The 1990s saw democracy take one of the biggest leaps forward all over the world — to be precise, in the Communist-ruled part of the world. One of the few exceptions was China, where Communists survived the challenge of student demonstrations at Tiananmen Square in 1989, thanks to a brutal military crackdown. Now, pressure for democratisation is again building up, albeit in very different forms. Take, for example, the ongoing 17th Congress of the Communist Party of China. It shows the party’s desperate effort to maintain its one-party rule at a time when the urge for freedom and democracy is surfacing among all segments of the population — middle, rich and poor.
Chinese society has changed beyond recognition since Mao Zedong founded the Communist regime in 1949. One of the poorest nations in the world then is emerging as a superpower now. There are, no doubt, many positive features of this transformation, which is entirely due to Deng Xiaoping’s farsighted economic reforms since 1978. China’s GDP rise is triple the global average for 29 straight years. It can also take legitimate pride in having achieved the biggest poverty alleviation task in human history: the number of people living in abject poverty has come down dramatically.
However, in the wake of these achievements have come some gargantuan problems, which will severely test the capacity of CPC’s present and future leaders to retain their monopoly power as an unelected oligarchy. The greatest challenge before the party is corruption within its own ranks.
China’s massive middle-class population, which is better educated and more exposed to the world than ever before, finds the lack of freedom to ask questions and debate freely stifling. Unlike in India, there is no RTI for citizens to seek official information. Sometimes, they use the Internet to vent their frustration. (China has about 18 crore Internet users, as against 6 crore in India). But Beijing’s clampdown on blogs and chats, especially those involving political discussion, is very harsh.
Recently, an anonymous person named Little Fire Dragon, belonging to the ‘Strong China Forum’, published a post addressed to Hu Jintao, China’s president and CPC general secretary: “Mr. General Secretary, please come to the Strong China Forum to share your thoughts with netizens ... I have a question for you, though I am not sure I will have the honour to be answered. It is about the relationship between the Chinese people and the Chinese Communist Party. Water can run without fish, but fish cannot swim without water; water is the Chinese people, and fish is the Communist Party. So when there is a conflict of interest between the people and the party, the people’s interest should override the party’s interests, right?”
The pressure for democracy is coming from the rich in a different way. Last week, Wu Zhong, the China editor of Asia Times Online, one of the best websites on developments in our continent, wrote an interesting article titled ‘How bourses bring democracy to China’. “The total capitalisation of China’s stock market now exceeds its GDP. The number of Chinese citizens involved in stock trading could be more than the 73 million Communist Party members. In the past 10 years, the party has attracted more and more ‘red capitalists’ as members. By participating in activities on the stock market, the masses are having a baptism in democracy. The stock market’s nature (excluding those illegal activities) is essentially democratic, with every investor treated equally. Everyone holds his own views and makes his own decisions. Indeed, the “training” in democracy that the massive number of Chinese stock investors are receiving could enhance the country’s possible democratisation in future.”
The third source of pressure to democratise is from the growing protests and revolts by the poor. Although abject poverty has been substantially removed, wealth distribution in today’s China is one of most iniquitous in the world. The urban-rural divide is widening rapidly. The plight of farmers is worsening. Hu Jintao and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao have recognised the urgent need to address these problems. One of the major themes in Hu’s report to the CPC Congress was the concept of “harmonious society” and “scientific development”, which is a codeword for balanced and all-sided development of society, as against the hitherto exclusive focus on economic growth. The government has been pouring a lot of money for anti-poverty schemes. But, for every ten yuans spent, less than five reach the poor whereas the rest is pocketed by government officials, all of whom are CPC members. Hence, even effective implementation of government schemes requires stern anti-corruption measures. But these measures cannot work in the absence of greater democracy, transparency and accountability at local levels.
Thus, powerful undercurrents of political change are building up in China. The question about democracy’s arrival is not if, but when. Hu has promised greater inner-party democracy. But one of CPC’s greatest achievements in the coming years would be if — and it is a big if — it could end its own one-party rule in a peaceful and non-chaotic manner.
Chinese society has changed beyond recognition since Mao Zedong founded the Communist regime in 1949. One of the poorest nations in the world then is emerging as a superpower now. There are, no doubt, many positive features of this transformation, which is entirely due to Deng Xiaoping’s farsighted economic reforms since 1978. China’s GDP rise is triple the global average for 29 straight years. It can also take legitimate pride in having achieved the biggest poverty alleviation task in human history: the number of people living in abject poverty has come down dramatically.
However, in the wake of these achievements have come some gargantuan problems, which will severely test the capacity of CPC’s present and future leaders to retain their monopoly power as an unelected oligarchy. The greatest challenge before the party is corruption within its own ranks.
China’s massive middle-class population, which is better educated and more exposed to the world than ever before, finds the lack of freedom to ask questions and debate freely stifling. Unlike in India, there is no RTI for citizens to seek official information. Sometimes, they use the Internet to vent their frustration. (China has about 18 crore Internet users, as against 6 crore in India). But Beijing’s clampdown on blogs and chats, especially those involving political discussion, is very harsh.
Recently, an anonymous person named Little Fire Dragon, belonging to the ‘Strong China Forum’, published a post addressed to Hu Jintao, China’s president and CPC general secretary: “Mr. General Secretary, please come to the Strong China Forum to share your thoughts with netizens ... I have a question for you, though I am not sure I will have the honour to be answered. It is about the relationship between the Chinese people and the Chinese Communist Party. Water can run without fish, but fish cannot swim without water; water is the Chinese people, and fish is the Communist Party. So when there is a conflict of interest between the people and the party, the people’s interest should override the party’s interests, right?”
The pressure for democracy is coming from the rich in a different way. Last week, Wu Zhong, the China editor of Asia Times Online, one of the best websites on developments in our continent, wrote an interesting article titled ‘How bourses bring democracy to China’. “The total capitalisation of China’s stock market now exceeds its GDP. The number of Chinese citizens involved in stock trading could be more than the 73 million Communist Party members. In the past 10 years, the party has attracted more and more ‘red capitalists’ as members. By participating in activities on the stock market, the masses are having a baptism in democracy. The stock market’s nature (excluding those illegal activities) is essentially democratic, with every investor treated equally. Everyone holds his own views and makes his own decisions. Indeed, the “training” in democracy that the massive number of Chinese stock investors are receiving could enhance the country’s possible democratisation in future.”
The third source of pressure to democratise is from the growing protests and revolts by the poor. Although abject poverty has been substantially removed, wealth distribution in today’s China is one of most iniquitous in the world. The urban-rural divide is widening rapidly. The plight of farmers is worsening. Hu Jintao and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao have recognised the urgent need to address these problems. One of the major themes in Hu’s report to the CPC Congress was the concept of “harmonious society” and “scientific development”, which is a codeword for balanced and all-sided development of society, as against the hitherto exclusive focus on economic growth. The government has been pouring a lot of money for anti-poverty schemes. But, for every ten yuans spent, less than five reach the poor whereas the rest is pocketed by government officials, all of whom are CPC members. Hence, even effective implementation of government schemes requires stern anti-corruption measures. But these measures cannot work in the absence of greater democracy, transparency and accountability at local levels.
Thus, powerful undercurrents of political change are building up in China. The question about democracy’s arrival is not if, but when. Hu has promised greater inner-party democracy. But one of CPC’s greatest achievements in the coming years would be if — and it is a big if — it could end its own one-party rule in a peaceful and non-chaotic manner.