Congrès Marx International V - Contribution – Paris-Sorbonne et Nanterre – 3/6 octobre 2007
Incremental Political Reform and Transition toward Democracy
He Zengke
Executive Director, Prof. & Dr.
ChinaCenter for Comparative Politics & Economics
Abstract: Just like the economic reform, Chinese political reform is also a kind of incremental reform. China is in the period of political transition through political reform from totalism to authoritarianism and finally to democratic political system. Study on reform politics is very needed in this period. Reform politics should put its focus on the following grand issues: strategies and tactics of political reform, its motivation mechanism, historical periods and its future. This article will explore these issues.
Key words: reform politics, mixed democracy, incremental political reform, dual track political system.
There are two ways to realize political development, one way is political reform, and another way is political reform. Since reform and open up to the outside world, Chinese democratic political development has move forward along the way of incremental political reform and had made significant achievements. After more than 20 years of incremental political reform, Chinese political system has transformed from highly centralized and overall controlled totalism[1] to post totalism political system. This kind of post totalism political system is a kind of mixed political system, which combined both the characters of authoritarianism and democratic system, and thus is called neo-authoritarianism political system.[2] Owing to it, study on transition politics or reform politics become very urgent. Reform politics should focus on the ideal model and goals of political reform, its path, motivation mechanism, historical evolution and its future.
Ⅰ．The Ideal Model of Chinese Political Reform: Mixed Democracy
Regarding the concrete model of Chinese political reform, some scholars have thought them in depth and put forward a lot of ideal models which are very insightful.
One model is the political system under the rule of law with consultations. Pan Wei pointed out that, ‘there are two choices for the direction of political reform, one choice is democratization, and another one is the rule of law. There are no countries that could realize these two goals at the same time; they can only be achieved in different sequences. Though democracy could be compatible with the rule of law, the two processes of democratization and the rule of law never took place together, since they can not be compatible due to the different direction of operations.……Politicalreform around the direction of the rule of law and modern civil servants system adapt to Chinese characters better.’[3]He cries up heavily Hong Kong and Singapore’s model of political system which are belongs to the Chinese society, and he named this model as ‘the political system of the rule of law without democracy’. He thought that future direction of Chinese political reform is to establish a political system of rule of law combined with consultation, which should include five pillars of institutional arrangements: the neutral civil servants system, independent judicial system, independent anti-corruption institutions, far-ranging social consultation system encirclingnational and provincial People’s Congresses, the freedoms of speech, press, assembly and associations protected fully by the laws. He summed up five features of this model as following: 1) Emphasis the rule of law and deny the rule of people; 2) Emphasis the fairness of the laws, and thus appreciate especially the principle of ‘every one is equal before the laws’ ; 3) Emphasis the significance of enforcing laws strictly, make it difficult to pass a law consciously; 4) Emphasis to confine the scope and functions of government, to build the limited government, to safeguard the liberty of social and economic life, and thus to encourage the creativity of the whole nation; 5) Emphasis to pursuit the order and liberty that suit the Chinese traditions. [4]
Second one is the model of cooperation state. Kang Xiaoguang brought forward the idea of building co-operation state model. He pointed out that, the basic formula of cooperation state is: authoritarianism politics + liberal market economy + corporatism + welfare state. As a kind of modern power-sharing system among different classes, corporatism state pursues the following four fundamental principles: the principle of autonomy, the principle of cooperation, the principle of checks and balance, and the principle of share. The first principle of the cooperation state is autonomy for both power, capital, knowledge and labor. The so-called power autonomy refers to carry out the authoritarianism politics. The ruling group outmatches all the social classes, these group is only responsible for themselves subjectively, but it is accountable to all people and the whole state from the point of view of objective outcome. The most members of bureaucrats come from intellectual class, and examination system bridges the intellectual class and the ruling class. The so-called ‘capital autonomy’ is the market economy plus the rule of law, that is, to build the capital autonomy via by the market mechanism and the rule of law encircling the protection of private properties. The principle of knowledge is the freedom of speech, press and academy. The so-called principle of labor autonomy is to organize the functionary associations which have the monopoly representation privileges, and workers could take part in politics through these associations. The purpose of ‘autonomy’ is to realize the effective cooperation. The cooperative political model is the system of multi-parties consultations or negotiations, in this system social members join into the functionary associations based on their labor divisions, and the public policies are jointly made by these associations and governments. Government chairs the classes’ negotiation in a neutral way, and social conflicts are resolved through negotiations. The implementation of the authoritarianism politics could confine the control of the wealthy on power to some extent, and to checks and balance the arbitrary power of the capital. The core content of the principle of share is to share in a fair way the wealth and opportunities, to restrict the economic power of the capital through building welfare state, to restraint the political power of the capital through authoritarianism and corporatism, and to safeguarding the basic rights of the disadvantaged groups. Cooperation state theory wishes to promote the compromise and equilibrium between liberty and equality. [5]
