and intellectuals to rethink their notion of cultural and political superiority.[1]

Democracy entered the Chinese consciousness because it was the form of government used in the West, potentially responsible for its industrial, economic and military advancements. A segment of Chinese scholars and politicians became persuaded that democratization and industrialization were imperative for a competitive China. In response, a number of scholars resisted the idea, saying democracy and Westernization had no place in traditional Chinese culture. Liang Shuming's opinion was most popular, holding that democracy and traditional Chinese society were completely incompatible, hence China's only choice was either wholesale Westernization or complete rejection of the West.[2] The debate centered on the philosophical compatibility of traditional Chinese Confucian beliefs and the technologies of the West.[3]

China is not a liberal or representative democracy. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Chinese government state that China is a socialist democracy and a people's democratic dictatorship. Under Xi Jinping, China is also termed a whole-process people's democracy.[4][5] Many foreign and some domestic observers categorize China as an authoritarian one-party state, with some saying it has shifted to neoauthoritarianism.[6] Some characterize it as a dictatorship.[7]

The constitution of the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the CCP constitution state that its form of government is "people's democratic dictatorship".[8] The state constitution also holds that China is a one-party state that is governed by the CCP. This gives the CCP a total monopoly of political power. All political opposition is illegal. Currently, there are eight minor political parties in China other than the CCP that are legal, but all have to accept CCP primacy to exist.[9] Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are severely restricted by the government.[10][11] Censorship is widespread and dissent is harshly punished in the country.[12]

Qing dynasty[edit]

Introducing the concept of modern democracy is credited to Liang Qichao, a prominent writer and political thinker. In 1898, along with his mentor Kang Youwei, he submitted reform proposals to the young emperor, leading to the Hundred Days' Reforms. These proposed popular participation and elections, but provoked a crackdown from court conservatives and the beheading of several reform advocates. After escaping to Japan, Liang Qichao translated and commented on the works of Hobbes, Rousseau, Locke, Hume, Bentham and many other western political philosophers. He published his essays in a series of journals that found a warm audience among Chinese intelligentsia hungering for an explanation of why China, once a formidable empire, was now on the verge of being dismembered by foreign powers. In interpreting Western democracy through the prism of his strongly Confucian background, Liang shaped the ideas of democracy that would be used throughout the next century. Liang favored gradual reform to turn China into a constitutional monarchy with democracy.[citation needed]

Liang's great rival was Sun Yat-sen who argued that democracy would be impossible as long as the Qing monarchy still existed. Sun proposed the Three Principles of the People (三民主義) – typically translated into English as "Nationalism, Democracy, and People's Livelihood".[13]: 53  This framing of democracy (minquanzhuyi) differs from the typical Western view, being based in Liang's interpretation of General will, which prioritizes the power of the group over individual freedoms.[13]: 54  Sun viewed traditional Chinese society as too individualistic and stated that individual liberty must be broken down so that the Chinese people could pressed together, using the metaphor of adding cement to sand.[13]: 54  Like Liang, Sun agreed that democracy, or at least universal suffrage, could not happen overnight in a country with high illiteracy rates and a lack of political consciousness. Sun's program called for a period of "political tutelage [zh]" in which the people would be educated, then allowed to participate in elections.[citation needed]

The Boxer Uprising and the Allied invasion exposed the need for basic changes. The Qing Imperial Court responded by organizing elections. China's first modern elections were organized by Yuan Shikai for Tianjin's county council in 1907. In 1909, 21 of 22 provinces, with the exception being Xinjiang, held elections for provincial assemblies and municipal councils. Requirements were strict; only those that passed the imperial exams, worked in government or military, or owned 5000 yuan of property may vote or run for office. This essentially limited the electorate to the gentry class. Hundreds of thousands voted and the winners were overwhelmingly constitutional monarchists, followers of Liang Qichao. The provincial assemblies elected half of the 200 member national assembly, the other half was selected by regent Prince Chun. All of these assemblies became hotbeds of dissent against the Qing as they were protected by freedom of speech. In 1909, the Qing government held parliamentary elections.[citation needed]

Republic of China[edit]

After the 1911 Revolution provincial assemblies provided legitimacy to the rebels by declaring their independence from the Qing Empire. The national assembly issued an ultimatum to the Qing court and delegates from the provincial assemblies were sent to Nanjing to legitimize the provisional government of the Republic of China. In late 1912, national elections were held with an enlarged electorate, albeit still small proportionally to the national population. Sun's Nationalist Party dominated both houses of the National Assembly. Song Jiaoren, the incoming Nationalist prime minister, was assassinated in March 1913 before the assembly could meet. The military leader Yuan Shikai forced the National Assembly to elect him president for a five-year term then purged it of Nationalists. After Yuan's death in 1916, a succession of governments failed to unify the country or gain international support. President Xu Shichang organized elections for a third assembly in 1921, but with only 11 provinces voting it never had a quorum and never convened. That was the last attempt to hold national elections until 1947. All assemblies were dissolved after the Nationalists' Northern Expedition.

The formation of the Nationalist one-party state in 1927 implemented Sun Yat-sen's three-stage program, in which the party provided "political tutelage", with elections only after the people were properly educated. All other parties were kept out of government until 1937 when the impending Second Sino-Japanese War led to the United Front and the formation of the People's Political Council which included the smaller parties.

