Brief comment on ‘China’s Promise’
I confidently predict that this fine essay by Geremie R. Barmé at The China Beat will be doing the rounds and inspiring debate among many Sino-bloggers in no time. I’m jumping on the bandwagon at the outset because the piece deserves to reach as wide an audience as possible.
Barmé begins with a look back on China’s ‘year of anniversaries’ before contemplating the Middle Kingdom’s future path now that she finds herself in a position of prosperity and global influence, particularly in the context of the commitments made to the Chinese people when the present CCP dynasty first came to power. Hence the title of the piece. Here’s a small excerpt:
If China is to be a responsible member of the international community, and for its peoples to be a harmonious part of an equitable world order, the citizens of the People’s Republic not only need to be informed and to inform of their views, but be free to debate, disagree and reach social and political consensus in a way that is not determined behind closed doors, or predominantly by a secretive political system with complex corporate connections in which family connections, personal wealth and power form the only basis for true legitimacy.
In the 1940s a number of Chinese writers, reporters and thinkers were wary of the Communist Party’s promises to bring democracy and freedom to the country. In 1956, the noted publisher and writer Chu Anping warned of the rise of what he dubbed a ‘Party Empire’ (dang tianxia ). Like so many others who spoke out as part of a movement that the Party launched so it could ‘correct its mistakes’, Chu was soon purged for his outspokenness. Eventually, he disappeared under mysterious circumstances in 1966. To this day the expression ‘Party Empire’ resonates powerfully among those who are fearful of the swagger and style of a regnant Communist Party that along with a newfound economic clout cleaves to its backward-looking autocratic habits. Some now discuss the baleful consequences that this kind of ‘Chinese story’ could have on a global scale.
This excerpt certainly doesn’t do justice to the essay; nor does it give an adequate sense of the writers direction. It does, however, speak to one of my principle concerns: how are the current actions of a resentful, paranoid, and self-centred authoritarian regime compatible with the freedoms and opportunities promised the Chinese people more than half a century ago? And how does the wielding of power and influence by the CCP improve the chances of a planet in (possibly terminal) decline?
It’s a thoroughly researched and informative article, and reading the whole thing is strongly urged.