The fiasco of the Olympic Torch Relay has focused attention on the condition of human rights in China. What is the source of human rights abuses in that country today? Many people assume the problem is that China remains a communist dictatorship, and that abuses occur because a strong centralized Chinese state ignores the rights of its citizens. With regard to Tibet and the suppression of the religious movement Falun Gong, this may be right. But the larger problem in today’s China arises out of the fact that the central Chinese state is in certain ways too weak to defend the rights of its people.
The vast majority of abuses of the rights of ordinary Chinese citizens today—peasants who have their land taken away without just compensation, workers forced to labor under sweatshop conditions, or villagers poisoned by illegal dumping of pollutants—occurs at a level far below that of the government in Beijing. China’s peculiar road towards modernization after 1978 was powered by so-called “township and village enterprises” (TVEs), which were local government bodies that were given the freedom to establish businesses and enter into the emerging market economy. The TVEs were enormously successful, and many today have become extraordinarily rich and powerful. In cahoots with private developers and companies, it is they who are producing conditions resembling the “satanic mills” of early industrial England.
The central government, by all accounts, would like to crack down on these local government bodies, but finds itself unable to do so. It both lacks capacity, and depends on local governments and the private sector to produce jobs and revenue. The Chinese Communist Party understands that it is riding a tiger. Each year there are several thousand violent incidents of social protest, each one contained and suppressed by state authorities, who nevertheless cannot seem to get at the underlying source of the unrest.
Americans traditionally distrust strong central government, and champion a federalism that distributes powers to state and local governments. The logic of wanting to move government closer to the people is strong, but we often forget that tyranny can be imposed by local oligarchies as much as by centralized ones. In the history of the Anglophone world, it is not the ability of local authorities to check the central government, but rather a balance of power between local authorities and a strong central government, that is the true cradle of liberty.
The nineteenth century British legal scholar Sir Henry Sumner Maine in his book Early Law and Custom points to this very fact in a fine essay entitled “France and England.” He notes that the single most widespread complaint written in the cahiers produced on the eve of the French Revolution (which Tocqueville also refers to in The Old Regime and the French Revolution) were complaints by peasants over encroachments of their property rights by seigneurial courts. According to Maine, judicial power in France was decentralized and under control of the local aristocracy. By contrast, from the time of the Norman conquest, the English monarchy had succeeded in establishing a strong, uniform, and centralized system of justice. It was the King’s Courts that protected non-elite groups from depredations by the local aristocracy. The failure of the French monarchy to impose similar constraints on local elites was one of the reasons why the peasants who sacked manor houses during the Revolution went straight to the room containing the titres to property that they felt had been stolen from them over the preceding generations. In England, the legitimacy of existing property rights was much more broadly accepted.
State weakness can hurt the cause of liberty. The Polish and Hungarian aristocracies were able to impose their equivalents of the Magna Carta on their monarchs; those countries’ central governments, unlike their English counterpart, remained far too weak in subsequent generations to protect the peasantry from the local lords, not to speak of protecting their countries as a whole from outside invasion.
The same was of course true in the United States. “States’ Rights” and federalism was the banner under which local elites in the South could oppress African-Americans, both before and after the Civil War. American liberty is the product of decentralized government balanced by a strong central state, one that is capable, when necessary, of sending the National Guard to Little Rock to protect the right of black children to attend school.
It is hard to know if and when freedom will emerge in 21st century China. The latter may be the first country where demand for accountable government is driven primarily by concern over a poisoned environment. But it will come about only when popular demand for some form of downward accountability on the part of local governments and businesses is supported by a central government strong enough to force local elites to obey the country’s own rules.
9 Comments »
Is strong central state with decentralized government can truly guaranty liberty? Wasn’t strong state are also could be dictator too like communism in China?
Comment by marina – April 27, 2008 @ 1:20 am
I know how to balance out the central goverment power and the local government power in a a new way. The next step for democracy is to split the election to be 2 steps for up and down. Joining the existing 3 rights, it will become the 5 rights constitution. The first 5 rights constitution was invented by the first Chinese President Mr.Sun one handred year ago in overthrowing Qing Dynasty, but he failed the democracy in that first chinese republic because he did not realized that these 2 extra rights should be used to split election to be election up and down. If these 2 rights are not used in what I said here, it is just some neglectable compensation to the existing 3 rights. Mr. Sun got a very a weak central government with chaos of war and muder, then in the end he generated the mode of chinese communisim party and KMD party to increase the power of central goverment by studying Soviet Union. In the end CCP won to be the present Chinese government.