In 1932, Chiang Kai-shek created the Blue Shirts Society, the core of which were Nationalist military officers who had been exposed to the politics of fascism through Chiang's Nazi advisors.[13]: 64  Blue Shirts rhetoric emphasized contempt for liberal democracy.[13]

After the end of the Second Sino-Japanese War, the Nationalist government promulgated the Constitution of the Republic of China. The 1947 National Assembly and 1948 legislative elections were boycotted by the Communists which held most of northern China. As a result, the Nationalists and their junior coalition partners, the Chinese Youth Party and China Democratic Socialist Party, won the election.

People's Republic of China[edit]

The People's Republic of China (PRC) officially refers to itself as a "socialist democracy with Chinese characteristics", but explicitly distinguishing itself from the liberal democratic system, which the CCP calls "unfit" for China's "unique conditions".[14] In the PRC definition, democracy has meant the Marxist–Leninist concepts of people's democratic dictatorship and democratic centralism. In this viewpoint, CCP acts as the representative of the Chinese public.[15]

New Democracy[edit]

Mao Zedong put forward the concept of New Democracy in his early 1940 text On New Democracy,[16]: 36  written while the Yan'an Soviet was developing and expanding during the Second Sino-Japanese War.[17]: 60–61  During this period, Mao was concerned about bureaucratization and sought to develop a culture of mass politics.[17]: 61  In his view, mass democracy was crucial, but could be guaranteed only to the revolutionary classes.[17]: 61–62  In the concept of New Democracy, the working class and the communist party are the dominant part of a coalition which includes progressive intellectuals and bourgeois patriotic democrats.[18]: 42 This coalition of classes is symbolized by the four smaller stars on the flag of China: workers, peasants, intellectuals, and the national bourgeoisie.[18]: 150  Led by a communist party, a New Democracy allows for limited development of national capitalism as part of the effort to replace foreign imperialism and domestic feudalism.[18]: 42 

The Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) was the primary government body through which the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) sought to incorporate non-CCP elements into the political system pursuant to principles of New Democracy.[19]: 43  On September 29, 1949, the CPPCC unanimously adopted the Common Program as the basic political program for the country following the success of the Chinese Communist Revolution.[20]: 25  The Common Program defined China as a new democratic country which would practice a people's democratic dictatorship led by the proletariat and based on an alliance of workers and peasants which would unite all of China's democratic classes (defined as those opposing imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucratic capitalism and favoring an independent China).[20]: 25 

Later Mao era[edit]

The Cultural Revolution promoted political empowerment of ordinary Chinese people, according to academic Dongping Han.[21] Prior to the Cultural Revolution, rural production team leaders were appointed by village leaders (who had themselves been appointed by commune leaders).[21] In his fieldwork in Jimo, academic Dongping Han found that production team leaders during the Cultural Revolution were elected by team members to one year terms as part of what Han describes as a rising democratic consciousness among ordinary people.[21]

Late 1970s to 1980s[edit]

In the Democracy Wall movement of 1978 to 1979, movement participants argued that "democracy" was the means to resolve conflict between the bureaucratic class and the people, although the nature of the proposed democratic institutions was a major source of disagreement among participants.[22] A majority viewed the movement as part of a struggle between correct and incorrect notions of Marxism.[22] Many participants advocated classical Marxist views that drew on the Paris Commune for inspiration.[22] The Democracy Wall movement also included non-Marxists and anti-Marxists, although these participants were a minority.[22]

Leaders of the post-Mao reforms in the 1980s argued that the Party's record under Mao was bad, but that the Party reformed without being forced. The American political scientist Andrew Nathan concluded that "the reforms aimed to change China from a terror-based, totalitarian dictatorship to a 'mature,' administered dictatorship of the Post-Stalinist Soviet or Eastern European type." "Democracy" would not involve elections or participation in decision making but "the rule of law", which was based on procedural regularity in the exercise of power.[23]

21st century[edit]

The party operates on the Leninist principle of democratic centralism.[24]: 18  From 2007 to 2009, Hu Jintao promoted intra-party party democracy (dangnei minzhu, 党内民主) in an effort to decrease the party's focus on top-down decision-making.[24]: 18 

In December 2008, more than 350 intellectual and cultural leaders, including Liu Xiaobo, issued Charter 08. The Charter said China remains the only large world power to still retain an authoritarian system that so infringes on human rights, and "This situation must change! Political democratic reforms cannot be delayed any longer!"[25]

Chinese premier Wen Jiabao called for more democracy in 2011, having generally been regarded as a political reformer during his career.[26] However, Wu Bangguo, chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, said in 2011 that "we have made a solemn declaration that we will not employ a system of multiple parties holding office in rotation", having said similar remarks during his career.[27]

The core socialist values campaign introduced during the 18th National Congress in 2012[28] promotes democracy as one of its four national values.[29]: 204 

