Contemporary Chinese Politics - the Legacy of Dynastic China - Assignment Example

Contemporary Chinese Politics Student’s name: Name of institution: Instructor’s name: Course code: Date of submission: Contemporary Chinese Politics (1) What was the legacy of dynastic China for modern political culture OR modern politics? A legacy may be defined as something that is received or transmitted from a predecessor or an ancestor from the past to present or future generations (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). The legacy of dynasties in China date back to as far as 2070 B.C. The history of China was marred by problematic transitions from one dynasty to the next (Buzan, 2010). In current times, China is usually portrayed as a neat country that does not have many problems as other Asian countries (Jianyong, 2008). In real sense, it was very rare for China to experience peaceful changes from one dynasty to the next (Abramson, 2008). Each new dynasty usually came into existence and power after overthrowing the existing regime and taking over power (Ankerl, 2000). The recorded history of China can be said to date back to 3,000 years ago. However, if archeological evidence is added, the history of China can be explained from 2,500 B.C. (Lo & Chan, 1998). This is the main source of information about the historical dynasties that existed in China and how the legacy that they had on the country then and on modern politics in the country now (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). Throughout the history of China, it has always been divided into different regions. Each of these regions has been ruled by different rulers, mostly family members and other close relatives who have been passing down power from one generation to the next (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). During those times, there was no single identifiable dynasty that could be said to rule China (Abramson, 2008). China was divided into regions that were ruled by their own dynasties. However, there have been numerous debates about the accuracy of these facts with some groups of scholars such as Carlson, Gallagher and Liebertha (2010) claiming that these dynasties ruled the whole of China and were overthrown out of power before other dynasties took over. The first dynasty in Chinese history was the Xia, a Bronze Age dynasty that was mostly known from legend. The Xia dynasty is thought to have run from the end of the 3rd millennium B.C. to the middle of the 2nd millennium B. C. The second dynasty was the Shang dynasty that is said to have existed from 1600 B. C. to 1100 B.C. it was also called the Yin dynasty and it was founded by Tang (Abramson, 2008). There were several other dynasties that were known to exist in the history of China. Examples of these dynasties include the Chou or Zhou dynasty, the Qin dynasty, the Han dynasty, the Xin dynasty, the Sui dynasty and the Liang dynasty among many others that originated from different regions in China (Lardy, 1998). All these dynasties existed at different periods in the history of China and all played an important role in the history of China (Buzan, 2010). Each dynasty was unique and has impacted modern political culture of China in various ways (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). The ancient Chinese dynasties were characterized by close relatives or family members of well established politicians who got into politics and succeeded these politicians in different positions or the same positions (Ankerl, 2000). There have been a lot of disagreements about the inherited political powers (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). These debates arose as a result of some people supporting the coming to power of political families and others totally being against this because they felt it was undemocratic (Ankerl, 2000). The dynasties can be explained as political families which pass down power to members of the family or to close relatives of the family. Dynasties have seen the members of one family rule a particular areas for generations and generations because power was passed down to family members or close relatives (Ankerl, 2000). Dynasties have existed in various forms. There are both historical versions and modern day versions of political dynasties (Abramson, 2008). The family members and close relatives of these dynasties enjoy power and other advantages more than other ordinary citizens of the nation (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). Dynasties in China have a legacy that has brought a lot of advantages to the country. They have influenced modern political culture in China in a number of ways. For example, fundraising in China has been made easier by the existence of dynasties (Jianyong, 2008). Family members and close relatives of dynasties have stronger networks and greater opportunities (Abramson, 2008). This gives them a built-in advantage because it is more difficult for opponents who may have a lot of resources such as influential networks and money to support campaigns (Buzan, 2010). Dynasties have made it possible to maintain legacies. This has been proven through research that has seen family members or close relatives belonging to a dynasty working extra hard to prove themselves or to maintain the legacy of their dynasties (Buzan, 2010). If the legacy that is being maintained is a good one, the voters have an added advantage because they will have competent and dedicated leaders (Jianyong, 2008). Dynasties have also helped politicians and voters to have access to politics (Abramson, 2008). This is in the sense that voters usually prefer to go for brand names when selecting their leaders (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). Research findings reveal that people prefer to vote for people or politicians who they are familiar with or understand their history or that of their families (Ankerl, 2000). This trend that was brought about by dynasties is still being experienced in modern politics in China (Buzan, 2010). This gives the members of such families’ access to politics (Abramson, 2008). Dynasties have also contributed to the stability of the country. Political dynasties have been argued to contribute to a high level of stability in the politics of China today (Jianyong, 2008). This can be seen through the existence of dynastic political parties in China that have dominated the politics of the country and have maintained a strong hold on the country’s political scene (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). (2) Who “lost” China and who gained it in the Chinese communist revolution of 1949? There had been a war in China for a very long time. The war was a result of the widespread instability that China has been experiencing for quite some time (Abramson, 2008). This led to differences that created a great rift between the National government that governed the Chinese people and the people of China. The war is said to have broke out in 1937 (Ankerl, 2000). This gave the newly formed Communist party the chance to win the favor of the Chinese people who were very dissatisfied and demoralized as a result of poor governance (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). The poor governance had been attributed to foreign influences, the Japanese to be precise, who had literally taken over China. The republic government was overthrown and there was a lot of suffering. The people of China became more and more unhappy and dissatisfied with the government (Buzan, 2010). They lost all respect for it as this was the era of war, suffering, hunger, famine, diseases and other inhumane forms of suffering that led to the death of very many helpless citizens (Jianyong, 2008). The nationalist government soon joined forces with the communist government and they managed to change the situation for some time (Jianyong, 2008). The war can be attributed to the Japanese invasion in China in 1937 that saw Japanese troops attack China. The war went on for a long time and Japan managed to take over most of China’s wealth. After some time, communist forces in China began to attack landlords who had taken over Chinese land (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). In October 1949, the communist leader, Mao Zedong publicly declared that the People’s Republic of China had been officially created (Abramson, 2008). This meant that the communists had won the wars and struggles that had gone on for a very long time (Buzan, 2010). In the Chinese communist revolution of 1949, the Japanese lost “China” and the communists won it. The announcement by the communist party leader Mao Zedong marked the end of the deadly and destructive civil war that had existed for many years (Abramson, 2008). The nationalist party and the communist party had always been engaged in on and off conflicts since the 1920s. The communist party can be said to have won the war in 1949 because of the declaration of the creation of the People’s Republic of China (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). The communists also won the war because the process of government upheaval that had been ongoing since 1911 in the country had officially come to an end. Mainland China had fallen to communism after the end of the war in 1949 (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). The Chinese communist party had been formed in 1921 in Shanghai China. Originally, it was a study group that worked within the nationalist party (Abramson, 2008). The Chinese communist army and the national party army collaborated on several occasions to get rid of the warlords in China who had prevented the country from forming a strong central government (Buzan, 2010). Their collaboration lasted until 1927 when communists were attacked by the nationalists. The communists were killed and purged from the party (Jianyong, 2008). The Japanese invaded China in 1931 and they proved to be stronger that the Chinese in very many ways (Buzan, 2010). They managed to take over the wealth of the country and control the major economic activities (Jianyong, 2008). The nationalist attempted to fight the Japanese but they were not strong enough and the Japanese could easily beat them. The communists were also not strong enough on their own and they could not manage to beat the Japanese singlehandedly (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). This forced the nationalist and the communists to unite so that they could save their country from foreign invasion by the Japanese (Abramson, 2008). The second cooperation between the communists and the nationalists was just as short-lived as the first one. The nationalist used all their resources to contain the communists rather than focusing on the elimination of Japanese troops in the country (Ankerl, 2000). The communists focused to increase their influence in the rural areas of the country. During the World War 2, the support for the communist greatly increased despite the nationalist receiving support from the United States of America (Abramson, 2008). There was a serios civil war between 1947 and 1949 between the communists and the nationalists (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). In the end, the communists eventually emerged victorious because of a number of factors. The first reason for their success is that the communists had strong support from the grassroots