In 1989, hundreds of pro-democracy protesters were killed by Chinese government troops in Beijing. Despite these murders, China had been moving toward capitalism, if not democracy, since the death of Mao Zedong in 1976. Mao, subsequently, is restless in his grave.How do we approach these conflicting perceptions of China from the other side of the globe? I have some suggestions:
China's government can best be described as promoting market-oriented economy with a focus on private property while continuing to implement one-party authoritarian rule -- a relic of Mao's China. After all, how often does a ruling force that already has authoritarian power go about giving it back to the people on it's own volition?
Before the events of Tienanmen Square,China was already doing a good job of this. In the early 1980s, Deng Ziaopang's administration recognized the importance of foreign capital and began to open up Special Economic Zones, in which laws setting price and otherwise interfering with the capital process were relaxed to encourage foreign investment. By now, the situation in China has become the opposite: The places where such laws haven't been repealed are few and far between.
What's most interesting about Modern China is the rise of a genuinely middle class -- a group of people who have enough money, and a sustainable way of making enough money, to have control over their own destinies -- provided that the government doesn't hamper that ability. It seems as often as an angel gets it's wings in Frank Capra's It's a Wonderful Life, a Chinese citizen becomes a millionaire.
With that kind of money comes a desire for individual rights, and so like in the 13 colonies and in the Third Estate of France, there is increasing pressure on Hu Jintao and his administration to ease off the social mandates. Unlike the liberation movements of the 18th century, though, everyone in China is more or less on the same page -- there is a strong national identity which knows it will be the world's foremost economy by 2040, and so outright conflict between the people and the state is largely undesireable.
What China stands to lose through capitalism and subsequent democracy is the ability to gain public opinion for and invest in Nationalistic goals, such as moving to annex North Korea should it collapse this decade, or putting an astronaut on the Moon within the next ten years -- both goals I'm sure the Republic could follow through with today, but perhaps not tomorrow.
I think China represents a vehicle into the next phase of human development. The imperative for progression is there in the form of an impossibly large population and a sudden influx of, well, more cash than there is in the United States (actually, they own a large portion of our debt). The Nationalist side of China may be scary to the West, but we should celebrate the Western ideas of capital and liberty that are taking off on their own in that country. China has been slow to change, but look how far they've come.
As George Bailey would have said, Attaboy, China.
[Some facts about China, taken from Wikipedia:
2010 Population estimate: 1,338,612,968
GDP: $8.767 trillion, per capita $6,549
Some facts about the U.S., take from Wikipedia:
2010 Population estimate: 308,991,000,
GDP: $14.441 trillion, per capita $47,440]
China may have a growing middle class, but how large is it (percentage-wise) in comparison to their total population? If it is significant (more than 1% would be significant, considering the massive population of that nation) then I would have to agree with you on all points.
ReplyDeleteMy fear is that the current decline of the United States will make it easy for China to slow or even reverse its trend toward social and economic liberty; no competition from a strong free society in the west means less pressure from it's own citizens due to lack of example.
If you don't know there's something better out there you tend to be content with what you have.
Interesting article.