After Xi Jinping became CCP general secretary in 2012, Amnesty International said that human rights in China have become worse.[30] In 2013, a CCP memo called "Document Number 9" was leaked, which warned against "Western constitutional democracy" along with other Western ideas.[31] Human rights abuses are rejected by the government, which insists the country is run according to law.[30] During a visit to Europe in 2014, CCP general secretary Xi Jinping said that a multi-party system would not work for China. He said China had experimented in the past with various political systems, including multi-party democracy, warning that copying foreign political or development models could be catastrophic because of its unique historical and social conditions.[32] Xi has strengthened the CCP's control over the government[33] and in 2018 amended the party and state constitutions to include Xi Jinping Thought, described as the next stage of socialism with Chinese characteristics. In that same year, the Chinese government also abolished term limits for the presidency, allowing Xi to rule for life.[34][35][36]

Whole-process people's democracy[edit]

CCP general secretary Xi Jinping has additionally coined the term whole-process people's democracy (全过程人民民主), also called "whole-process democracy" (全过程民主, 全过程的民主) which he said "put the people as masters" and that in it "all major legislative decisions are made only after democratic deliberations and thorough procedures to ensure sound and democratic decision-making". He said that "whole-process democracy" had four pillars:[37]

  1. process democracy (过程民主) and achievement democracy (成果民主)
  2. procedural democracy (程序民主) and substantive democracy (实质民主)
  3. direct democracy (直接民主) and indirect democracy (间接民主)
  4. people's democracy (人民民主) and will of the state (国家意志)

In 2021, in response to the Summit for Democracy held by US president Joe Biden, the State Council of China released a white paper called China: Democracy That Works which praised China's "whole-process democracy", said that "there are many ways to achieve democracy" and disparaged American democracy as "performative."[38] The white paper describes China's position that "There is no single road to democracy. The true barrier to democracy lies not in different models of democracy, but in arrogance, prejudice and hostility towards other countries’ attempts to explore their own paths to democracy, and in assumed superiority and the determination to impose one's own model of democracy on others."[39]

Under the concept of whole-process people's democracy, whether a country is democratic should not be measured by the electoral process but instead by the results it delivers to the people.[40]: 189  By using the improvement of living standards and development as the measure of democratic success, this framing favors China, which has undergone major advances in development and living standards during the last four decades.[40]: 189 

Consultative democracy[edit]

The Xi Jinping administration promotes a view of consultative democracy (xieshang minzhu 协商民主) rather than intra-party democracy.[24]: 18  This view of socialist democracy emphasizes consulting more often with society at large while strengthening the leading role of the party.[24]: 18  Through consultative democracy, Chinese policymakers seek to balance conflicting interests and stakeholders as long as they do not challenge the CCP priorities, with the main channel for this being the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC).[18]: 150 [16][41] The CPPCC is an institutional component of the CCP's people's democracy and united front strategy, which provides a "seat" for the eight small legally-permitted parties and independent nonparty "friends."[18]: 150  These eight parties were founded before the proclamation of the PRC, and they must accept the "leading role" of the CCP as a condition of their continued existence.[42]

Such institutional mechanisms for addressing the interests of new elites while also taking into account disadvantaged groups have been described by academics as "administrative absorption of society" or "democracy in governance."[43]: 50 

Elections in China[edit]

China conducts direct and indirect elections for its people's congresses, a practice that began in the communist areas during the Chinese Civil War.[44] The operation of people's congresses were set out in the Electoral Law of 1953 and have been subsequently revised.[44] Currently there are five levels of people's congresses.[44] From more to less local, they are: (1) people's congresses in villages, minority nationality townships, and towns; (2) people's congresses of cities that are not sub-divided, municipal districts, counties, and autonomous counties; (3) people's congresses in sub-districts of larger cities and in autonomous prefectures; (4) people's congresses in provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly administered by China's central government; and (5) the National People's Congress.[44] Direct elections occur at the two most local levels, while the members at the higher levels are indirectly elected, i.e., elected by those elected in the lower levels.[44] The National People's Congress is officially China's highest organ of state power.[45] However, nominations at all levels are controlled by the CCP, and CCP's leading position is enshrined in the state constitution, meaning that the elections have little way of influencing politics.[16][46] Additionally, elections are not pluralistic as no opposition is allowed.[16]

Starting in the 1980s, in the period of Opening and Reform, the government organized village elections in which several candidates would run, changing the position of the village chairman from appointed by the Communist Party to being elected by villagers.[47] In mid-2000s the autonomy of elected village officials gradually eroded.[47]

Special Administrative Regions, 1997–present[edit]

As European colonies, Hong Kong and Macau were denied democratic governments until very late in the colonial period. Official memos from CCP leaders, threatening the British government if they were to hold elections in Hong Kong, were repeatedly sent from the 1950s onwards.[48][49] Hong Kong got its first elections in the 1980s, and Macau in the 1990s.

Both Hong Kong and Macau have legislatures; 35 of Hong Kong's 70 legislators are directly[citation needed] elected, as are 14 of Macau's 33. Also, like grassroots elections in China, Hong Kong does hold elections for the district councils, which act as consultants to the government. Following electoral reforms implemented by the Mainland government, the legislature of Hong Kong following the 2021 general election will only have 20 out of 90 members directly elected.

Hong Kong[edit]

The first Chief Executive election saw the Chief Executive elected by a 400-member Selection Committee in 1996, then by 800-member Election Committee in 2002, 2005, 2007, and then 1200-member Election Committee in 2012 and 2017.

