One
of the cruel ironies of today's world is that India which is applauded as
the world's largest democracy has the largest number of poor and destitute
in any country, and China which has achieved, a steady rise in people's
living standards and has also acquired the status of a world power has
failed to develop democratic institutions and practices. It is also
interesting to note that despite the absence of liberal democratic freedoms
the West has a deep fascination with China which is reflected not only in
the tourist inflow to China but also in the flow of foreign investment and
government good will. Operation of democratic institutions such as free and
fair elections, existence of competitive politics and dissent do not
particularly attract either Western tourists or Western capital to India. On
the contrary the geopolitics of South Asia has been governed by the US and
other Western countries as compared by India's pre-eminent position and
therefore they have followed by an large a policy of containment of India
vis- a-vis its neighbours. The functioning democratic system of India has
had little effect on their policy.
The
experience of India and China have put the theory of democracy to a severe
test. Two old questions need to be asked again about democracy. In addition,
two new questions have to be raised.
Do
formal political institutions and practices constitute democracy or does it
involve appropriate socio-economic conditions which enable citizens to
exercise their political rights. On this issue India scores poorly with
nearly forty per cent of its people below what is statistically called a
"poverty line". China has asserted that it is engaged in creating
better living conditions for its people after overthrowing semicolonial and
semifeudal domination. Today, however, this dichotomy between economic and
political conditions of democracy is seriously questioned. Their mutual
dependence is emphasised. Therefore both India and China have to achieve yet
more conditions of democracy.
The
other familiar question relates to equality and freedom. Western liberal
democratic theory asserts the priority of freedom over equality even though
the radical stream in liberalism stresses that gross inequalities are
detrimental to the exercise of freedom. On this criterion pre-Reform China
scored higher marks than India. Social inequalities were reduced in China to
a very large extent with the abolition of landlordism and formation of
cooperatives and Communes and also takeover of the bourgeoisie owned
industries by the state. The wage system was directed towards promoting
equality and limiting income differences within the six point grade system.
In India too there were a number of measures taken in the early decades
following independence to curb monopoly in industry, abolish zamindari
system and carry out land reforms. In both the countries the stress on
equality declined in the 1980s and almost disappeared in the 1990s. In the
past decade or so equality has been a low priority in both China and India.
The "equalitarianism", "theory of eating from the iron rice
bowl" and such ideas of the Cultural Revolution were severely
criticised by the Chinese reformers as being obstacles to the development of
the productive forces. The perspective of the present day leadership in
China is to "allow some people to get rich first" so that the
general level of growth is raised steadily. In India the introduction of the
Structural Adjustment Programme promoted the ideology of profit and the
egalitarian programmes of social transformation took the back seat.
The
two new issues arise from the great democratic upsurges of the past few
decades, namely the social movements such as the women's movements, the
environmental movement, the autonomy movement and the human rights
movements. One question posed by them is to concretise freedom as freedom
from multiple forms of domination so that freedom to realise the
potentialities of the human being is advanced. Patriarchal domination
continues substantially in all the countries of the world as evident from
the deliberations at the Fourth World Congress of Women in Beijing and as
documents in the 1995 Human Development Report. China and India have
only marginal difference among them. As to ethnic self-determination there
has not yet been a scientific measurement. But both the countries have
fairly centralised regimes and both have regions manifesting popular
discontent. The caste hierarchy and disabilities in India are targets of
public attention and social action. There is no comparable social problem in
China though new forms of social stratification have emerged in the recent
years.
The
other issue is response of the modern state to these expanding democratic
demands. All ruling elites would like to have an appearance of being popular
and responsive to the demands of the various unprivileged groups. And they
engage in innumerable measures of legitimation to create a climate of
acceptability among the people. Thus the modern state is coercive,
responsive and legitimative at the same time. For this purpose it has
developed sophisticated systems of management of society, complex methods of
propaganda and innovative techniques of manipulation. Today the technology
of repression and the vast networks of communication allow the formal
democracy to continue while the citizens remain helpless. There is a new
authoritarianism in the modern societies including those of the West which
make the basic notion of democracy nominal. The tragedy is that while
failing on the scores of either political or socio-economic freedom both
India and China have fast accumulated the resources of modern
authoritarianism. These tools include modern capitalist preoccupation with
consumerism promoted through advertisement. Sensate entertainment that
commefcialises culture in the global scale on the one hand and building up
security forces of all kinds to suppress democratic movements on the other.