China has over 1500 years of politician qulification exam history with the content of ancient chinese philosophy and literature, which can be evolved to be mordern style by adding modern content. Also chinese ancient government had officials that were responsible for criticizing every politician inluding emporer. This is why President Sun thought out 2 extra rights for democracy.
Now,one right should controled by public citizens, which is used to elect down every level of major official such ad mayor, govenor and president by every 4 years. the election up power should be controled by central government politician qulication exam and the poll of very level of Parliament or board. Cadidates passed the central government exam first, then they were allocated to the place other than his home town for a practicing position. Whenever there is a major official position becomes empty, candidates in that area will be slected by election from the the city hall board, province board or parliament. The central government will the same style. For local government, local citizen will have chance to join the effort of central government to control the local government. Local government official will not be so easily join any group to intensify their own interest also because they come from other area by the order of the central government. And they can be elected down by public. On the other side, they can not be promoted to higher level if they do not care the policy of central government. For the same reason, The central goverment is also formed in this way, it is democracy. Public can elect down the president although they can not elect up a president. Election up is controled by parliament members. If a president is not elect down by public, he can continue another term or appoints his successor. Otherwise, the person supported by the majority of parliament will take the position. so it is a kind of mixing of USA and British democracy style. In addition, every citizen will have the chance to pass the qulification examle ready for a high rank official postiion above county level in theory by less cost than the present election compaign system.
It should the way of chinese Democracy, which is a mix of western democracy and the chinese ancient and present government style. I guess that it will also be the the future of democracy fo the whole world. Then we can get rid of the chaos when applying democracy in developing country. We were fed up by those chaos stories.
I am a chinese that salute to Mr.Francis Fukuyama by what you said in this article. I agree with you and I would like to put my cents here for a better world.
Best Regards
George Wang
-Canada
Comment by George Wang – April 30, 2008 @ 4:39 pm
Dear Mr. Francis Fukuyama
After reading your article_Strong States and
Liberty, I agree with you and I decided to say my
comment although I am only an electronics engineer in
Canada. I just hope that this idea can make the world
better. What I said here can be checked in chinese
history and democracy history into detail. I put
comment in your
blog, but I think that I make many spelling errors
there.
I know how to balance out the central government
power and the local government power in a new way. The
next step for democracy is to split the election to be
2 steps for up and down. Joining the existing 3
rights, it will become the 5 rights constitution. The
first 5 rights constitution was invented by the first
Chinese President Mr.Sun one hundred year ago in
overthrowing Qing Dynasty, but he failed the democracy
in that first Chinese republic because he did not
realized that these 2 extra rights should be used to
split election to be election up and down. If these 2
rights are not used in what I said here, it is just
some neglect able compensation to the existing 3
rights. Mr. Sun got a very a weak central government
with chaos of war and murder, then in the end he
generated the mode of Chinese communism party and KMD
party to increase the power of central government by
studying Soviet Union. In the end CCP won to be the
present Chinese government.
China has over 1500 years of politician qualification
exam history with the content of ancient Chinese
philosophy and literature, which can be evolved to be
modern style by adding modern content. Also Chinese
ancient government had officials that were responsible
for criticizing every politician including emperor.
This is why President Sun thought out 2 extra rights
for democracy.
Now, one right should controlled by public citizens,
which is used to elect down every level of major
official such ad mayor, governor and president in
every 4 years. The election up power should be
controlled by central government politician
qualification exam and the poll of very level of
Parliament or board. Candidates passed the central
government exam first, and then they will be allocated
to
the place other than his home town for a practicing
position. Whenever there is a major official position
becomes empty, candidates in that area will be
selected by election from the city hall board,
province board or parliament. The central government
will be the same style. For local government, local
citizen will have the chance to join the effort of
central
government to control the local government. Local
government official will not be so easily join any
group to intensify their own interest also because
they come from other area by the order of the central
government. And they can be elected down by public. On
the other side, they can not be promoted to higher
level if they do not care the policy of central
government. For the same reason, the central
government is also formed in this way, which is
democracy. Public can elect down the president
although they can not elect up a president. Election
up is controlled by parliament members. If a president
is not elect down by public, he can continue another
term or appoints his successor. Otherwise, the person
supported by the majority of parliament will take the
position. So it is a kind of mixing of USA and British
democracy style. In addition, every citizen will have
the chance to pass the qualification exam ready for
a high rank official position above county level in
theory by less cost than the present election campaign
system.