The Legislative Council of Hong Kong from 1997 to 2004 had 60 seats with 24 were directly elected, six elected from an 800-member electoral college known as the Election Committee of Hong Kong, and 30 elected from FCs. Elections in 2004 and 2008, had 30 members were directly elected by universal suffrage from geographical constituencies (GCs) and 30 were elected from functional constituencies (FCs). From 2012 onwards, The Legislative Council consists of 70 elected members, 35 members were directly elected by universal suffrage from geographical constituencies and 35 were elected from functional constituencies.

There have been many attempts with many different ideas to introduce universal suffrage since the handover. Electoral reform in Hong Kong was seen as an avenue for political liberalization in China;[50] the universal suffrage reform package which would allow Hongkongers to vote for the chief executive but the chief executive first needed to be approved by a committee. The law failed to pass Hong Kong's legislative council when pan-democrats voted against the package and most of the pro-Beijing members walked out.[51][52]

In 2014, Hong Kong experienced massive protests against the Chinese government's universal suffrage reform package, as the candidates would have to "love the country, and love Hong Kong" and would "protect the broad stability of Hong Kong now and in the future" to be able to stand for election.[53] The universal suffrage reform package failed to pass Hong Kong's legislative council when the majority voted against the package.[51]

On December 20, 2021, China's central government issued a white paper on its view of democracy in Hong Kong, which it framed as an executive-led governance arrangement designed to ensure Hong Kong's capacity and efficacy.[54]: 186  According to this view, there is no single set of criteria for democracy and no single democratic model that is universally acceptable.[54]: 186  The white paper states that Hong Kong's democracy should not be a replica of some other democratic model and that in the central government's view, principles of national sovereignty and security require that central authorities have the final say in determining Hong Kong's method of democracy.[54]: 186–187 

Macau[edit]

The first Macao Legislative Council in 1996 had 23 members: eight of whom were directly elected (GC), eight indirectly (FC), and seven nominated by the Chief Executive. Its second Legislative Council (2001) had four more members: two more directly elected and two more indirectly. Its third and fourth (2005 and 2009) legislative councils had 29 members, and the fifth (2013) and sixth (2017) have 33.[citation needed]

The first Chief Executive of Macau was elected by the 200-member Chief Executive Selection Committee in 1999, 2004 and 2009 saw the Chief Executive elected by 300-member Election Committee, and 400-member Election Committee in 2014 and 2019.[citation needed]

Influence of international events[edit]

Chinese policymakers generally view democratic political systems as hampered in their ability to pursue long-term development targets and long-term programs because of their focus on election campaigns and the frequent changes of government in such systems.[55]: 6–7  In this view, policy under democratic systems as largely restricted to ad hoc interventions which leaves social development vulnerable to blind market forces and the short-term policy interventions available under democratic systems are not equipped to address long-term issues such as environmental degradation, dysfunction in capital markets, or population change.[55]: 144–145 

Chinese policymakers view the experience of the post-Soviet states as an example of the harm caused by rapid democratization.[43]: 50  According to this view, these states' adoption of democracy resulted in the collapse of their communist governments and a decade of political instability and economic instability.[43]: 50 

The election of Donald Trump as President of the United States reinforced Chinese views that liberal democracy is dysfunctional.[56] The United States' response to the COVID-19 pandemic compounded the situation, increasing views among the Chinese public that the United States political system and economy were not world benchmarks.[56]

Influence of traditions[edit]

Confucianism[edit]

Social harmony[edit]

A primary motivation within traditional Chinese philosophy is to preserve social harmony. It looks unfavorably upon anyone who attempts to disrupt this placidity. The election process that takes place in modern liberal democracy directly opposes this ideal. During election campaigns, the issues most frequently discussed are the ones that are highly charged emotionally and politically. In contemporary U.S. elections, controversial issues like abortion, gay marriage, military engagement in the Middle East are at the forefront of campaigns. Chinese Confucians consider these controversial issues to be cleavages within the fabric of social harmony. Western politicians rely on utilizing these social cleavages to garner support from voters. In Chinese culture it would be an impropriety for a politician to exploit these social cleavages to achieve the personal goal of getting elected. Consequently, many of the more traditionalist Chinese people consider the election process of the West and western-influenced democracies to be quite arguably inappropriate as per Chinese culture.[57]

Serve the common good, not the majority[edit]

Another motivation in Chinese culture is to benefit the common good. Modern liberal democracy is based upon the self-interest of each voter. Voters are encouraged to choose an official that benefits them and promotes their interests.[citation needed] Elected representatives serve the interests of their individual constituents. If they do not adequately represent the beliefs of their constituency they will not be re-elected. Consequently, people of a traditionalist Chinese perspective tend to believe that the collective good of the people is under-represented in a democracy, which instead reflects majoritarianism.[57]

The weight of the Confucian family[edit]

Another frequently cited argument against democracy in China relates to the importance of the family. Familial relationships form the backbone of China's social structure. People are more concerned with their family than with politics. Based on this aspect of Chinese culture, many traditionalist Chinese viewpoints emphasize that in the absence of a strong authoritarian government, Chinese society would disintegrate. Thus in the eyes of many, a democracy would be too weak for Chinese society.[58]