and local communities (Buzan, 2010). Their military organization was much more superior and the army had much more morale as compared to the nationalists. The communists were also successful because their army had seized large stocks of weapons from the Japanese reserves at Manchuria (Jianyong, 2008). When the communists brought the revolution in China, the United States ended all relations with the country since 1949 and only began to relate to it in the 1970s. The communists can therefore be said to have won China during the communist revolution of 1949 and the nationalists lost China (Ankerl, 2000). (3) Has China found a middle way between a command economy and a “free market”? Evaluate the country’s present-day political economy. A command economy is also referred to as a planned economy. In a command economy, the state or central government regulates or controls various factors of production (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). In a command economy, the government is considered the final authority that makes the final decisions regarding utilization of finished products, allocation of revenues earned from the distribution of resources and production of goods to be consumed (Buzan, 2010). China has been one of the best examples of a country that enforces a command economy (Wade & Veneroso, 1998). This saw the state and private owned enterprises receive directives and guidance from the government regarding their day to day operations and courses of action, their modes of production, their volumes of production and their production capacities (Ankerl, 2000). Command economy in China was established in 1949 and was in effect until the end of 1978. During this period, China operated on a centrally planned economy (Jianyong, 2008). This saw the Chinese government control and direct all the activities of the country’s enterprises that contributed to the economic output (Ankerl, 2000). Everything about the economy was regulated and controlled by the state. Production goals for example were fully set by the government and other factors such as prices were also set by the government. Most economic resources throughout the country were also allocated by the state (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). All these factors have led to China being considered the fastest growing economy in the world. When China began to strike a balance between the command economy and the free market, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the country is said to be growing as an annual rate of approximately 9.7 %. That is why the country has been able to raise more than 200 million people out of the extreme poverty that they were in before (Ankerl, 2000). A free market on the other hand can be said to be the exact opposite of a command economy. A free market economy is a very competitive economy that sees the prices of goods and services being determined by demand and supply (Lazonick, 1991). There is little or no government control when it comes to free market economies. Buyers and sellers in a free market economy are given the freedom to transact freely based on the mutual agreement of the price (Jianyong, 2008). In a free market economy, there is hardly any state intervention or interference. The allocation of resources is solely determined by the factors of demand and supply (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). In a free market economy, the state may only control certain aspects of the economy such as enforcement of contracts and private ownership and tax collection. However, the buyers and sellers are fully responsible for any of the choices that they make (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). Prices are given absolute powers to determine how goods and services will be allocated and distributed (Jianyong, 2008). The forces of demand and supply are responsible for fixing the prices (Ankerl, 2000). China began to look for a middle way between a free market economy and the controlled economy that has been in use for many years in the country. It has for the longest time been considered to be the largest command economy in the world (Buzan, 2010). The need to look for a middle ground has been mostly brought about by the fact that the largest command economy has been seen to no longer respond to the commands of the state (Jianyong, 2008). This has been because growth has been at a very fast rate to such an extent that the government got concerned that China may have excess capacity and that there may be more asset bubbles together with the increased friction between the country and other trading partners (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). China has managed to strike a balance between the command economy and the free market economy. This is because features and characteristics of both economies are still being witnessed in the country (Jianyong, 2008). The country’s present day political economy can be explained as being a little bit of both the free market economy and the command economy. However, economists warn of a looming danger if the country does not regulate its level of economic growth and development. Currently, the economic scene is not faced with a lot of political interference. The political environment in the country has been ideal for the economic growth that has been realized in the country over the past few decades (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). China has however not managed to strike a perfect balance between free market economy and the command economy (Buzan, 2010). (4) Does China possess political-cultural resources for building up “soft power” that may pose a challenge to the dominant