Author: Raymond Ro
Disclosure: it is difficult to teach politics without getting political. In the classroom, I facilitate discussion and debate by playing devil’s advocate. Any political leanings herein are expressly my own.
Introduction
As background, I am Canadian and received my legal training in the U.S. (admitted to the State Bar of Wisconsin) and so I have cultivated a full appreciation of the elegant interworking of the American government system—though I must admit it is not without its flaws and inefficiencies. Nonetheless, I tip my hat off to the Founding Fathers of America and truly respect the U.S. Constitution and its Amendments. (While arguable, it is absolutely amazing that a document drafted centuries ago still stands up to scrutiny in today’s complex America and world.)
Thus, you could imagine my skepticism and fear-of-the-unknown when I decided to leave the U.S. and move to China. I did not know what I would make of living in a country with an authoritarian regime. (At the time of this writing, President Xi Jinping and the Communist Party are in the process of eliminating the Chinese constitutional two-term limit for the presidency, paving the way for Xi to serve indefinitely.) Wasn’t the whole point of Americans fighting against the Brits in order to gain independence from a monarchist rule? With its system of checks-and-balances, isn’t it one of the paramount rationales for the separation of powers, as delineated in the Constitution, to guard against tyranny? Along these lines, a single-party authoritarian regime that is not elected among the general populace must be a bad thing, right? And finally, on a personal level, why am I leaving my career as a patent litigator to move to such a country with a “bad” form of government? (Indeed, many friends and colleagues thought I was out-of-my-mind to make the move.)
Having lived in China for about eight years now, I have studied, seen, and experienced China’s system[1] of governing. Although different from Western systems, the Chinese system nonetheless works for China. In other words, the government system that works (mostly) for America, a constitutional democratic republic, may not work so well in China, “a socialism with Chinese characteristics.”[2] Reminder: the population in the U.S. is about 323 million compared to that of China, which is about 1.379 billion. With such an enormous population (imagine plopping more than a billion people in to the U.S.), one could easily envision that maintaining social order, then, becomes a national government’s top priority. Rather than undermine the Chinese system, it should be viewed as another form of governing—not necessarily better or worse, just different. A different system, with a different history, for a different demographic. Please allow me to explain.
China Historically Authoritarian
China has historically been authoritarian. It has been shown that Chinese civilization has existed uninterrupted for over 5,000 years. Records indicate that beginning in 1046 BC, the ancient Chinese tradition of tianming, or the “Mandate of Heaven,” was the basis for political authority.[3] Even the great Chinese philosopher Confucius (551 BC – 479 BC) espoused the doctrine. The Mandate of Heaven holds that emperors were the earthly representation of Heaven (tian), whose role was running the realm under Heaven (tianxia). Heaven offered a mandate (ming) to each new dynasty, but this right to govern was revocable. If an emperor failed to carry out his[4] role correctly, Heaven could transfer the mandate to a new ruler. So, if the people were thoroughly dissatisfied, Heaven would stop protecting the emperor and a rebellion was then justified to establish a new dynasty. Thus, this authoritarian ideal has been historically embedded into the Chinese tradition of governing through millennia. Put another way, the notion of a non-authoritarian government is foreign for the Chinese. Instead, the Chinese view an authoritarian government as the rule, not an exception, as opposed to those views in the West. This is further evidenced by China’s seamless move to allow President Xi to stay in power for life by rewriting China’s Constitution.
The Three Major “Beefs” with the Chinese System
Based upon personal discussions with students and colleagues (from the West) on the issues they have with the Chinese form of governing, I distill the concerns down to three major “beefs” with the Chinese system. Firstly, that China’s government is not based on universal suffrage (i.e., the right to vote and elect officials). Secondly, that China’s government does not allow for multiple parties, but rather has a one-party rule. And finally, that an authoritarian regime is necessarily inferior to one with an electoral democracy. While the U.S. and other Western nations try to impose and fit their systems onto China, China endeavors for a status of independence and equality in coexistence.
The Chinese are not unfamiliar with the electoral process. In fact, local residents directly elect members of the local People’s Congresses, who, in turn, elect governors, mayors, and heads of counties and towns. Furthermore, direct democracy occurs at the village level whereby the people elect their village chiefs. Although villages are the lowest level of government in China’s hierarchy of governance, these direct elections occur in over 700,000 villages across China—reaching well over 1 billion people. At the federal level, members of the People’s Congresses of provinces elect the close to 3,000 members of the National People’s Congress, who then in turn elect the President and the 35 State Council members—the most powerful governing body in China. The State Council is the principal administrative authority in the country. Although a hierarchy in government stratifies elections, there are nonetheless elections in China whereby people have the opportunity to engage in the electoral process.