Christian influences[edit]

As per some points of view, there is arguably a correlation between Christianity and democracy, perhaps, as per some Chinese perspectives, liberal democracy has its historical basis in Christian culture. As a result, most current forms contain philosophical remnants of those probable origins. One such trace of Christianity is the empowerment of the individual. Christian concepts consider each individual to be sacred in the eyes of God. The concept of liberal democracy rests on all this sense that the individual has inherent worth regardless of his place within social hierarchies.[59]

Traditional Chinese culture makes no such claim. In fact, the philosophical significance of the individual is often identified as an area of incompatibility between democracy and Chinese culture. Confucian societies are centered on familial relationships; an individual had no authority to revolt against these societal ties. An individual disconnected from the family is widely considered an outcast and relegated to the bottom of the social ladder. Confucianism lacks a universal reverence for the individual; personal status in Confucian communities is inexorably linked to one's position within the social hierarchy. In this context, many individual rights cannot exist in the same way they do in the West. Naturally the right of the individual to partake in the direct appointment of a ruling official is an ideological inconsistency with traditional Confucian society.[51]

Chinese pragmatism[edit]

Disassociation of democracy and well-being[edit]

A counterpoint to these examples is that as time has progressed, anti-democratic rhetoric has moved away from the philosophical and into the pragmatic. The boom of the Four Tigers and other growing Asian economies has severed the links between Western culture and material wealth in the eyes of many Chinese[citation needed]. In the early 1900s, scholars like Liang Qichao conflated democracy and power. For some Chinese, the economic success of Confucian and authoritarian societies challenges the idea that wholesale adoption of Western beliefs such as Democracy are requisite for economic success.[60][61][62]

Optimism versus pessimism[edit]

At a fundamental philosophical level, Confucian tradition is contingent upon an idea articulated by Thomas Metzger as epistemological optimism. This expresses the belief that it is possible to understand the essence of high morality and design policies and laws that reflect that knowledge. Confucian society seeks to carry out all daily tasks and rituals in pursuit of fulfilling that universal morality. The modern conception of liberal democracy is grounded in the opposing principle of ideological pessimism. This denies that such knowledge is possible, thus the theory and practice of liberal democracy does not make rules in the pursuit of high morality.[63]

Citizen surveys[edit]

A 1990 survey from Andrew Nathan and Tianjian Shi reported that 55% of people surveyed agree that "China needs more democracy now", but 76% agreed that Chinese democracy depends on the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party.[64] They also reported that a sizeable proportion feared the negative aspects of democracy, 36% agreed that too many parties would "cause political chaos."

Surveys done with the World Values Survey and the East Asia Barometer in 2001 and 2002 shows high explicit support for democracy.[65] In the survey, 96% answered either "fairly good" or "very good" to the question "Do you think having a democratic political system is....". Moreover, 81% of respondents agreed with the statement "democracy may have problems but it is better than any form government." When asked to compare authoritarianism or democracy, only 5% of respondents said that an authoritarian government can be preferable, with 20% saying it does not matter. When chosen to rate out of 10 how suitable democracy is for China, only 2% gave a rating lower than 5, 96% gave a 6 or higher, 76% giving an 8, 9 or 10. Nevertheless, 60 to 70% of respondents feared some democratic practices may cause negative effects. 26% agreed or strongly agreed with the statements "in democracy the economic systems runs badly." 35% agreed with that statement "democracies are indecisive and have too much quibbling." 18% agreed with the statement "democracies aren't good at maintaining order."

An Asian Barometer survey from 2014 to 2016 had 76% of Chinese respondents agreeing that democracy was capable of solving the problems in their society. However, when asked to rate the level of democracy in their own government on a 10-point scale, they gave an overall rating of 6.5 (the 7th highest percentage out of 14 different regions surveyed).[66]

Zhengxu Wang of Fudan University in Shanghai wrote in a report in 2007: "It is clear that public support for democracy is high in China. Public opinion surveys show that more than 90% of Chinese citizens believe that having a democracy is good. But the majority is not yet ready for a major effort towards democratization because they still see economic growth and social stability as more important than freedom of speech, political participation, and other democratic rights."[57]

A report of two Stanford professors, Jennifer Pan and Yiqing Xu, done between 2018 and 2019 showed that a majority of Chinese people believed that the government had no right to interfere in how many children people had, and that the government should allow public expression of negative views of government policies. The poll also showed that Chinese people with higher income or Chinese students studying in the US being more politically and economically liberal.[67]

A 2020 Harvard University study conducted yearly since 2003 found that Chinese citizens' trust in their government has increased each year, "virtually across the board."[68]

In 2022, a poll by the Alliance of Democracies Foundation found that 91% of Chinese say democracy is important to them, with an 81% saying that China is a democracy.[69]

According to Chinese economist David Daokui Li, the general trend is that age cohorts born in the 1970s and later take a more critical view of United States-style democracy than other age cohorts.[70]: 198 

Democracy dimensions[edit]

The general Chinese public has virtually no say on how the top leaders of the country are elected,[71][10] which violates the right to be a candidate as a democratic dimension for the conduct free and fair elections.[72]

