2008年12月19日星期五
2008年12月13日星期六
2008年8月10日星期日
Three Cheers for State Power
Three Cheers for State Power
With thunderous applause and loud cheers for the Beijing Olympic opening ceremony from all over the world, who can resist claiming honour as a Chinese? I doubt – not even for liberals who have been long time critics of CCP. Lam Hang-chi of the Hong Kong Economic Journal, for instance, could not deny the event as a recognition of wealth and ability of the State.
The glamorous demonstration of state power by our central government last Friday is highly instrumental. Thirty years ago, when the communist state was rusty and weary, Deng Xiaoping vowed to modernize the nation in four aspects. Thirty years later, with the golden opportunity to host an international event, it was hoped that 8888, supposingly the luckiest time in the era for Chinese, could mark the watershed success point in recent history. The immediate effect of the 4-hour show is encouraging – noises of ‘wow’ on the growing capacity of PRC as a party state, rallying peoples under the five stars flag, are rampant. Everyone’s eyebrows were raised about how far the state has reached.
In a confident democracy, a deliberate demonstration of state power is not common. The French military parade on the Elysees Avenue every 14th July might be an exception. The need is obvious. With 4 regimes after Napoleon yet no single victory in any war, it is not difficult to imagine the insecurity of the French.
The price to legitimize an authoritarian state is even higher. All the stools have to be managed. Yet, those who seek to please everybody please nobody. The recent implementation of the labour contract law was meant to be an honest broker between the evil capitalists and the vulnerable proletariats. While the pseudo “socialist” state attempted to delude itself and its subjects that it strived for the moral high ground to protect its workers, neither the employers nor the employees perceived the same.
The last minute reversal of the decision to support the compromise deal of import surge thresholds also reflected the paranoia. When it endeavored to use 15,000 performers to showcase the nation’s ancient history and its rise as a modern power, it did not have the courage to go for the long-expected Doha arrangement at the last moment – just because it could not take the risk of offending its 900 million of peasants. It was a declimax to the assertion of state power but it was still a calculated fair deal.
A Leviathan government can never walk side by side with a free society. However obscure, China has the most powerful bureaucracy in the world. No doubt, it can serve its people’s interest by satisfying their vanity with a perfect ceremony. At the other end, until 30 July 2008, it defied the spirit of fearless advocacy making lawyers liable to their statements in court, and also the right of the detained accused to privacy with their legal representatives. The sarcasm intensified when the omnipotent central state sought to set the wrong right by legislative amendment - granting lawyer’s immunity in court and accused the right to meet lawyers free from procuratorat surveillance – with the disapproval of the local criminal justice organs who refused to honour the amendment.
It is the obsession of state power that an atomic bomb and a hydrogen bomb are desired so much. General Chen Yi once said, “We prefer a nucleon (‘hezi’) to a pair of pants (‘kuzi’)”. This is one of the many experiences that Chinese have been preached by someone from the top that we should ‘stand up’ as if we were invertebrate.
Pundits put the phenomenon down to a cultural cause – the so-called ‘cultural institutionalism’ in the language of political scientists. Culture determines institutional choice. The late Li Shenzhi, Deng Xiaoping’s English secretary and Associate Director of the Chinese Social Sciences Academy, observed Chinese history to be a history of dictatorship. An Australian Historian, W.J.F. Jenner, in ‘The Tyranny of History: The Roots of China's Crisis’, attributed the root of China’s crisis to the Chinese populists’ obsession in state power. Whenever crisis arises, power centralization is always the answer. It works like a panacea to all the problems. A strong unitary state has long been taken as the icon of stability and prosperity amongst Chinese subjects (‘zimin’). Similarly, formidable military buildup and the successful hosting of an international event watched by millions acrossed the planet are viewed as tokens of ‘Strong Army, Rich Nation’.
Everyone is a patriot these days. One would for sure be proud of Director Zhang Yimou and his team for the incredible opening performance. One would be ecstatic if Yao Ming dunks on Kobe Bryant. The question is, putting this August aside, would one feel happier if the State respected workers’ rights by recognizing free labour unions, honoured right of the accused, and protected farmers from exploitation? Should this evolve from wishful thinking, the spontaneous applause filled in the air would definitely be accompanied by long-term appreciation, respect and trust.