It is true that the Chinese government system does not allow for multiple parties, but there are, in my view, justifiable reasons for a single-party rule in China. The first was previously described above in that China has historically been authoritarian for millennia. It is thus more than just an accepted form of governing, it is part of Chinese tradition and notions of how people yield to a single, divinely appointed ruler. At the core, the Chinese are accustomed to this type of government. Next, the idea about the sheer population size in China was also alluded to earlier. Undoubtedly, it is difficult to fathom what it takes to govern 1.379 billion people in a single country. To offer some perspective, there are as many people in China as there are in North and South America, Australia, New Zealand, and all of Western Europe—combined.[5] There are over 160 cities in China with a population of 1 million or more; by comparison, the U.S. has 10. Should China ever adopt a multiparty system, one could only imagine the number of parties that would emerge and the logistical political nightmare that would ensue—this would in essence revert back to the Warring States experience with each region of people vying for representation and resources. Thus, a strong rationale for a one-party rule is to maintain social and economic stability. A single-minded government needs the authority to act swiftly on matters of national import without the political gridlocking that often occurs in partisan politics. Despite its large territory and population, China has maintained social stability by finding a balance between economic, social, and political reform and development. The Chinese government has a unique capacity for “learning,” which presents itself by way of piloting reforms. Unlike multi-party Western systems, the Chinese system is highly efficient in pooling resources to deal with major social and economic problems.
Lastly, there is evidence supporting the legitimacy of China’s evolving socialism with Chinese characteristics. China has lifted 700 million people out of poverty in the past 30 years. China is currently the world’s second largest economy, eclipsing Japan in 2010; and is on track to overtake the U.S. economy by 2030. On the measure of “purchasing power,” China has already surpassed the U.S. Additionally, China emerged from the 2008 financial crisis virtually unscathed due to a high savings ratio that continued to stimulate demand. While the financial markets around the world were hard hit by the crisis, China’s financial market and macroeconomy emerged largely unaffected. Above all, China is the largest holder of U.S. debt: $1.18 trillion as of December 2017.[6] In other words, this trillion-dollar amount is how much the U.S. owes China. By being America’s largest banker, so to speak, this engagement gives China significant political leverage and legitimizes its position and its independence as a well-functioning government system. Furthermore, various surveys by international organizations show not only the Chinese people’s satisfaction but also growing support for their political system. The U.S.-based Pew Research Center has been carrying out a worldwide survey of the publics’ “satisfaction” with the economic performance of their countries. The survey results show that the satisfaction rate in China has become the highest in the world since 2005, climbing from 48 percent in 2002 to 87 percent in 2016. By comparison, the satisfaction rate in 2016 was 59 percent in Canada, 58 percent in the U.S., 51 percent in the UK, 41 percent in Japan, 21 percent in France, and just 15 percent in South Korea.[7] Due to positive development economically and socially, the Chinese are content with their political system and confident in their country and government going forward.
Conclusion
China’s success in its economic, social, and political spheres has shown there is more than one governmental regime that can produce good governance. This success challenges the Western system’s exclusive legitimacy and understanding of an inferior authoritarian regime. In light of China’s differing history, traditions, and demographic, Martin Jacques, a senior research fellow at Cambridge University, stated it best: “We cannot understand the rise of China using Western concepts.” Rather than try to fit China’s regime into a global hierarchy emphasizing world dominance, the West should acknowledge China as a partner and cooperate with China in dealing with global issues. Instead, the current U.S. president is acting himself like a dictator by unilaterally imposing tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum imports; with retaliation from China with comparable tariff figures on U.S. goods. This has the potential to escalate into a true trade war.
Oh, I left my career as a lawyer in the U.S., and found my calling as a professor in China. For me, this has made all the difference.
Footnotes
[1] Where a “system” can be understood as the trinity of economic, political, and social subsystems.
[2] A term used since the 12th National People’s Congress in 1982 to stress modernization in China.
[3] Mote, F.W. (1999). Imperial China: 900–1800. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
[4] There is evidence of a female emperor (or empress) during China’s dynastic rule.
[5] Schiavenza, Matt. “A Surprising Map of the World Shows Just How Big China’s Population Is.” The Atlantic (2013).
[6] McGregor, Sarah and Greifeld, Katherine. February 16, 2018. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-15/china-2017-holdings-of-u-s-treasuries-rise-most-in-seven-years
[7] http://pewglobal.org/database/?indicator=3&survey=1&response=Satisfied&mode=chart