Asia Times: Letters


	June 27, 2002	atimes.com

Letters

In response to China: Surrounded again by Francesco Sisci: The basic reason for the differences in ideology between China and the United States lies not in issues such as communism, democracy, Taiwan, Tibet, religious or human rights, but in opposite political structures.

The elements of a political structure in a certain country can be defined as follows: (1) the true source of power; (2) the sovereign (the governing body); (3) the society (the people); (4) history; (5) the current political daily routine ('content'); (6) the strategic path for a better future.

Remarks: 1. The terms "society" and "history" refer only to the political aspects within a certain society. 2. "Content" is defined as the possible maneuvering within the fixed limits set by the structure itself. 3. A certain country's own "strategic better future": 3A. It is acceptable by the majority of the society. 3B. It is the logic from which the sovereign governing body defines its own daily routine. 3C. It might contradict other nations' own interests.

(1). The true source of power: The American constitution is the foundation of the political authority in the United States. In China, the true source of authority is not the Communist Party but an "unwritten constitution" (the "Mandate of Heaven") which is a set of rules, norms and morals which have not changed throughout history.

(2). The Sovereign and the Governing Body - Historically, China and the US hold two opposite manners, in which their governments are formed. In the US, it is a fixed and an unchanged process. The next election will be held in 2004. In China, the method in which the sovereign gains its power changes. The method can be inherited by birth, formed by the use of power or appointed as part of internal elections. The coming Communist Party Congress is a good example of the latter.

In the US, titles are important; there is strict definition of authority; the term of one chosen president and his administration is clear.

In China, on the other hand, official titles are completely meaningless (in 1911, China's last emperor was a 3-year-old boy; Chairman Mao Zedong, who founded the Communist Party in 1921, acted like an emperor; Deng Xiaoping, although not officially a president, was the true leader of China). Also in China, in terms of duration of power, a certain governing power's rule ranges anywhere from a few days to several centuries.

(3). The Society, (4) History and (5) the current Daily Routine: Politically speaking, the society in China is unchanged. Throughout history, the Han's three basic political points of view (the way they see themselves; the way they see their own leaders, and the way they see the rest of the world) have not changed. For the Han people, feudal dynasties, communism or democracy have no true political difference and no true ideological characteristics. Politically speaking, in China, once in power, sovereigns have to adjust themselves to the society, and not the other way around. The legitimacy of the ruling power is highly determined by the people, and as a result, society plays a very big role in government's stability. Leadership can preserve its power only by its ability to provide prosperity. In terms of political additional value - current issues such as the accession to the World Trade Organization and hosting the 2008 Olympics are to be judged by the central government's ability to bring prosperity to the people.

As for the United States, the American society is a changing one, thus its political agenda is also changing. The political views on basic values and morals (such as women's political rights, minorities, immigration, education, legal rights, human rights, capitalism, economy, media, international conflicts and international affairs) are frequently reviewed, examined and replaced. However, despite public discussion, arguments, even if violent, have no influence on replacement of the federal government, as the rules are set by the constitution itself. Political issues, and American society as a whole, play a minor role in terms of the government's stability.

In terms of political structure only, the tragic terror attacks on September 11, 2001 proved to have no influence on the structure of the American feudal government itself. In China, on the other hand (although very different in nature) the tragic June 4, 1989 Tiananmen massacre immediately led to the replacement of the Communist Party's chief, Zhao Ziyang, by Jiang Zemin, while putting the former under house arrest (June 24, 1989). Zhao was accused of serious errors by supporting democratic demands.

(6). The Strategic Path to a better Future: China wants to become a global superpower. The United Sates wants to keep its international economic and political superiority, not sharing or losing it to other rivals - the EU, Russia or China.

China: President Jiang Zemin's mistake regarding his "Three Represents Theory" is in structure rather than content. Although legitimate, his theory pulls the sovereign's attention "backwards" to a foreign governing formula, trying to educate the Chinese society to accept modern communist theories. The theory prevents the ruling sovereign (the Communist Party) from further adjusting itself "forward" into Confucianism. According to China's own logic, Confucianism (not Manchu culture, not communism and not even Western democracy) is a better pattern to follow. In modern China, although Confucianism may not be the ultimate answer to everything every time, everywhere, it still has higher chances of achieving stability and prosperity. Communism with more Confucianism characteristics is probably needed.

The US: The American constitution will not be changed even if the US loses it leading role as an economic political global superpower. Politically, "historically speaking", on a long timeline, in the fast economic global village the world is right now, American superiority is not forever guaranteed. From the rest of the world's point of view, examples of President George W Bush's possible weakening of American international efficiency is seen in issues such as the Middle East conflict, China-Taiwan relations, the Kyoto Protocol, the missile defense system, the 2001 lost seat in the UN Commission on Human Rights etc.

Solution: The solution, in my opinion, should be as follows: China should abandon the "Three Represents Theory". America should elect a new president in 2004 (maybe even a woman president).
Ram Gorni
www.WebSitesAboutChina.com

back to the top

©2001 Asia Times Online Co., Ltd.

Building B - 5th Floor, 102/1 Phra Arthit Road, Chanasangkhram, Bangkok 10200, Thailand