The third one is the theory of building democratic state institutions. Wang Shaoguang and Hu Angang believe that, Chinese political transition should focus on strengthening and improving the public authorities and make it democratization rather than blindly abolish or constraint the public authorities. In other words, the focus should be to make the existing state institutions democratization and institutionalization and standardization, to enhance vigorously the weakness part of the state institutions, and to build a government with strong capacity of good governance. Building fundamental state institutions should surround the following eight state capacities, which include: the capacity of safeguarding state security and public order (coerce capacity); the capacity of mobilizing and dispatching social resources (collect capacity); the capacity of fostering and consolidating national identity (legitimatize capacity); the capacity of maintaining economic and social orders (regulatory capacity); the capacity of retaining the control, supervision and coordination within state institutions(leadership capacity); the capacity of vindicating distributive justice ( redistribution capacity); the capacity of bringing the demand of citizens participation into the channel of official institutions (admit capacity); the capacity of coordinating different interests and formalizing public policies (integrate ion capacity). The breakthrough point of building basic state institutions should be to adjust the relationship, to establish the modern public finance system, to enlarge the channels of citizen’s political participations, and at the same time to strengthen party building. In a simple word, China needs to implement the second generation reform strategy, that is, to push forward actively the basic state institutions. [6]
The fourth one is the theory of incremental democracy. Yu Keping raises the view of incremental democracy of political reform. It includes several major points: first point is to emphasis the democratic procedures and to realize the procedural democracy; second point is to appreciate the role of civil society organizations and citizens in building socialist democracy; third point is to cry up the rule of law, put the ruling party under the rule of law; fourth point is to push forward the inner party democracy and grassroots democracy as breakthrough point; fifth point is to let the ruling party and government play a leading role in building democracy. [7]
The fifth one is the theory of rule of law with democracy. Wang Guixiu thought that, the fundamental malpractice of the old system is ‘over-centralization of power’, which manifests as ‘over-centralization of power into the hand of party committee’, ‘over-centralization of power into the national government’, and ‘over-centralization of power into the senior officials’. Political reform needs to reform this kind of political system, to build ‘a kind of system of rule of law with democracy. ’[8]
These five views on political reform have different emphases. The theory of political system of rule of law with consultancy stresses the priority of the process of rule of law. The view of corporatism state stresses the cooperation and negotiation between authoritarianism state and functionary associations. The theory of building democratic state institutions stresses the fundamental role of building state capacity. The theory of incremental democracy stresses the irreplaceable role of both civil society and state in building democracy. The view of political system of rule of law with democracy stresses to realize inner party democracy in order to solve the problem of over-centralization of power into the hand of senior officials. But all of them have some common elements. First, all of them highly appreciate the rule of law, put it as the first and most important goal of political reform. Second, all of them thought that their political reform plan could be accept by various parties, and thus is easy to realize the transition smoothly between the new and the old political system and would not cause big social shock. Due to it, their plans are feasible and could put into operation. Finally, all of them are very cautious on electoral democracy especially general elections nationwide. Some scholars such as Pan Wei and Kang Xiaoguang e even oppose the electoral democracy firmly. The theory of ‘political system of rule of law with consultancy’ views the democratization and the move forward toward rule of law as two processes that could not be compatible and even fight off each other. It is not only contradict with the reality of parallel development of grassroots democracy and building the state of rule of law, but also hard to get support from various social groups due to it does consciously spurn democracy. In addition, when they oppose democracy in general, the theory of political system of rule of law with consultancy has included some basic elements of liberal democracy and deliberative democracy such as independent judicial system, social consultancy system, the freedoms of speech, press, assembly and associations under the legal protection into its model as major institutional pillars. Therefore, their theory exists inner contradictions. The theory of corporatism state views authoritarianism state as a kind of permanent political system, while international and domestic academia intend to see authoritarianism politics as a kind of periodical and transitional political system, its destination is democratic political system. The theory of building democratic state institutions stresses the priority of building state capacities and has the tendency of state-center, and thus pays less attention on the idea of democratic governance such as the capacity building of civil society and deliberation and partnership between civil society and state. The theory of incremental democracy pays less attention on deliberative democracy. The theory of political system of rule of law with democracy stresses inner party democracy and thus pay little attention on social democracy especially grassroots democracy.
