Editor’s Note: This article, written by Global Times journalist Peijuan Ji based on an interview with some China scholars in Singapore , examines the opinions of political science specialists from Singapore, a tiny but independent republic ruled by an autocratic government that has achieved remarkable economic success since it declared independence in 1965. In light of recent protests in the Middle East, many are wondering if China is the next in line for a “Jasmine Revolution.” The article details why these specialists think that’s unlikely.
Photo: Xinhua Agency
Professor ZHENG Yongnian (郑永年 教授, Head of the National University of Singapore’s East Asian Institute):
In today’s world, every country faces challenges. Social unrest is more likely to occur in some Western countries than in China. China will not follow in the footsteps of the Arab world, mainly because of structural differences. First, the governments of some Middle Eastern countries had problems with government rotation. Leaders could rule for decades. China, on the other hand, has already established predictable patterns for replacing leaders upon completion of their terms of office. This move towards a leadership replacement system is an important part of democracy. Secondly, some of the Middle Eastern countries had exclusive political circles whereas China’s government has gradually become a relatively inclusive structure which emphasizes open development.
The West emphasizes multi-party systems. China emphasizes democracy within the party. The leadership of an open one-party system can also build up a country, as demonstrated by Singapore. In many countries currently implementing Western-style democracy, opposition parties do nothing but oppose, giving rise to a multitude of problems. Systems under the leadership of a single, open party are different: they’re effective. One-party systems avoid fierce political struggles and can focus on effectively building up the society and economy.
Professor WANG Gungwu (王赓武 教授, Chairman of the National University of Singapore’s East Asian Institute’s Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy):
The Middle East is an Arabic society, and its religious traditions make it radically different from Chinese civilization. Their cultural traditions have had a big impact on the structure of their society. In many Middle Eastern countries, power has been too centralized leading some rulers to use their power for personal profit and creating serious social issues. This problem doesn’t exist in China. China is developing in an orderly way, based on principles of gradual reform. Revolution represents a kind of extreme that China has experienced in the past. The Chinese people won’t choose to take that road again. What’s important now is avoiding another extreme: the blind pursuit of material wealth.
HUANG JING - 黄靖, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy:
Countries in the Middle East have had problems for several reasons. First of all, people there are leading abnormally hard lives. Second, the unemployment rate has remained high for some time, especially for well-educated young people (high unemployment rates for university graduates usually lead to problems). Third, these countries have experienced long periods of economic depression. Fourth, there is an utter collapse of social structure, creating problems such as embezzlement and corruption, inept governments, and a lack of transparency in government policy formation.
No market for turmoil in China
HUANG JING:
The practical basis of the Chinese stability theory lies in the following: first, the Chinese economy can keep on growing rapidly for the foreseeable future, meaning that most people can hope to share in the benefits of Chinese economic development. Therefore, two essential conditions for social unrest, namely hopelessness and feelings of “nothing to lose,” are not present in China. In addition, one of the benefits resulting from policies of reform and opening up and the move towards a market economy has been the appearance of more diversified political interests in Chinese society. This makes it difficult to establish unified interest groups over large areas, to quickly come up with influential political platforms with national appeal, to organize politically minded interest groups or become politically influential leaders without party support.
The root of this theory is: As a result of modern development, our most important economic resource has changed from land to knowledge and technical skills. The middle class, through their knowledge and technical know-how, is becoming more and more central to society. Though their financial independence as well as their social and economic power lead them to make demands for participation in government, they have no desire to overthrow party leaders. They have no desire to bring about social unrest, so instead call for an end to officials’ abuse of power and corruption. The middle class are fundamentally different from the proletariat: they are rational and pragmatic. They don’t want to throw everything out with a grand revolution. Instead, they can accept reasonable compromises.
All countries have two types of political identity: ethnic identity and political identity. Chinese people have always had a strong sense of ethnic identity, and the success of China’s reform and opening up policies have made that sense of ethnic identity even stronger. At the moment, there are essentially no outside challenges to China. All threats of unrest lie within China’s borders. Thus, there is a desperate need to increase the people’s feelings of identity with the national political system if China wants to guarantee long-term political peace and stability.