With thunderous applause and loud cheers for the Beijing Olympic opening ceremony from all over the world, who can resist claiming honour as a Chinese? I doubt – not even for liberals who have been long time critics of CCP. Lam Hang-chi of the Hong Kong Economic Journal, for instance, could not deny the event as a recognition of wealth and ability of the State.
The glamorous demonstration of state power by our central government last Friday is highly instrumental. Thirty years ago, when the communist state was rusty and weary, Deng Xiaoping vowed to modernize the nation in four aspects. Thirty years later, with the golden opportunity to host an international event, it was hoped that 8888, supposingly the luckiest time in the era for Chinese, could mark the watershed success point in recent history. The immediate effect of the 4-hour show is encouraging – noises of ‘wow’ on the growing capacity of PRC as a party state, rallying peoples under the five stars flag, are rampant. Everyone’s eyebrows were raised about how far the state has reached.
In a confident democracy, a deliberate demonstration of state power is not common. The French military parade on the Elysees Avenue every 14th July might be an exception. The need is obvious. With 4 regimes after Napoleon yet no single victory in any war, it is not difficult to imagine the insecurity of the French.
The price to legitimize an authoritarian state is even higher. All the stools have to be managed. Yet, those who seek to please everybody please nobody. The recent implementation of the labour contract law was meant to be an honest broker between the evil capitalists and the vulnerable proletariats. While the pseudo “socialist” state attempted to delude itself and its subjects that it strived for the moral high ground to protect its workers, neither the employers nor the employees perceived the same.
The last minute reversal of the decision to support the compromise deal of import surge thresholds also reflected the paranoia. When it endeavored to use 15,000 performers to showcase the nation’s ancient history and its rise as a modern power, it did not have the courage to go for the long-expected Doha arrangement at the last moment – just because it could not take the risk of offending its 900 million of peasants. It was a declimax to the assertion of state power but it was still a calculated fair deal.
A Leviathan government can never walk side by side with a free society. However obscure, China has the most powerful bureaucracy in the world. No doubt, it can serve its people’s interest by satisfying their vanity with a perfect ceremony. At the other end, until 30 July 2008, it defied the spirit of fearless advocacy making lawyers liable to their statements in court, and also the right of the detained accused to privacy with their legal representatives. The sarcasm intensified when the omnipotent central state sought to set the wrong right by legislative amendment - granting lawyer’s immunity in court and accused the right to meet lawyers free from procuratorat surveillance – with the disapproval of the local criminal justice organs who refused to honour the amendment.
It is the obsession of state power that an atomic bomb and a hydrogen bomb are desired so much. General Chen Yi once said, “We prefer a nucleon (‘hezi’) to a pair of pants (‘kuzi’)”. This is one of the many experiences that Chinese have been preached by someone from the top that we should ‘stand up’ as if we were invertebrate.
Pundits put the phenomenon down to a cultural cause – the so-called ‘cultural institutionalism’ in the language of political scientists. Culture determines institutional choice. The late Li Shenzhi, Deng Xiaoping’s English secretary and Associate Director of the Chinese Social Sciences Academy, observed Chinese history to be a history of dictatorship. An Australian Historian, W.J.F. Jenner, in ‘The Tyranny of History: The Roots of China's Crisis’, attributed the root of China’s crisis to the Chinese populists’ obsession in state power. Whenever crisis arises, power centralization is always the answer. It works like a panacea to all the problems. A strong unitary state has long been taken as the icon of stability and prosperity amongst Chinese subjects (‘zimin’). Similarly, formidable military buildup and the successful hosting of an international event watched by millions acrossed the planet are viewed as tokens of ‘Strong Army, Rich Nation’.
Everyone is a patriot these days. One would for sure be proud of Director Zhang Yimou and his team for the incredible opening performance. One would be ecstatic if Yao Ming dunks on Kobe Bryant. The question is, putting this August aside, would one feel happier if the State respected workers’ rights by recognizing free labour unions, honoured right of the accused, and protected farmers from exploitation? Should this evolve from wishful thinking, the spontaneous applause filled in the air would definitely be accompanied by long-term appreciation, respect and trust.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)