It is this process which is strengthened by the forces of capitalist
globalisation. The alliance of Western capitalists and the native elites has
intervened to assimilate the rest of the third world into the Western model
of capitalist political economy. The alternatives which the socialist
revolutions and the anticolonial struggles had presented have been defeated
in course of the battles of the recent decades. The socialist experiments
adopted the same economic goals as capitalist systems and failed to promote
socialist democracy. The anticolonial struggles such as India's which
centred on the comprehensive concept of Swaraj failed to
institutionalise after Independence.
The
result was the crisis of the state and crisis of development in the third
world to tackle which the elites leaned on the West. Thus today on the one
hand there is an expanding demand for multidimensional freedom while on the
other hand there is a an advancing tide of global hegemony by the capitalist
West. The experiments in India and China are caught in this historical
conjuncture.
With
these comparative notes let us look at the democratic prospects in China.
The Communist Party of
China's Perspective on Democracy
Has
democracy receded as a goal in contemporary China? In recent years the
proclamations of the Chinese leadership have articulated their policy
perspective in terms of "reform, development and stability" .The
pressures from the Western countries on the human rights issue have had only
marginal effects on the course of political development of China. The
Chinese communist leaders have frequently asserted that stability in
politics and society is an essential condition for China's economic growth
and they would not take any risk that might disrupt that process.
Yet
development of "socialist democracy" has been reiterated in every
session of the National People's Congress (N PC) and also the Congress of
the Communist Party of China (CPC) as an important goal. And above all. the
constitution of China declares that the goal is to "turn China into a
socialist country with a high level of culture and democracy". This
statement constantly accompanies the well known objectives such as
"four modernisations", and turning China into a "medium level
developed country" by the middle of the twenty-first century. In other
words, there is a continuing commitment to promoting democracy in China, but
at the same time there is an unambiguous refusal to hasten up the process of
competitive politics or expression of serious dissent in China.
To
understand this contradiction let us try to ascertain to what extent do
contemporary Chinese leaders share the 111 Western notion of democracy.
Having
been a product of the May Fourth Movement of 1919, the Communist Party of
China was bound to uphold the ideal of democracy. After all the favourite
slogans of the Chinese intellectuals then were pop promoting "Mr.
Science" and "Mr. Democracy." At the same time the Bolshevik
Revolution had provided the main inspiration for the foundation of the
Communist Party of China and thus had prompted it to challenge the
civilizations. China's elite was also looking for its own ways of building a
new society. It is this back drop in which we have to understand Mao
Zedong's theory of New Democracy. Distinguished from bourgeois democracy of
the West and socialist democracy of the USSR it was an anti-feudal,
anti-colonial revolution based on the united front of four classes- workers,
peasants, petite bourgeoisie and national bourgeoisie who constitute
"the people" (Renmin). This created a system of people's
democracy. It was both a class concept and a mass concept covering some
ninety per cent of the population of a society the rest being the enemies.
The
nature of the Chinese revolution and the operation of the People's
Democratic Dictatorship after 1949 had a common organisational principle,
namely, "mass line". It meant "from the masses, to the
masses". The revolutionary strategy of the Communist Party of China
during the 1937-1949 period relied heavily on the support of the masses and
the same approach was sought to be implemented during the period of rural
transformation, from land reforms to the People's Communes. People's
involvement and active participation were essential aspects of Communist
Party of China's political line under Mao Zedong's leadership.
The
Cultural Revolution was conceived by Mao as a great experiment in socialist
democracy. Masses were called upon to undertake ideological debates and
orient all activities towards socialist goals of building an alternative
participatory moral- political order serving the interest of the working
people. It challenged not only the bourgeois notions of liberal democracy
but also the elitist centralised system that had evolved in the Soviet Union
since the days of Stalin.