International rankings[edit]

China is considered internationally to be amongst the least democratic countries in the world.[71][12][73][74] It has consistently been ranked amongst the lowest as an "authoritarian regime" by the Economist Intelligence Unit's Democracy Index, ranking at 156th out of 167 countries in 2022.[75] According to 2023 V-Dem Democracy indices China is the third least electoral democratic country in the world[76] and ranked second least electoral democratic country in Asia according to V-Dem Democracy indices in 2023.[77] Hong Kong was ranked 14th least electoral democracy in Asia according to V-Dem Democracy indices in 2023.[76][77] According to Civicus, China's civic space is rated as "closed."[78]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Ham, Chae-bong (2004). "The Ironies of Confucianism". Journal of Democracy. 15 (3): 93–107. doi:10.1353/jod.2004.0046. ISSN 1086-3214. S2CID 56257227.
  2. ^ Alitto, Guy. "Eastern and Western Cultures." The Last Confucian: Liang Shu-ming and the Chinese Dilemma of Modernity. Berkeley: University of California, 1979. 85.
  3. ^ Yu, Keping. Democracy Is a Good Thing: Essays on Politics, Society, and Culture in Contemporary China. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 2009. 115–17. Print.
  4. ^ Mattingly, Daniel C. (5 December 2019). The Art of Political Control in China. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-316-99791-8.
  5. ^ "Whole-Process Democracy". China Media Project. 23 November 2021. Retrieved 10 January 2023.
  6. ^ Perlez, Jane (13 November 2017). "Behind the Scenes, Communist Strategist Presses China's Rise". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 17 December 2022.
  7. ^ Heurlin, Christopher (27 October 2016). Responsive Authoritarianism in China: Land, Protests, and Policy Making. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-108-10780-8.
  8. ^ "The National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China". npc.gov.cn. Retrieved 15 December 2021.
  9. ^ Wong, Alan (10 September 2018). "Is China a democracy? A long (and better) answer". Inkstone News. Archived from the original on 9 December 2018. Retrieved 7 December 2018.
  10. ^ Jump up to: a b "China: Freedom on the Net 2022 Country Report". Freedom House. Retrieved 16 December 2022.
  11. ^ China: Events of 2020, Human Rights Watch, 13 January 2021, retrieved 16 December 2022
  12. ^ Jump up to: a b Bradsher, Keith; Myers, Steven Lee (7 December 2021). "Ahead of Biden's Democracy Summit, China Says: We're Also a Democracy". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 16 December 2022.
  13. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Crean, Jeffrey (2024). The Fear of Chinese Power: an International History. New Approaches to International History series. London, UK: Bloomsbury Academic. ISBN 978-1-350-23394-2.
  14. ^ Kim, Jo. "Exploring China's New Narrative on Democracy". The Diplomat. Archived from the original on 6 December 2019. Retrieved 10 April 2020.
  15. ^ "Democracy". Decoding China. 4 February 2021. Retrieved 22 August 2022.
  16. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Liu, Zongyuan Zoe (2023). Sovereign Funds: How the Communist Party of China Finances its Global Ambitions. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. ISBN 9780674271913.
  17. ^ Jump up to: a b c Karl, Rebecca E. (2010). Mao Zedong and China in the Twentieth-Century World: a Concise History. Asia-Pacific series. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press. ISBN 978-0-8223-4780-4.
  18. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Lin, Chun (2006). The Transformation of Chinese Socialism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. ISBN 978-0-8223-3785-0. OCLC 63178961.
  19. ^ Hammond, Ken (2023). China's Revolution and the Quest for a Socialist Future. New York, NY: 1804 Books. ISBN 9781736850084.
  20. ^ Jump up to: a b Zheng, Qian (2020). Zheng, Qian (ed.). An Ideological History of the Communist Party of China. Vol. 2. Translated by Sun, Li; Bryant, Shelly. Montreal, Quebec: Royal Collins Publishing Group. ISBN 978-1-4878-0391-9.
  21. ^ Jump up to: a b c Han, Dongping (2008). The Unknown Cultural Revolution: Life and Change in a Chinese Village. New York: Monthly Review Press. p. 71. ISBN 978-1-58367-180-1. OCLC 227930948.
  22. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Paltemaa, Lauri (2007). "The Democracy Wall Movement, Marxist Revisionism, and the Variations on Socialist Democracy". Journal of Contemporary China. 16 (53): 611. doi:10.1080/10670560701562325. ISSN 1067-0564. S2CID 143933209.
  23. ^ Andrew J. Nathan. Chinese Democracy. (New York: Knopf : Distributed by Random House, 1985). ISBN 039451386X. pp. 227–228.
  24. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Cabestan, Jean-Pierre (2024). "Organisation and (Lack of) Democracy in the Chinese Communist Party: A Critical Reading of the Successive Iterations of the Party Constitution". In Doyon, Jérôme; Froissart, Chloé (eds.). The Chinese Communist Party: a 100-Year Trajectory. Canberra: ANU Press. ISBN 9781760466244.