Professor ZHENG Yongnian:
Instability’s root causes differ case by case, and trying to find a universal explanation is an exercise in futility. Every political power must search for the source of their problems based on criteria specific to those problems. For example, the fact that inflation has been a serious problem this year, and has the potential to impact national stability has led the National People’s Congress and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Congress to stress the need to control inflation. Leaders are responsible for finding these “seeds of discontent” and for finding the means to eradicate them.
In conclusion, there are three indicators of a society capable of long-term stability: economic growth, a fair society, and a large middle class. As China works toward its goal of long-term stability, it needs to learn from the experiences of unstable societies.
Professor WANG Gungwu:
We live in a global era, and developments in every corner of the globe will have an impact on China. China’s stability is actually in a constant state of change. In modern times, when we reflect on the status of a nation, past experiences can warn us what to watch out for, but we cannot depend solely on old strategies to solve new problems. The development of each and every foreign country has the potential to influence China’s domestic development. As a whole, China appears very stable. We cannot allow a few small problems to throw the country off track, especially problems of inequality. We must strive to be sensitive to public sentiment, and quickly resolve any problems that arise.
Source: The Global Times
Related links
The Lessons China Should Draw from the War with Libya
What Does China Lack to be a Real Superpower? A Chinese Perspective
China’s Rise in Power: World Public Opinion Survey Reveals Four General Views
Warning：The use of any news and articles published on eChinacities.com without written permission from eChinacities.com constitutes copyright infringement, and legal action can be taken.
Keywords: is political unrest possible China China’s stability China unrest Political unrest China
All comments are subject to moderation by eChinacities.com staff. Because we wish to encourage healthy and productive dialogue we ask that all comments remain polite, free of profanity or name calling, and relevant to the original post and subsequent discussion. Comments will not be deleted because of the viewpoints they express, only if the mode of expression itself is inappropriate.
Please login to add a comment. Click here to login immediately.
Let's remove the emotions from these arguments and try to be objective friends. Everyone feels a little obligation to be patriotic and defend their own country. Not me.
I will honestly say that under George Bush I was ashamed to be an American. Under Jimmy Carter and Clinton I felt quite proud to be American. But even under the best leadership (in any country) there is no perfect country and people will never be fully content with any status quo. Both America and China has too much corruption, too much pollution, and to big pof an income gap between common people and the elite. Both countries have manipulated medias, and frankly elections don't make too much difference when the Supreme Court gets to appoint a president! China is a safer country (less crime) but has a high level of contempt for the government with good reason... Less than 2% of China's population can afford to buy a home in Beijing and less than 8% can afford to buy a car. People are still hired and promoted based on Guanxi and not merits, and bribery reigns supreme in the business world.
America is still the biggest meddler and self-appointed policeman of the world that dictates too much and does not do themselves what they preach to others (i.e. human rights, nuclear policy, etc). American people have big hearts, but lost the courage to control our arrogant leaders who invade foreign lands and kill innocent people based on false pretenses and out right lies (Iraq) But we do not block blog sites and censor the internet in America - our last vestige of genuine freedom.
Overall there is no perfect country but having lived, worked, and suffered in both America and China I can say that China is moving in the right direction (perhaps too slowly), and America is moving in the wrong direction (perhaps too quickly) The American dream was lost for millions during the Bush years and China appears to have found it. Hopefully, million of Chinese will embrace real freedom and not make the same mistakes as we did in America.
May 21, 2011 01:17 Report Abuse
I see alot of validity in most of these comments, but I fear that the one main point of why civil unrest is impossible in China or any economically stable country, has not been pointed out. Economic stability cannot be judged by recessions, it can only be judged by what people want and need. Unfortunately our wants now far exceed our needs and they're all easily accessible. So much so that people will generally complain verbally but will rarely go any further. Chinese may not like they're government but they like their carefree lifesyles with QQ, iphones, and so on. The simple fact that we enjoy our capitalism so much that we often complain from the couch instead of confronting the problem. This in my opinion is how Democracy keeps their citizens docile. You may call China a communist country but what I see is far more capitalism than a communist society.
