Will Economic Liberalism in China cause Political Liberalism?

Will Economic Liberalism in China cause Political Liberalism?

*I am writing this after reading China’s Great Leap Backward by James Fallows, which is published in the Atlantic Magazine.

Yoon, Jaehyun

revised at Feb. 20th 2017
writed at Jan. 5th 2017

 

Skeptism against Liberalism

Some of researchers claim in Liberalism, if a, politically, non-liberal state is weaved in Global free market, then that state will be politically democratic in some point. However, Current International system seems changing from one-polar to multi-polar, and from free market to mercantilism. So Political Realism is concerned more persuasive. Maybe great failure in Syria and Iraq, issue of Grexit and Brexit is relevant with the skeptism against Liberalism.

One of hot argument in this issue would be china’s case. China is being richer and taking more important role in the global economic system. Surely China is changing its economic system as liberal system de facto. But it does not mean China is being politically democratic. China’s tendency would be much more related with sustainability of Chinese government and its system. Because escaping poverty is prior factor of survival. Skeptical view is being concluded as “if poverty is overcome, then people are going to be not angry enough to be eager for democracy.”

Ping Pong diplomacy

Current Sino-American relation is based on Nixon-Kissinger’s diplomacy in 70’s which is called “Ping Pong” diplomacy. Major goal of Ping Pong diplomacy was separating China and Soviet Union and isolating Soviet Union. In 60’s and 70’s, China wanted to be fair, equal and more independent from Soviet Union. In other hand, Soviet Union wanted to get more control and influence on China.  This discord had grown as Sino-Soviet conflict; border dispute. By it being revealed in America, America alternated the role of Soviet as economic supporter on China by Ping Pong diplomacy, and as China, there was no reason to be hanged with Soviet Union.

Nowadays, the situation is changed. America wants to get the power by isolating its rival. In the Cold War, the rival was Soviet Union but currently main rival of America is China. This is why America preferred to get better relation with Russia, and making distance with China. Recently Henry A. Kissinger also said he advised to Donald J. Trump in this point.

The Dispute of Revisionism

Sino-Soviet conflict is also grown from “dispute of Revisionism” between Khrushchev and Mao. This dispute occurred by the succeeding secretary, Khrushchev criticized Stalin’s work. Stalin tried to make centralized system, and it created his dictatorship and heavy industry. On the other hand, Khrushchev wanted to build more decentralized and autonomic system. It increased production of light industry.

China was against Khrushchev’s action. And it came as Maoism, Great Leap forward, and the Cultural Revolution. These were centralized, more Stalinized movements of China in Mao’s era. But China did not stuck in the old Communism. Deng Xiaoping and his policies were the antithesis of Mao. Nevertheless, Tiananmen Massacre in June 1989 shows China’s centralized tendency. This has the same side of the character of Mao’s regime. Under these points, I assume the hypothesis that China is being more centralized when the foreign relation gets more strain.

In the same vain, In the contemporary China, the chairman Xi is driving the cleanup of his political rival, the control in media, and the prasing of its own regime under the strain with U.S. and other rival states, such as Japan. They are doing similar role of USSR in Sino-soviet dispute in 60’s. However, as Deng did in the economic area, this regime is chasing for the throne of Free-Trade-Dominator. Nov. 19th, 2016, Chairman Xi called for Free Trade and FTAAP as economic globalization falters, and rise of protectionism. but it is calling in power game with U.S. against Trump’s move in protectionism. If so, this would scarcely mean Liberalism of China, rather be close to precarious Libertinism of the world.

China’s Great Leap Backward?

In Conclusion, I think China and the world is going backward if we concern affects and aspects in international politics. At least there is no reason that let us believe the world is naturally going for Liberalism. It would be better close to multipolar system in Realism.

But this is in only thinking in international politics. What I want to claim is, there is no ‘natural’ reason and relation to go Liberalism and Democracy by effects in international politics. I still want to open possibilities in domestic and civil scale, which is not related with international scale. It is because the identities of the Chinese people are, inevitably, changing. And this identities are not about information based on global standard, but something more like briskness of action even under constant amount of information, I hasty guess.