values of capitalist modernity? Soft power has been defined differently by different scholars. According to Buzan (2010), the term soft power is used in international relations to refer to the use of culture or economic ability to influence others. Soft power has also been described as the ability to get what one wants through certain attractive factors such as economic or cultural powers (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). Soft power has also been described as the ability to get what one wants through attraction and not coercion (World Bank, 2002). China possess some political and cultural resources that can slowly build up soft power. This soft power can slowly pose a threat to the values of capitalist modernity that dominate the society today (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). The soft powers can be built up from the existence of dynasties that may influence the opinions and thoughts of others. Soft power has been explained as power that is based on intangible characteristics and influences such as ideology, values and culture. The dynasties can therefore have ideologies that can win them favor among the people. The cultures of China are also very strong and people from these cultures may end up having a lot of influence on the rest of the population. Cultural values may lead to the creation of soft powers among people who strongly believe in these cultures (Jianyong, 2008). In the modern Chinese society, the dominant social values are those of the capitalists. These dominant values are threatened by the soft powers that may arise from the existence of certain political-cultural factors. Politically, soft powers may arise from dynasties which may have a great influence on the surrounding communities around them (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). (5) Explain rising tensions and policy crises in Tibet and/or Xinjiang. There have been rising tensions in Xinjiang China as a result of ethnic differences. The tensions have led to several street demonstrations by the ethnic-Han Chinese. The main reason for these demonstrations were that the government had been accused of failing to stop an upsurge that saw the Uighurs experience a lot of violence against them. The Uighurs are the main ethnic group in Xinjiang. They had been accused by the government and the Hans of carrying out a lot of stabbings using sharp objects such as needles, safety pins and syringes (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). The tensions were very high because the country hardly has anyone who is daring enough to speak against the senior party leaders. The attacks have come after the inter-communal riots that were experienced at different points in the country. The Han claim that more than 200 people were left dead and it was the fault of the government (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). The demonstrations in Xinjiang have brought the tension that has been experienced in the region and the violence reached its peak on the 3rd of September when the communist party leader, Mr. Wang, was rejected in public by having water bottles and other plastics thrown at him. (6) Is there a “Chinese model” or “Beijing consensus” of development? There is a Chinese model or Beijing consensus of development. The Beijing consensus is known to represent an economic development model. This economic development model was an alternative to the Washington Consensus that advocated for market friendly policies. The Beijing consensus was supported by the United States Treasury, World Bank and IMF. The Beijing consensus was meant to guide reforms in developing countries (Landauer, 1947). The Beijing consensus is simply considered to be an alternative economic development plan in the developing world (Ankerl, 2000). China has had a very complicated ancient and modern history. That is why the China way of development has been very sophisticated (Jianyong, 2008). The Chinese model of development consists of four sub-systems. These sub-systems include: a unique outlook of the world, a unique way of government, a unique way of developing the country’s economy and a unique way of organizing the society (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). The Chinese society has been found to be organized in a very different way from the Western world. Specialists have stated that the Chinese market is very difficult to classify. The Chinese model is meant to show a commitment constant experimentation and innovation (Jianyong, 2008). The Chinese model was created to provide an alternative to the previous Washington consensus. The Chinese consensus was formed on the basis that it was so much better than the Washington consensus (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). The Washington consensus was highly criticized because of its complacency. Even though the proposers of the Chinese model such as Joshua Cooper Ramo argue that there is no perfect solution to the economic development, they feel that the Beijing model is much better than the Washington consensus (Wade, 1990). The Chinese model also proposes that the per capita income (GDP) should not be the only measure of a country’s progress. Joshua Cooper Ramo is of the opinion that the sustainability of a country’s economic system and the distribution of wealth together with the GDP should be used as the indicators of a country’s progress and economic development (Fairbank, 1992). The Chinese model has been attributed to the tremendous economic growth that the People’s Republic of China has been experiencing over the past few decades (Ankerl, 2000). These trends have attracted a lot of attention from different