A Question about democracy and Communist Party of China

[Zulkarneyn]

PRC is today mainly known for a single party system where The Communist Party is dominating almost all the political processes.

My question to Chinese members in this forum is whether you think China will experience a transition towards democratization in the political sphere like post Soviet countries did after the fall of the wall? And are there strong movements in China that supports such a process?

I am neither pro-communist nor pro-democratic, i think imposing your own values to a foreign country is without any doubt wrong. Hence, if China experiences democratization it must come within, but again we have to keep in mind that liberal Democracy is not always the optimal solution to social progress.

So, are we gonna experience such a transition, what are your thoughts?

(No offence intended to our fellow Chinese friends)

 

[below_freezing]

The opposite of democracy is dictatorship.

A dictatorship is defined as a government dominated by one person.

The Communist Party of China has the same number of members as Turkey has people overall. 77 million.

It is not a dictatorship.

Therefore, we are a democracy already.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_China

The CPC is the world's largest political party,[9] claiming nearly 78 million members[10] at the end of 2009 which constitutes about 5.6% of the total population of mainland China.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Mainland_China#Age_structure

19.8% of the population is under the age of 15, and therefore cannot participate in politics. My estimates are, probably another 10% of the population is 15-22 (the minimum age to join CPC is 22). About 8% of the population eligible to join, are members. Or, one member per 12 people. The average extended family in China has 8-9 people. Therefore, approximately one person per family is a CPC member.

 

[Zulkarneyn]

But if the citizens are not able to vote for another party, then how can the citizens determine the outcome of the political process. Democracy means after all that people have the right to chose their own leaders.

 

[below_freezing]

The definition of democracy never includes multiple parties. You vote for individuals, not parties. It happens that sometimes these individuals represent different political parties but they do not have to.

It is questionable if Turkey is a full democracy.

Military coups are a sign of unstable government and a slide towards dictatorship.

From 1949-today, there have been 0 military coups in China.

However, in Turkey, there have been 3 in the same time period.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_Turkish_coup_d'état

Due to the disrespect of the military of Turkey for the democratic process, and for the obvious lack of civilian control over the military, we all have significant questions regarding the integrity of democracy in turkey.

 

[Zulkarneyn]

That is also what i meant by democracy. In reality i guess you have elections at village and town levels, but if some independent members gets elected to lowest congress, which is by the way possible, then for them to organize and elect members to the next highest congress without the approval of Communist Party of China is impossible. This means, in China if you want to actively pursue politics you must go with the Communist Party of China, all other parties have no chance for success. And this very process is not democratic at all.

 

[S10]

China is not a democracy. At the very least it is not in the sense that most Western societies are used to. However, it would also be unfair to call it a dictatorship at the moment, since there is no supreme leader who can dictate the entire country at the whim. The communist party itself is quite a diverse group of different backgrounds, ranging from businessmen, scholars, workers to farmers. Political power lies in the hands of a few dozen men within the poliburo, forming an oligarchy. There are a number of smaller parties, but in the grand scheme of things they are nearly irrelevant and they are generally pro-communists. Authoritarian yes, dictatorship no.

At the moment the country is going through an economic boom and people's standard of living have been steadily improving in general. That reduces the chance of the recent revolts in the Middle East. However, discontent with the government does exist throughout the country, but most of them are single issue based (land disputes, medical problems, abuse of power etc..) and small in event scale. These are not threatening to the government's existance, but officials are somewhat concerned.

Currently, the most pressing issues are housing prices, medical/educational costs as well as corruption. The government has taken note of these and did put some efforts into reforms. Political freedom is somewhat of a secondary concern at the moment during this economic growth period. The concern is that if the government fails to address corruption, housing, health and education problems, a downturn in the economy could stir up discontent. Since there is no political mechanism to remove the government through democratic means, the population might resort to violent means.

At the moment though, this is not likely. With that said, no political system can remain static. As the number of middle-class grows, there will be a greater need for political and judicial reforms.

 

[BJP*]

The definition of democracy never includes multiple parties. You vote for individuals, not parties. It happens that sometimes these individuals represent different political parties but they do not have to.

It is questionable if Turkey is a full democracy.

Military coups are a sign of unstable government and a slide towards dictatorship.

From 1949-today, there have been 0 military coups in China.

However, in Turkey, there have been 3 in the same time period.

1980 Turkish coup d'état - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Due to the disrespect of the military of Turkey for the democratic process, and for the obvious lack of civilian control over the military, we all have significant questions regarding the integrity of democracy in turkey.

in my school day I was taught ... "a democracy is, the government of the people, by the people, for the people" if any one of the attribute is missing then it is not called a democracy.... care to explain how your Govt fulfills the criteria.....

As I do not regard mere election process is the symbol of democracy... and as basic definition dose not include election... your govt can be a democratic... all you have to explain is ...HOW????...so no offence

 

[Zulkarneyn]

At the moment the country is going through an economic boom and people's standard of living have been steadily improving in general. That reduces the chance of the recent revolts in the Middle East. However, discontent with the government does exist throughout the country, but most of them are single issue based (land disputes, medical problems, abuse of power etc..) and small in event scale. These are not threatening to the government's existance, but officials are somewhat concerned.

But you know, the more material resources your citizens have the more they will strive for having their voices heard and political freedom, at least according to one study. So the real issues at stake here is whether Chinese citizens will remain content with their government, or whether we will see a development towards democracy as the population experiences material richness.