May 19, 2011 22:16 Report Abuse
To say that political unrest in China is impossible is at best Naive and worst plain stupid. Political unrest is ongoing and has been for several years. It has not reached any kind of national united force just yet but that's not to say it will never happen.
The fact that protests have, and are still being staged means that the seeds of discontentment have been sown and are just waiting to be germinated.
China's most pressing problem is the huge amount of educated graduates who have lost the careers race and with nothing else left to do will become too 'free thinking' and creative'. In short political unrest is a firm reality and political upheaval is a very real possibility.
May 12, 2011 07:23 Report Abuse
Dear dear Neutralizer
Again you want to pick a fight when there really is not one to be had. The article stated that political unrest is impossible, which I and you yourself both refuted = agreement.
If you read my comment with some concentration then you might discover that I said China's greatest threat was its educated idle population...did I say this was a good thing? What do you think 'threat' means?
I think China is doing a great job at keeping the lid on the pot but the ethos behind a free market economy and globalisation will bring years of unknown and unacknowledged gripes to the boil...
Even though you are Chinese and clearly pro government surely you can shed the wool from your unobservant eyes and realise that the Global Times and quotes stated here are really quite laughable.
Me and my friend actually started a scrap book of Global Times articles that warranted particular ridicule. Horrendous English coupled with fanciful tales passed of as 'true' factual' data sure made for entertaining reading.
My favourite was an article back in late 2010 which held that the reason there are so many dead fish in the liangma he （亮吗河）is that the water is such a gushing torrent that the poor fish get swept away and suffocate from lack of oxygen. This was supposedly written by an irrigation and urban planning expert employed by the city council.
Of course all those living in Beijing know that even though it is called a river it is a canal and hence does not flow. and even if it did the theory is just preposterous.
Oh how I wish I was a CCP propagandist I could have so much fun
May 16, 2011 02:54 Report Abuse
Well political unrest can be seen in every country, the topic is about following suit with the middle east. And seeing how my post yesterday has somehow mysteriously disappeared, I'll type it again. First, the materialistic nature of the Chinese and the easily accessible wants and needs will keep the majority of the Chinese docile, very much like Western Countries. The gap between the rich and poor is large and growing but I've been around these villages, poor they maybe but they a filled with materialistic positions that are not actually needed but low cost and accessability make it easy for them splurge. Not only that, I speak with the locals, poor maybe but unhappy certainly not. They actually think that real hard work isn't worth the money that it would bring in, drink their tea and tell me I should relax more and worry less about money. And please don't get me started on their education system, a Chinese Degree is as accreditied as a Diploma Mill Degree. I love Chinese people and their culture but the education is horrid at the very least. The new policy, leave no children behind means no child or student will fail even if they don't accomplish anything in school. Civil unrest will not happen in China, there are a few small get togethers but for the most part, the majority are lazy. The well educated Chinese are generally educated outside of China and are the ones who are trying hard to make a difference in China. I have been in China for many years and have seen alot of changes positive and negative. But to even mention the lifestyle and civil unrest stemming from this fact in comparison with the Middle East is stupidity at it's best.
May 20, 2011 23:42 Report Abuse
FYI your an idiot. To even respond to such critisim would put me on the same level as you. So I'll stick with your an idiot. I live in TEDA Tianjin, 3rd avenue stop on by and we can speak about your ideas in person, but your an idiot.
May 24, 2011 21:56 Report Abuse
Yes, I agree the West puts out more than its share of BS propaganda too (Especially when they wrongfully invade foreign countries under false pretenses fabricated by the U.S. government), but all news these days seem to have become tainted in both China and America. Everyone has an agenda. But getting back to real facts... Despite the current wealth of the Chinese government, the average Chinese citizen still earns less than $5,000 a year, cannot afford to buy a home, nor a car, and less than 5% of college graduates can find a job in their major, and now food prices are starting to soar. These realities will breed discontent and contempt for the wealthy people of China. Even if the wealthy earned their wealth, most are still perceived as corrupt. Sometimes the perception is stronger than reality and sometimes we just have to admit that there is just too much corruption in China (And America as well. I am not proud to be American, but was born one. I will not defend corruption in any country)
May 13, 2011 01:49 Report Abuse
Neutralizer!
