Chinese Democracy soon might be more than just a bad Guns and Roses album. While it is still far from certain that the student protests in Hong Kong will result in lasting reform, the fact that these demonstrations have not been brutally crushed as of yet is no small sign of progress in that country. Even if this is not the flashpoint of reform some think it is, the party elites in Beijing would do well to open their eyes and ears: big changes are imminent.
China is slowly but surely moving towards a sociological tipping point. Ignoring the obvious blunder of the "one child policy", China's demographics are beginning to look more like the West's as its middle-class begins to buy cars, houses, and vacations. And when a burgeoning middle class becomes manifest, history has shown that their materialism, self-interest, and down-right pettiness demands that the government become more subservient to the populace, both in the form of elections and public services.
China is moving forward on the latter - social services are indeed expanding in China, with public healthcare and pensions becoming more commonplace. But on the former, Beijing and the who's-who of the Communist Party remain obstinate: democracy is one item the party elites do not want on the menu, no matter how much black bean sauce its in.
There are more reasons for this than most far-out left-wingers and right-wingers give China credit for. China views democracy in much the same way that militant Islam views the Sexual Revolution - a manifestation of absolute chaos and blasphemy. China has always prided itself on stability in the family, economy, and government; thus, the West's track record of high divorce rates, economies in tailspin, and political deadlock helps only to provide support to Beijing's favorite Confucian tenet: order, not liberty, is the highest good.
How then can the Chinese elites be convinced to lessen their stranglehold on political offices and electoral candidates? The answer is simple: allow change to happen slowly.
China has corruption issues all over the country, particularly in rural areas. If Beijing were to allow for accountability in these areas they might very well see production soar as their citizens no longer have to grease palms or hide their surplus. The lessons learned in the rural areas, where stakes are lower, can be transferred to larger and larger urban centres, until finally, the major centers are allowed to join the more democratic fray. Furthermore, the elites might learn to take advantage of a system based on merit and integrity over party loyalty or family connections, thus cracking the glass ceiling many middle-class and innovative Chinese come up against when they enter political life.
What I've just described might seem simplistic, but its a workable system that can take place over a few decades while promising not to threaten the security and unity of China. True, none of what is proposed is exactly what the students are asking for, and it won't directly address the problems in Tibet or suppression of dissent, but perhaps the reader ought to be reminded that English-speaking democracy was built piece by piece over a thousand years. Slow and steady reform worked for our world - I'm sure it can work for China.
What remains to be seen is if the elites in Beijing can understand that it is in their own best interest to let their citizens regulate themselves, especially in matters of property and local services. With the rapidly growing middle-class, time is running out to be seen as part of the solution, not the problem. In this time of change, the party elites would be wise to recall Sun-Tzu: the supreme art of war, as in politics, is to subdue your opponent without fighting.