 

[below_freezing]

But you know, the more material resources your citizens have the more they will strive for having their voices heard and political freedom, at least according to one study. So the real issues at stake here is whether Chinese citizens will remain content with their government, or whether we will see a development towards democracy as the population experiences material richness.

You are throwing the word democracy around like it means something. I already pointed out that by 1 indicator of democracy, civilian control of the military as opposed to military junta, indicated by number of military coups, China is doing better than even Turkey. In another indicator of democracy, number of people actively participating in government, China beats turkey. We have more CPC members than Turkey has population. You have also not refuted a simple fact: who said democracies were about voting for different parties? Last time I checked democracy was about voting for individuals, who may or may not happen to represent political parties, or perhaps the same political party.

 

[Zulkarneyn]

The definition of democracy never includes multiple parties. You vote for individuals, not parties. It happens that sometimes these individuals represent different political parties but they do not have to.

It is questionable if Turkey is a full democracy.

Military coups are a sign of unstable government and a slide towards dictatorship.

From 1949-today, there have been 0 military coups in China.

However, in Turkey, there have been 3 in the same time period.

1980 Turkish coup d'état - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Due to the disrespect of the military of Turkey for the democratic process, and for the obvious lack of civilian control over the military, we all have significant questions regarding the integrity of democracy in turkey.

I don't understand why you have turned to an attack stance. I didn't defend my Country as a democracy, as i am aware that Turkey has had some flaws in the past. Still, Turkey scores 3 in Freedom House index whereas China scores 7, this my friend doesn't indicate your point of view at all.

 

[S10]

But you know, the more material resources your citizens have the more they will strive for having their voices heard and political freedom, at least according to one study. So the real issues at stake here is whether Chinese citizens will remain content with their government, or whether we will see a development towards democracy as the population experiences material richness.

To the contrary, a greater demand for stability would result from improving living standards. You need political stability for proper economic growth and this is widely accepted in China. If the boat is not sinking, do not rock it. If you look at Singapore, one of the wealthiest nations in the world on a per capita basis, is also an authoritarian state. Yet, there are no popular demands for an uprising and it runs very well. Western democracy will unlikely to be able to take roots in China. Political freedom is not as important as corruption, housing, healthcare and education in the minds of most Chinese.

 

[below_freezing]

I don't understand why you have turned to an attack stance. I didn't defend my Country as a democracy, as i am aware that Turkey has had some flaws in the past. Still, Turkey scores 3 in Freedom House index whereas China scores 7, this my friend doesn't indicate your point of view at all.

I am simply showing an alternative point of view. The whole concept of "democracy vs. dictatorship" implies there are 2 categories, but in reality it is a spectrum. Freedom House is a CIA puppet. There is no single index for democracy. Some countries rank very highly on some and very low on others. Singapore is a 1 party state with significant tendency towards 1 man rule. But it is also one of the richest nations in the world and has some of the lowest corruption rates in the world. On the other hand, Nigeria has many free elections, but is one of the most corrupt countries in the world, extremely poor and has frequent military coups.

 

[Zulkarneyn]

To the contrary, a greater demand for stability would result from improving living standards. You need political stability for proper economic growth and this is widely accepted in China. If the boat is not sinking, do not rock it. If you look at Singapore, a nation with top 5 GDP per capita in the world, is also an authoritarian state. Yet, there are no popular demands for an uprising. Western democracy will unlikely to be able to take roots in China.

I fully agree with this point of view. You see in political science it is accepted that the more equal (in income) a country is the more democratic it will be. BUT, if a country has an undemocratic authoritarian regime, but at the same time the country scores really well in equality there won't be a strive for democracy. We clearly see this in Singapore, they don't give a damn about whether they have an authoritarain regime or not, as long as they are contended with their socio-economic level they will stay happy.

As i previously pointed out, do you think that the Chinese case illustrates the same, i mean the level of corruption and inequality can lead to disrupt in the social sphere, the reason Singapore stays succesfull is because their human development index is extremely high whereas China's is medium.

 

[BigTree.CN]

But you know, the more material resources your citizens have the more they will strive for having their voices heard and political freedom, at least according to one study. So the real issues at stake here is whether Chinese citizens will remain content with their government, or whether we will see a development towards democracy as the population experiences material richness.

You made a common mistake by assumming we are not doing these before questioning the political system of China.

 

[S10]

I fully agree with this point of view. You see in political science it is accepted that the more equal (in income) a country is the more democratic it will be. BUT, if a country has an undemocratic authoritarian regime, but at the same time the country scores really well in equality there won't be a strive for democracy. We clearly see this in Singapore, they don't give a damn about whether they have an authoritarain regime or not, as long as they are contended with their socio-economic level they will stay happy.

As i previously pointed out, do you think that the Chinese case illustrates the same, i mean the level of corruption and inequality can lead to disrupt in the social sphere, the reason Singapore stays succesfull is because their human development index is extremely high whereas China's is medium.

Obviously there are many problems that China must overcome at the moment to even reach the height of Singapore on a per capita basis. It was only last year that per capita GDP exceeded $4000 (although this is due to an undervalued Chinese currency, should be closer to $7000 otherwise). Income inequality is a big obstacle that China intends to address in the next 5 year plan. How they will do it is beyond me at the moment.

From my personal experience, the most pressing issues for Chinese people:
1. Housing prices
2. Inflation
3. Healthcare
4. Corruption