It
is the practice of the Cultural Revolution which invited a strong reaction
from Deng Xioaping. The mass upsurge during the Cultural Revolution
degenerated into conditions of anarchy, large scale and arbitrary
persecution and institutional collapse. The Third Plenum of the Eleventh
Central Committee of the Communist Party of China in December 1978 decided
to "change the focus from class struggle to economic
construction". Since then the approach to democracy in the Communist
Party of China under Deng's leadership has been centred on this. The
"one focus" and "two points" framework which governs the
policies of the reform period in China has clearly affirmed this line of
thinking. The perspective entails that the two points namely (1)
"Reform and Open Door" and (2) Four Cardinal Principles have to
promote economic development. (The Four Principles relate to adherence to
socialist road, leadership of the Communist Party of China, People's
Democratic Dictatorship and Marxism Leninism Maozedong Thought).
The
contemporary approach of the Communist Party of China to democracy has three
components. Firstly, the Chinese state has to continue to be a people's
democratic dictatorship where freedoms are allowed within the stipulated
terms defined by the Communist Party. Secondly, the basic economic and
social conditions of life of citizens must continue to improve as material
foundations of democracy. Third, institutions, law and processes of
accountability must gradually evolve to enhance the quality of democracy.
This perspective carries the class perspective into a new framework of
promoting economic development. It has an element of power sharing
vertically as well as horizontally especially accommodating the aspirations
of minority nationalities.
This
perspective is reflected in political practice in various spheres in
present-day China. The Tiana'nmen Square demonstrations were crushed by the
Chinese armed forces to reestablish the point that the dictatorship had to
be maintained to ensure stability. Deng Xiaoping himself called it "a
counter revolutionary rebellion". Those who wanted political freedoms
in China along Western lines were condemned as proponents of "bourgeois
liberalisation". Demonstrations and oppositional activities continue to
be banned in China thus inviting strong criticisms from the western liberals
that China was yet to develop "civil society".
In the same way the
Chinese leaders claim that their concept of human rights includes right to
basic needs of life, right to development and right to national sovereignty
which are as important as right to freedom of expression and other civil
liberties. This is how "stability" is regarded as a necessary
condition for economic development. At the same time the Communist Party of
China leadership has stressed the importance of building institutions and
operating them with regularity and according to procedures. They wish to
avoid by all means the anarchy and factional strife of the Cultural
Revolution.
Thus the present
approach to democracy in China is grounded in the historical experience of
last hundred and fifty years since the Opium War. China wanted to get out of
the humiliation suffered under colonial domination, so achievement of
national honour in the world became a major political objective of all the
leaders in twentieth century. All of them wanted to end poverty and
destitution in China and build a prosperous economy comparable to the
advanced western nations. They also wished to realise "People's
rights" or curb feudal and other forms of socio-political domination
within the country. Nationalism, Development and Democracy were the three
themes which run through the ideas and politics of Sun Yat-sen and his Three
People's Principles, Mao Zedong and his New Democracy and Deng Xiaoping and
his Theory of building socialism with Chinese characteristics.
Thus
democracy is not an isolated principle or ideal. As a system of self
determination it is part of an integrated perspective involving values of
nationalism, social justice and people's welfare. Democracy is not a mere
procedural arrangement of elections and judicial process. It is at the same
time connected with socio-economic rights of people. It is this approach
which has unfolded concretely in recent policy measures in China.
While
the Chinese communist leaders reject the western approach to democracy they
are sensitive to certain global trends which uphold democratic values and
norms. They cannot ignore the fact that this century has been a century of
great democratic upsurge. The anti-colonial struggles, social revolutions
and new social movements together have expanded human consciousness and
urges for freedom. All countries including the liberal democratic and
industrialized countries of the West are restructuring their systems to
promote women's rights, rights of minorities, indigenous people, cultural
identities, socially oppressed groups such as dalits in India. Besides,
institutional guarantees of justice, participatory decision-making and
accountability are demanded all over the world. Whereas the western powers
would claim to assimilate all these demands within the capitalist framework
other voices seek new kinds of democratic transformation that facilitate
multidimensional liberation in all parts of the world.