  25. ^ Macartney, Jane (10 December 2008). "Leading Chinese dissident, Liu Xiaobo, arrested over freedom charter". London: Times Online. Archived from the original on 4 June 2011. Retrieved 10 December 2008.
  26. ^ "Chinese premier Wen Jiabao calls for more democracy". BBC News. 15 September 2011. Retrieved 26 August 2022.
  27. ^ "Chinese leader rules out democracy". BBC News. 10 March 2011. Retrieved 23 August 2022.
  28. ^ "How Much Should We Read Into China's New "Core Socialist Values"?". Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved 13 December 2023.
  29. ^ Santos, Gonçalo (2021). Chinese Village Life Today: Building Families in an Age of Transition. Seattle: University of Washington Press. ISBN 978-0-295-74738-5.
  30. ^ Jump up to: a b "Human rights in China under Xi Jinping 'worst since Tiananmen crackdown': Amnesty". South China Morning Post. Amnesty International. 17 November 2017. Archived from the original on 21 December 2019. Retrieved 26 December 2019.
  31. ^ Buckley, Chris (19 August 2013). "China Takes Aim at Western Ideas". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on 24 August 2013. Retrieved 10 April 2020.
  32. ^ "Xi says multi-party system didn't work for China". Reuters. 2 April 2014. Archived from the original on 7 August 2019. Retrieved 25 December 2019.
  33. ^ Mitchell, Tom (6 September 2021). "The Chinese control revolution: the Maoist echoes of Xi's power play". Financial Times. Retrieved 14 April 2022.
  34. ^ "Xi Jinping as 'Authoritarian Reformer'". Freedom House. Retrieved 13 April 2022.
  35. ^ Andrésy, Agnès (2016). Xi Jinping : red China, the next generation. Lanham, Maryland. ISBN 978-0-7618-6601-5. OCLC 927168921.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  36. ^ Doubek, James (11 March 2018). "China Removes Presidential Term Limits, Enabling Xi Jinping To Rule Indefinitely". NPR. Retrieved 13 April 2022.
  37. ^ Chen, Stella (23 November 2021). "Whole-Process Democracy". China Media Project. Retrieved 13 August 2022.
  38. ^ "中国发布民主白皮书, "民主峰会"前夕与美争夺话语权". BBC News (in Simplified Chinese). Retrieved 26 August 2022.
  39. ^ "Full text: China: Democracy That Works_Embassy of the People's Republic of China in the United States of America". us.china-embassy.gov.cn. Retrieved 16 December 2022.
  40. ^ Jump up to: a b Tsang, Steve; Cheung, Olivia (2024). The Political Thought of Xi Jinping. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780197689363.
  41. ^ Joske, Alex (2020). "The party speaks for you: Foreign interference and the Chinese Communist Party's united front system". Australian Strategic Policy Institute. JSTOR resrep25132. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  42. ^ Tselichtchev, Ivan, ed. (2 January 2012). China Versus the West: The Global Power Shift of the 21st Century. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. doi:10.1002/9781119199311. ISBN 978-1-119-19931-1. OCLC 883259659.
  43. ^ Jump up to: a b c Meng, Wenting (2024). Developmental Piece: Theorizing China's Approach to International Peacebuilding. Ibidem. Columbia University Press. ISBN 9783838219073.
  44. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Boer, Roland (2021). Socialism with Chinese characteristics : a guide for foreigners. Singapore. p. 193. ISBN 978-981-16-1622-8. OCLC 1249470522.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  45. ^ "Constitution". en.npc.gov.cn.cdurl.cn. Retrieved 23 August 2022.
  46. ^ Truex, Rory (28 October 2016). Making Autocracy Work. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-17243-2.
  47. ^ Jump up to: a b Martinez-Bravo, Monica, Gerard Padró i Miquel, Nancy Qian, and Yang Yao. 2022. "The Rise and Fall of Local Elections in China." American Economic Review, 112 (9): 2921-58.
  48. ^ Guilford, Gwynn (10 October 2014). "The secret history of Hong Kong's stillborn democracy". Quartz. Archived from the original on 10 June 2019. Retrieved 10 June 2019.
  49. ^ Jacobs, Andrew (27 October 2014). "Hong Kong Democracy Standoff, Circa 1960". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 29 December 2016. Retrieved 4 December 2018.
  50. ^ Buckley, Chris; Forsythe, Michael (31 August 2014). "China Restricts Voting Reforms for Hong Kong". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on 27 February 2015. Retrieved 10 April 2020.
  51. ^ Jump up to: a b c "Hong Kong reform package rejected as pro-Beijing camp walk out in 'miscommunication'". South China Morning Post. 18 June 2015. Archived from the original on 28 April 2020. Retrieved 12 April 2020.
  52. ^ "HK lawmakers shun Beijing poll plan". BBC News. 18 June 2015. Retrieved 30 September 2020.
  53. ^ Buckley, Chris; Forsythe, Michael (31 August 2014). "China Restricts Voting Reforms for Hong Kong". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on 27 February 2015. Retrieved 12 April 2020.
  54. ^ Jump up to: a b c Hu, Richard (2023). Reinventing the Chinese City. New York: Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-21101-7.