All of these five theories have their merits and we could draw lessons from them. Based on the above theory, I would like to put forward my view on political reform, that is, to build the compound democratic political system under the guide of liberal socialism. Liberal socialism advocates the political idea of liberty first compound with social justice, which is a kind of political value system that could compatible with socialist market economic system. Compound democratic political system is a kind of political institutional arrangement that manifests the political idea of liberal socialism. It is a kind of political system that composed of electoral democracy, liberal democracy and deliberative democracy. The so-called electoral democracy refers to that leaders at various levels are elected through general, free and competitive elections. The electoral democracy is the major element of procedural democracy, and it is also the institutional guarantee of building political accountability. The liberal democracy includes such elements as constitutional democracy, rule of law, the limited government, independent judicial system, checks and balance of power; freedom of press, its core is to push forward the transition toward rule of law. The liberal democracy is institutional guarantee of political freedoms and rights of citizens and of the development of civil society. Deliberative democracy is an important form of democracy, which makes the deliberative policy-making process between functionary associations and state institutionalization through a lot of channels such as elite’s recruitment, policy consultation, public hearings, media discussions, and public deliberation. Its purpose is to maintain social justice and hear the voice of the disadvantage groups in the compulsory distribution process of social values. The path toward building the compound democratic political system is to combine the way of bottom up of pushing forward electoral democracy, the way of top-down process to advance the rule of law, and the way of breakthrough from the middle levels of deliberative democracy and extend to grassroots level and higher levels. The theory of the compound democracy draws the idea of democratic governance, which pointed out that, the direction of political reform should be to deepen democracy, advance the rule of law, safeguard the human rights, raise the government efficiency, and promote clean government. It not only pays attention on state capacity buildings, but also pays attention on civil society capacity building. It not only emphasis the democratization, but also emphasis the rule of law. It not only stresses the political freedom, but also stresses the social justice; it not only stresses inner party democracy, but also stresses the social democracy. It not only emphasis political reform, but also emphasis the smooth transition from the old system to the new system and their link up. Therefore, the compound democratic political system is a kind of desirable and feasible political choice.
Ⅱ. The Preference Path of Chinese Political Reform:
Incremental Political Reform
Chinese economic reform is a kind of incremental reform. Meanwhile, Chinese political reform is also a kind of incremental reform. In recent years, international and domestic transitional economists have engaged in study in depth on the path of Chinese economic reform and its characters and have made a lot of valuable academic works. Some scholars from political science circles recently have put forward many insightful views on the path of Chinese political reform and its characters.
The transitional economics began its study on the path characters and its benefits and weaknesses of Chinese economic reform from the comparison of economic transitions between China and Russia. The mainstream view is that China has gone along the road of incremental reform, while Russia has chosen a way of radical reform named as shock treatment. Incremental reform is a process to advance reform through making experiments, to move forward step by step, implement the plan from parts first then to the unity. Through the comparison of reform performance between China and Russia, the recognize view in academia is that incremental reform is better than radical reform. Some scholars have verified this view in theory. The different initial conditions, different goals and nature of reform, all of them decided that China and Russia chose different reform plans. The favorable initial conditions, the socialist nature and goals of reform decide that China could only choose incremental reform pattern. [9]One theory that supports incremental reform comes from epistemologically empiricism and evolutionism. American economist Murell believes that, the philosophical support on incremental theory could come from two different theoretical schools, that is, ‘evolution economics’ and ‘conservative politicalphilosophy’. All of them oppose the ‘constructive rationalism’ tradition of institutional evolution, and advocate the ‘evolution rationalism’. The evolutionism economics views the society as a kind of information process mechanism. Social evolution is a process of aggregative development of the current information and knowledge stocks. The evolutionists call this process as ‘climb the mountain via by grasping stones’ (there are surprisingly similarities between it and Deng Xiaoping’s word ‘get through the river via by touching the stones’). Institutional evolution just like climb the mountain, the information and knowledge stock of every organization is very limited, and thus could only move forward cautiously and step by step. The evolutionists thought that, reform process is a process of ‘learning by doing’. The evolutionism attaches importance to the partial experimentations and trials and the relevant accumulated experiences and wisdoms, and consequently opposes those plans that have very large size, fast speed and less reversibility. Incremental reform needs not only to preserve the existing system to some extent, but also to encourage the development and expansion of the new system, and thus it will lead to the ‘dual track system’. [10]Another theory that supports incremental reform comes from the analysis on the costs and benefits of reform. Many scholars pointed out that, the radical reform is very fast but very costly, while the incremental reform is very slow but costs fewer. Fan Gang, a Chinese scholar, distinguished the reform cost into the so-called ‘implementation cost’and‘rub cost’. He believes that, the implementation cost is the decreasing function of the radical degree of reform, while the rub cost is the increasing function of the radical degree of reform. The implementation cost of incremental reform is higher than that of radical reform, but its rub cost is far lower than that of radical reform, and thus it is a reform path with less resistance. [11]Lin Yifu and some other scholars pointed out that, Chinese incremental reform has had the nature of ‘Pareto Improvement ’, that is, it focuses on expanding the total sum of the distributable resources in order to make people benefit at large and doesn’t change the established interest structure directly. [12] Incremental reform stress the top-down pattern of reform, its reform began from the micro-level, partial experiments, and increment reform out the exist system, and then move forward step by step to the macro reform, overall spreading, and inventory reform within the system. This is another difference between China’s incremental reform and former Soviet Union and East European bloc’s reform. Its advantage is that it could transform the big shock into little shock, and thus reduce the risk of social turbulence. Incremental reform has its own limitations, such as the adding up cost and follow-through apportion cost will increasingly rise, and thus the resistance of further reform will consequently rise. [13]Due to lack of scientific design on whole system, the link up and coordination of different reform measures is quite insufficient, the rub cost between the old system and the new system and among various parts of the new system is very huge.