As a part of this process the Chinese leaders have taken a number of steps to promote democratic changes in China during the reform period.
Democratic Practices
The
constitution of People's Republic of China passed in 1975 was replaced by a
new one in 1982 which bore greater resemblance with that of 1954. It dropped
some of the Cultural Revolution elements and spelt out in detail the
composition and powers of national, provincial and local institutions. Since
1978 the National People's Congress has been elected every five years and
met annually to discuss the national budget and major policy matters. The
Standing Committee of the National Peoples Congress meets almost every month
to formulate laws and regulations. During the last fifteen years many laws
have been made covering social, economic and administrative matters
including foreign trade, taxation and criminal procedure which were left to
discretions of Communist Party of China units earlier. Thus institutional
functioning has improved considerably in China during the reform period.
Important
decisions including appointment of Premier have been put to vote and that Li
Peng's reelection as Premier in 1993 was not supported by more than one
third of the National People's Congress Deputies, was also part of the
published proceedings. Upto the County level the number of candidates has
been more than the number of posts thus having an element of choice before
the electors. At the Xiang (Township) and Gun (Village) levels
there is a three dimensional division of power between Party, the
Administration and enterprise management.
The
role and status of the non-communist parties has acquired greater
significance. The Chinese Peoples Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC)
National Committee discusses all important policy drafts and gives serious
suggestions. There are many appointments upto the Minister and Vice-Governor
level from among non-communists. The mobilisation of patriotic forces of
China and among overseas Chinese to build a prosperous motherland on a
"united front" basis has facilitated this process. The
non-communist forces do not treat this "united front" as a
communist tactic but as a serious endeavour to build a prosperous China
where they also make major gains for themselves.
The Communist Party of China functioning itself has changed its organisational mode. Opponents of Deng's line are removed from office, but not prosecuted as was the case in the earlier years or harassed by political campaigns as during the Cultural Revolution. There is much greater inner-party democracy in the Communist Party of China Politbureau and Central Committee at present leading to many compromise formulations involving Chen Yun (till his death) and Deng. Though Deng has ensured that proponents of his line alone are lined up in the Communist Party of China, People's Liberation Army and the government to succeed him.
The Prospects
The
present-day theoretical framework in China centres around the concept of
"socialist market economy" and "building socialism with
Chinese characteristics" which were articulated in the fourteenth
Congress of Communist Party of China in 1992. One of the characteristics is
the role of the state in regulating the market for macro-economic
coordination and for achieving socialist objectives of reducing disparities.
In other words, firm political control by the Communist Party of China is a
basic feature of China's political economy designed by Deng Xiaoping. The
successor generation of leadership with Jiang Zemin "at the core",
as they put it, seems to be committed to this line of thinking.
Visitors
to China who interrogate Communist Party of China cadres on political issues
are often told that they have tried to have two guarantees so as to prevent
a Soviet type of collapse. One is the legitimacy of the reforms from which
practically every household in China has benefitted and which has raised
China's status in the world, making Chinese citizens proud of their
country's economic achievements. Second is the strict political control and
vigilance by the Communist Party of China which ensures stability and peace
and concentrate all efforts on economic construction. Such an approach was
evident from the assumption of top state, army and party -all in one person,
namely Jiang Zemin as Party General Secretary, President of Peoples Republic
of China and Chairman, Military Affairs Commission. At lower levels too -as
in the Wuxi rural area where I have done field work -in many cun's the
Director of a Village Committee and the Secretary of the Party Branch and
Manager of the Industrial Company was the same person. This was the reversal
of a trend of differentiation of the party and the government from
enterprise management which had been operative in the 1980s.