stakeholders such as policy makers, economists and scholars from all over the world. They have been interested to know why China has been economically successful (Cheng & Lo, 2002). Many developing countries are seeing China as the example to follow when it comes to realizing economic growth and development. The economic growth and development strategies used in China differ from those proposed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). The Beijing consensus is believed to be slowly emerging and has been seen to be more effective than the Washington consensus. In fact, many authors, scholars and economists speculate that the Beijing consensus is emerging at a very fast rate and could quickly replace the Washington consensus (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). Despite the global financial crisis that is being faced by many countries, the Chinese economy has been showing signs of withstanding the effects of the financial crisis (Ankerl, 2000). It has been projected to receive growth which can be a way of proving that the Chinese model is indeed one of the most effective economic growth and development plans to ever exist (IMF, 2000). The Washington consensus was conceived in 1989 by an economist named John Williamson. It was launched as an economic and policy recommendation that was fast accepted by many developing nations as one of the best strategies to spur economic growth and development (Carlson, Gallagher & Liebertha, 2010). This method embraced the ideals of free market capitalism, deregulation, privatization and open trade policies. The Washington consensus seemed like the best way to ensure that developing countries would increase their rates and levels of development (Buzan, 2010). However, the model was faced with a lot of mixed results. These included multiple currency issues and crises, recession during the economic turmoil of the 90s and stagnation among many other problems that saw the collapse of several economic systems in various nations. That is the when a new strategy began to emerge, the Chinese model or Beijing consensus of economic development (Jianyong, 2008). This has been said to be a contrast of the Washington consensus and has very little in common with the Washington model. Unlike the Washington consensus which was very rigid in solving economic problems, the Chinese model or Beijing consensus of economic development is very flexible and recognizes the importance of doing so in solving multifarious economic problems. The Chinese model or Beijing consensus of economic development is also very pragmatic (Ankerl, 2000). In conclusion, there is a Chinese model or Beijing consensus of economic development. This Chinese model of economic development continues to attract increasing interest and attention as many countries aim to be like China in terms of economic growth and development. China has experienced tremendous and extraordinary economic growth and development over a period of very few decades. The strategies that the country has been using so as to realize this growth and development are what have been referred to as the Chinese model or the Beijing consensus. The Chinese model or the Beijing consensus is replacing the common Washington consensus and is taken to be an alternative model that can be used by all countries so as to develop the world. As the world goes through the crunch of the global financial crisis, the focus on the Chinese model or the Beijing consensus has intensified further with more and more nations wanting to adopt this model of economic growth and development so as to survive the economic crisis (Ankerl, 2000). References Abramson, M. S. (2008). Ethnic Identity in Tang China. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Ankerl, G. C. (2000). Coexisting Contemporary Civilizations: Arabo-Muslim, Bharati, Chinese, and Western. Geneva: INU PRESS Geneva. Buzan, B. (2010). China in International Society: Is Peaceful Rise Possible? The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 3, 5-36. Retrieved from, http://www.irchina.org/pdf/BarryBuzan.pdf Carlson, A., Gallagher, M. E. & Liebertha, K. (2010). Contemporary Chinese Politics: New Sources, Methods, and Field Strategies. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Cheng, Y. S. & Lo, D. (2002). Explaining the financial performance of China’s industrial enterprises: Beyond the competition-ownership controversy. The China Quarterly, 170, 413-440. Fairbank, J. K. (1992). China: A new history. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. IMF (2000). World Economic Outlook. Washington, D.C.: The International Monetary Fund. Jianyong, Y. (2008). Peaceful Rise of China: Myth or Reality? International Politics, 45 (4), 439-456. Landauer, C. (1947). Theory of National Economic Planning. Berkeley: University of California Press. Lardy, N. R. (1998). China’s Unfinished Economic Revolution. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press. Lazonick, W. (1991). Business Organization and the Myth of the Market Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lo, D. & Chan, T. M. H. (1998). Machinery and China’s nexus of foreign trade and economic growth. Journal of International Development, 10 (6), 733-749. Wade, R. & Veneroso, F. (1998). The Asian crisis: the high debt model versus the Wall Street-Treasury-IMF Complex. New Left Review, 228, 3-23. Wade, R. (1990). Governing the Market: Economic Theory and the Role of the Government in East Asian Industrialization. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. World Bank (2002). Transition – The First Ten Years: Analysis and Lessons for Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank. Read More