By Minxin Pei
The current labour unrest isn’t as apolitical as it looks. But don’t expect an early change in China’s autocratic leadership.
The ongoing labour unrest in China is seen by many as a labour market response to uncompetitive wages offered by foreign companies. And, to a large extent, this is true. Changing demographics are reducing the supply of ultra-cheap young labourers from the countryside to coastal export-processing zones, giving labour more bargaining power.
But explaining China’s newly assertive workers purely on economic grounds misses the larger—and more interesting—political context. For labour activism is only one of the many signs of a broader political re-awakening in Chinese civil society.
For years, Western observers have been disheartened by the lack of political change in China. Modernization theory predicts that rapid economic progress should help liberalize the political system, but this hasn’t occurred in China since 1989. Until now.
In addition to migrant workers who have risked their jobs and personal safety in joining the strikes, China has seen other forms of civic activism and political assertiveness at the grassroots level.
What’s interesting about this new political reawakening is that on the surface it doesn’t look all that political. Instead of calling for democracy and freedom, participants in these activities focus on issues directly related to their economic interests, property rights and social justice. Examples include fighting off local governments’ attempts to build polluting factories, seize farmers’ land without compensation and evict urban residents from their homes. Criticism of government policy and performance in delivering public services and protecting social justice are routine in Chinese publications and on-line venues. And, of course, the ostensibly apolitical nature of such civic activism makes it much harder for the Communist Party to suppress it with brutal force.
Several forces have contributed to the reawakening. Clearly, the information revolution—a direct result of economic modernization—has helped change values and reduced the costs of organizing collective action. It has also magnified the political impact of such moves (even inspiring copycat action), while the rapidity with which the latest labour unrest has spread would have been inconceivable without the assistance of the Internet and cell phones.
Rising physical mobility of the population is another factor—as ordinary Chinese citizens have more opportunities to compare how conditions differ among China’s diverse localities, they acquire a greater awareness of the political and social injustice of their own surroundings and become less tolerant of such injustices.
Photo Credit: Peter M
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
CHARTER 08
1.. farms… age
2. Industrial age.
3. Information Age Internet Age… computer age…..
4. One computer chip Now has 2-billion transistor……. and still growing…
china has now 1-billion cell phones…. 500 million on internet..
Moore’s law: double computing power in 2-years… computing power double in 2-years….
All humans on Earth can Now publish a Newspaper/Magazine/Journals/Radio/TV show/Webpages/Blogs/Email from a $200 computers.
Computers/Internet/Blogs Allow Universal communications.. Matter of time china will free free free.
Free China at about 2015/2020
mandrewsf
I remembered that Deng Xiaoping once made a comment that China should become democratic only after its GDP per capita has reached $10,000. The current Chinese GDP per capita is only 40% of that number.
Do not forget that China is still a poor country. What China need the most right now are stability and economic growth, and China will be needing them above all else for the foreseeable future. China has always been heavily divided upon regional and urban-rural lines: it is nothing new and the CCP did not create it. Only a centralized government is capable of holding China together.
And do not presume the Chinese are fans of democracy. Their impression of Western democracy is more often than not similar to Liberum-Veto Poland. They would usually prefer a centralized state that gets the job done rather than a legislature that waste time bickering along partisan lines. Prominently, even the Tian’anmen Square protesters did not demand the overthrow of the government, but instead called for more citizen participation within the existing framework and a crackdown on widespread corruption.
Meanwhile China is becoming freer, albeit slowly. But progress is being made. Modern-day developed Asian democracies all had dark and despotic pasts. South Korea had Gwangju. Taiwan had “2.28.” And I do not even need to mention Japan’s militant past. What the West should exercise right now is patience. China is moving in the right direction. Criticizing China would only make it sensitive and provoke a backlash. The West should also keep in mind that China is inherently different culturally from the West. Even if China does become free, the result might not be something that the West will sigh at with relief.
IllinoisJoe
Won’t be easy. Chicomms won’t just roll over. Gonna cost a few million liters of blood. Of course, we have our problems with tyranny here as well. I’ll be praying for you, China.
Alex
Your name is Illinois Joe so I’m assuming you’re American. Last I checked, we’ve got the most free society of any major country, so what are you smoking that made you say we live under tyranny?
mandrewsf
Kent state and bonus marchers wasn’t that long ago. And don’t forget the governor of Illinois tried to sell Obama’s senate seat.
Alex
You could make the argument that there was a degree of tyranny here under GW Bush, what with all the wiretapping and tyrannically conquering Iraq after lying about WMDs, which resulted in 100s of thousands of deaths of innocent Iraqi civilians. But even back then, we had full freedom of press, assembly, etc. Tyranny is political structures in places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Myanmar, etc. So to say that the US falls into the category of aforementioned dictatorships is naive at best and insane at worst
purple
China’s government probably over estimates their power (as does the American public, for that matter). The US treads gingerly on many China concerns because its companies want access to the China market, not because of fear of China’s innate power. If China continues to shut off its markets then we will probably see a rapid shift in the US attitude toward China. After all, Indonesia and India both offer massive untapped markets as well.
Mike
Looks like a Chinese Tea Party! Godspeed to our brothers in China, let them overthrow their Communist oppressors.
Magnus T.M.
China needs a democracy revolution to overthrow the Chincoms. They will never voluntarily release their grip on power. Tens of millions may die but it’s better die for democracy than to live under slavery!
Tibet and East Turkestan must be liberated from the control of racist Chinese control. Excessive Chinese population should be removed Tibet and East Turkestan to allow those people to keep their culture pure and teach the Chinese a lesson for their racist arrogance.