  55. ^ Jump up to: a b Heilmann, Sebastian (2018). Red Swan: How Unorthodox Policy-Making Facilitated China's Rise. The Chinese University of Hong Kong Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctv2n7q6b. ISBN 978-962-996-827-4. JSTOR j.ctv2n7q6b. S2CID 158420253.
  56. ^ Jump up to: a b Zhao, Suisheng (2023). The Dragon Roars Back: Transformational Leaders and Dynamics of Chinese Foreign Policy. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. p. 91. ISBN 978-1-5036-3088-8. OCLC 1331741429.
  57. ^ Jump up to: a b c Pan, Wei (February 2003). "Toward a Consultative Rule of Law Regime in China". Journal of Contemporary China. 12 (34): 3–43. doi:10.1080/10670560305465. ISSN 1067-0564. S2CID 154847398.
  58. ^ Fukuyama, Francis (1995). "Confucianism and Democracy". Journal of Democracy. 6 (2): 20–33. doi:10.1353/jod.1995.0029. ISSN 1086-3214. S2CID 11344823.
  59. ^ Mansbach, Richard W., and Edward Joseph Rhodes. Global Politics in a Changing World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2006. 109. Google Books. Web. 8 May 2012.
  60. ^ Bengardi, Dave (12 October 2015). "Singapore's Challenge to Democracy". Berkeley Political Review. Retrieved 14 October 2018.
  61. ^ Allison, Graham (30 March 2015). "The Lee Kuan Yew Conundrum". The Atlantic. Retrieved 14 October 2018.
  62. ^ "The Singapore exception". The Economist. 16 July 2015. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 25 May 2020.
  63. ^ Metzger, Thomas A. A Cloud across the Pacific. Hong Kong: Chinese UP, 2005. 21. Print.
  64. ^ Nathan, Andrew; Shi, Tianjian (1993). "Cultural requisites for democracy in China: some findings from a survey". Daedalus. 122 (2): 95–123.
  65. ^ "Social Change and Social Attitudes Survey". WVS China 2001, EAB China 2002. 2002.
  66. ^ Chu Yun-han. "How Asians View Democracy: Three Puzzles (pages 10 and 13)" (PDF). Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. Asian Barometer Survey. Archived (PDF) from the original on 14 October 2021.
  67. ^ Mazzocco, Ilaria; Kennedy, Scott (9 February 2022). "Public Opinion in China: A Liberal Silent Majority?". Center for Strategic and International Studies. Retrieved 26 August 2022.
  68. ^ Cunningham, Edward; Saich, Tony; Turiel, Jessie (2020). "Understanding CCP Resilience: Surveying Chinese Public Opinion Through Time". ash.harvard.edu. Retrieved 16 December 2022.
  69. ^ O'Connor, Tom (30 May 2022). "Most in China call their nation a democracy, most in U.S. say America isn't". Newsweek. Retrieved 26 August 2022.
  70. ^ Li, David Daokui (2024). China's World View: Demystifying China to Prevent Global Conflict. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 978-0393292398.
  71. ^ Jump up to: a b George, Nectar Gan,Steve (8 December 2021). "China claims its authoritarian one-party system is a democracy -- and one that works better than the US". CNN. Retrieved 16 December 2022.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  72. ^ Bishop, Sylvia; Hoeffler, Anke (2016). "Free and fair elections: A new database". Journal of Peace Research. 53 (4): 608–616. doi:10.1177/0022343316642508. S2CID 110571606.
  73. ^ Hale, Erin. "China claims to have 'democracy that works' ahead of Biden summit". www.aljazeera.com. Retrieved 16 December 2022.
  74. ^ "China attacks 'US-style democracy' prior to Biden summit". The Guardian. 6 December 2021. Retrieved 16 December 2022.
  75. ^ "The world's most, and least, democratic countries in 2022". The Economist. 1 February 2023. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 2 February 2023.
  76. ^ Jump up to: a b V-Dem Institute (2023). "The V-Dem Dataset". Retrieved 14 October 2023.
  77. ^ Jump up to: a b Democracy Report 2023, Table 3, V-Dem Institute, 2023
  78. ^ "China: Activists and journalists face arrests and convictions despite UN human rights review". Civicus Monitor. Retrieved 5 March 2024.

Further reading[edit]

  • Nathan, Andrew (1985). Chinese Democracy. New York, USA: Knopf. ISBN 978-0-394-51386-7.
  • Daniel Bell, East Meets West: Human Rights and Democracy in East Asia (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2000).
  • Daniel Bell, Beyond Liberal Democracy: Political Thinking for an East Asian Context (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2006).
  • Bell, Daniel (2018). The China model : political meritocracy and the limits of democracy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0691166452. OCLC 1032362345.
  • Edmund S. K. Fung, In Search of Chinese Democracy: Civil Opposition in Nationalist China, 1929–1949 (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Cambridge Modern China Series). xviii, 407p. ISBN 0-521-77124-2
  • Hu, Shaohua. Explaining Chinese Democratization (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2000).
  • Liu Jianfei (刘建飞), Democracy and China (Beijing: New World Press, 2011). 178 p. ISBN 9787510412240
  • Holbig, Heike, und Günter Schucher (2016), "He who says C must say D"—China's Attempt to Become the "World's Largest Democracy", GIGA Focus Asia, 02, June, 2016