Why don't you defend your country on its own merit? To defend your country by saying that another is worse is soooo dirty and just a way to justify wrong doings. Go to an American forum if that's what you want to talk about. This here is for China.
and fyi the reason you think the American political system is much worse is that it is more transparent and open than the Chinese one. Nobody, the general Chinese population least of all, knows much about the Chinese governmental apparatus because it is shrouded in secrecy.
May 16, 2011 03:03 Report Abuse
Sunilsah said I was someone's mouthpiece... I'm not a media organization.
But anyhow, yes, all media organizations do have agendas of some kind or another. But there (1) certainly degrees of honesty and spin. A North Korean newspaper will likely be far less honest than, say, The New York Times; and (2) when there is only one voice being heard, and there are no competing agendas, then that agenda is far more pernicious and powerful.
May 07, 2011 06:16 Report Abuse
Let's not forget that the Global Times is a moutpiece for the PRC government. That being said, the professors quoted in the article do raise some interesting and valid points.
I think (a) prolonuged economic growth; (b) rotation of leadership; and (c) the ability to join the party and move up in its ranks distinguish the Chinese situation for those middle eastern countries where there are turmoil.
On the other hand, by linking its legitmacy so closely with economic growth, one wonders.... What will happen when the first economic blips or crisis appears (and make no mistake, no nation has ever proven crisis proof)?
Secondly, how much corruption and indifference from the elite will an increasingly educated and wealthy middle class be willing to tolerate? And what of the growing gap between rich and poor, or eastern and western China? Those are questions which, unsurprisingly, the article doesn't address in any meaningful way.
So, this article would be better titled "why political rest currently occuring the Arab world is extremely unlikely to affect China." For the record, were I a middle class Chinese, I might support the Party as well right now. But saying "political unrest is impossible in China" and ignoring these large fundamental problems suggests a lack of intellectual thoroughness or - far more likely - the desire to promote a none-too-subtle propaganda agenda.
May 04, 2011 09:47 Report Abuse
How very evil of you, sunilsah. Also, completely unconstructive.
I don't see this Global Times piece being anything more than a one-sided, self-reassuring enumeration of 'China won't be affected by Middle East' 'professional' comments, and while some do bring out interesting points, it would have been nice, even only for argument's sake, of putting up at least one contrasting opinion.
May 04, 2011 21:11 Report Abuse
Now, now. Sunilsah makes 50 mao for each post on this forum. Let's not deprive a man of his livelihood.
May 05, 2011 05:04 Report Abuse
I do think professors and teachers can be "out of touch" sometimes with the day to day reality. But I don't trust the opinions more (nor do I see how their lives are somehow more "real") of a factory worker, the lawyer in the corner office, an account, the captain of a cruise ship, a farmer, etc... They have their own biases and myopia brought on by individual circumstances as well. At least a professor is required to be well-read.
But anyway, I do agree that the internet is playing an important role in publicising cases of corruption and indifference. It is a trend that is likely to continue. Hopefully, this will help lead to increasing transparency and the rule of law (to be clear: rule of law = it doesn't matter who your father is or what your position is... if you break the law, you should be punished).
I don't think there is any chance of China "going communist" again. Certainly to do so would cause economic disruption on an unprecedented scale.. and likely political unrest too. Increasing welfare state services such as healthcare, welfare etc might alleviate some of the disparities and potential unrest caused by the wealth imbalance, but that would still by no means protect China from economic crises, recessions, etc.
Perhaps the Communist Party can continue to deliver these things through continued economic growth and gradual reform. But it may not be able to either (and thus poltical unrest isn't "impossible" as per my initial point). However, nobody is suggesting that the solution in that case would be to blindly follow western models; it would have to be a solution created by and for the Chinese, drawing upon (or rejecting) foreign models where necessary.
In any case, I appreciate your spirit of honest debate and inquiry.
May 07, 2011 06:32 Report Abuse
Sign up with
Google
(
(