This
combination of market economy with political authoritarianism is likely to
continue for the foreseeable future in China because of three reasons, two
domestic and one external. The two domestic reasons are: First, the policies
are popular in1he country for they are raising people's standard of living
everywhere. Second, a large measure of consensus exists among the Chinese
elites, the victims of the Cultural Revolution who are in pC1Ner and the
beneficiaries of reforms, the managers, technicians, entrepreneurs, foreign
returned experts. These are the forces who are in control in all spheres
including the government, the army and the party. The structure of interests
in contemporary China unites politics and economy so solidly that backed by
patriotism this elite has a relatively smooth sailing course. The external
impetus comes from the business corporations in the Western countries who
find it easier to deal with clearcut authorities in authoritarian regimes
rather than chaotic situations of conflict as in India. They find great
merit in the East Asian model of market economies led by authoritarian
regimes as in South Korea. In fact, China is developing close economic
relations with the ASEAN countries which is likely to reinforce the present
model in its own territory. Above all, the overseas Chinese whose investment
in China has been a major accelerator of China's growth have shown more
interest in China's economic development and rise as a major world power
rather than in her democratic transformation.
This
external factor has been unchanged despite the mobilisation of democratic
opinion by the exiled Chinese intellectuals after the Tian'anmen episode.
Their efforts to link up with dissidents in China and organise support
campaigns for human rights have failed to influence either business groups
or Western governments. Delinking of the annual renewal of Most Favoured
Nation status in trade relations with China by US President Clinton a couple
of years ago was an indication of this. The Chinese government makes
occasional gestures like post-conviction deportation of Harry Wu earlier.
But on the whole, China remains unmoved on its political line.
But
such a model has its inherent contradictions. Market economy is considered a
canon of liberal democracy in the age of capitalism. In China it may have
achieved economic growth but has caused serious social inequalities. If the
proportion of income disparity in a village like Hela in Wuxi was 1 : 10 in
1979, it was 1 : 10,000 in 1993 as per the data collected by me. In addition
to inter-household inequality the disparity between regions has grown
further. Coastal provinces such as Jiangsu and Guangdong are prospering very
fast while inland areas such as Shaanxi and Ningxia remain far behind even
though they too are developing steadily. The social differentiation among
classes is increasing both in rural and urban areas, between rich peasants
and poor peasants in the countryside and business persons, managers and
ordinary workers in the city. The problem of the unemployed, migrant workers
and the floating population is a serious source of social instability and
discontent in China.
Yet
another source of tension in the polity is the new milieu of competition in
profit-making. With autonomy available to enterprise managers they try all
possible methods to obtain business contracts within the country as well as
from foreign investors. This has led to corruption and criminalisation in
large scale. Ideological commitment having receded, the cadres are out to
fulfill economic targets in one way or the other. Since 1993 the Communist
Party of China has launched a massive campaign to curb corruption with
summary trials of corrupt officials and heavy punishments, in addition to
making apeals in the name of socialist morality. But still the trend remains
unabated.
The
culture of consumerism has emerged as a dominant trend in contemporary
China. The austerity and simplicity of the Mao era was given up as outdated
and an economic constraint on market development. So production and sale of
consumer goods was emphasised as a part of the new economic path. This
brought into China western goods and services, western life style and
cultural practices. The Special Economic Zones may have been a source of
much profit-earning for the PRC, but they were also the channels for the
introduction of corrupt practices including smuggling and prostitution. The
Communist Party of China has from time to time attacked such "cultural
decadence" and "spiritual pollution". But it has failed to
restrain the tidal wave of westernised consumerism. During the celebrations
of the birth centenary of Mao Zedong in 1993 this theme was discussed in
many fora. Still the leadership did not wish to stress this theme lest it
led to a "reemergence of a left cult".
It is this objective social situation which is bound to lead to political protest and challenge to the prevailing system. Some may do it in defence of the Chinese revolution and legacy of Mao Zedong. Some who are inspired by western liberal democracy may use all opportunities to demand greater political freedom. Yet others while accepting the need for reform in the old style socialist system may challenge the present trend of capitalist development under Communist Party leadership and seek fuller democracy under a humane and participatory socialist system. They may cherish a vision of socialist freedom which secures material, cultural and political conditions of freedom in the course of building socialism. But none of these forces has the strength that can shake up the present regime. With domestic achievements and external support the Deng Xiaoping path for China is going to continue well into the twenty-first century.