It should the way of Chinese Democracy, which is a mix
of western democracy and the Chinese ancient and
present government style. I guess that it will also be
the future of democracy of the whole world. Then we
can get rid of the chaos when applying democracy in
developing country. We were fed up by those chaos
stories.
I am a Chinese that salute to Mr. Francis Fukuyama by
what you said in this article. I agree with you and I
would like to put my cents here for a better world.
Best Regards
George Wang
-Canada
Comment by George Wang – April 30, 2008 @ 6:18 pm
With the “knowledge revolution” in full swing, the world is moving feebly toward a system of noocracies, led by the western democracies, followed by (the few) “benevolent” dictatorships, communist dictatorships and theocracies.
Comment by Arnold Eyre – May 2, 2008 @ 8:34 am
Democratization in China,
Well, cultural differences maybe
improbable to use the American or Anglo democratic develop as the guiding process of Democratization in China.
The rule of develop a middle class , the middle class will ask for right and civil -Anglo western democracy will follow
lamentably has not been the Historical rule
In matter of fact , Middle class did not turn
Southern European Countries in
Anglo Western Democracies
Middle Class economic power did not turn
pre WWII Japan in stable Anglo democracy
Middle Class power, did not turn Argentina into a long stable Democratic Power like the Anglo , American model did
Culture affects the politics and while constitutions, laws can be copied,
Cultural traditions is a different ball game
The Anglo tradition of common law. More individualist and less centralized authority , more egalitarian culture , a tradition of thousands of years
It as powerful as the Cultural tradition in China, Japan and worldwide are.
And they affect the political attempt to recreate Anglo Western traditions
In his book Trust , Mr Fukuyama
offer a great dissection of how the internalization of trust in different societies affect economical, political and public sphere
According to his study, trust in Asian and African culture tradition is center more in family and less in society that results in
cultures with strong family ties but corrupt government , families ties trumping other larger spheres of trust so crucial ingredient in Anglo democratic societies .
And Asian societies have a millenarian tradition of free enterprise , private business acumen and capitalism but it did not
brought like in the Anglo cultural world
a Democratic Political Culture
So History proof that Economic reforms per se
are not enough,
Just large middle class and private entrepreneur spirit which in the case of the Chinese culture , it is an undeniable Chinese cultural achievement ,
Neither education per se
Which always have been prized in Asian cultures
does not bring Democracy other ingredients are necessary
Dissent, Individualism, Trust beyond the family sphere, tradition of Common Law, limited government are the root behind the
Anglo Democratic achievement.
Anyone who read the list of Human Right Groups notices that
Human Rights embody in the original 1948 Chart reflect Anglo Western Concepts
that for other cultures Human Rights lack the same meaning
Order, stability and lack of introspective self reflection of flaws in cultural modes
are the order of the day among the hearts and
minds of Non Western Cultures be Asians or not
Maybe for that reason, Overwhelming Chinese support the occupation, annexation of Tibet and racial discrimination and racial sense of superiority among Han Chinese
While in the Anglo American model the occupation of the Philippines, the racist laws caused pain , moral dissent and disturbance among Americans
Many felt that if the Filipinos wanted Independence America should give it to them
In China, due to cultural factors
Even that Taiwanese and ethnic Tibetans want such independence
Chinese lack such emphaty toward or desire to
respect their will
No Amount of Economic Development or Education can affect a Culture Elements
Anglo American Western Culture is an unique model as Unique as the Chinese or the Kenya Culture is
The only way for a worldwide embrace of Anglo American cultural values such as jury independence. empathy toward others , individual freedoms , dissent , check and balance Trust beyond family sphere
it if such values could be internalized and taught from home to school to culture and the
only way to do so
in a absolute fashion is if
the British Empire have not being dissolved and if Britain or an similar American empire ruled the planet otherwise
we have the Rainbow and the United Nation mosaic of cultures and as Mr Fukuyama knows
culture is stronger than any economical force
Comment by viewer – May 21, 2008 @ 12:30 am
The Chinese government sure has a friend in Francis Fukuyama don’t they?
Those pussy little protesters at Tiananmen Square just didn’t understand power like you do, did they, Frank?
What a sorry excuse for a liberal democrat you’ve become.
Thanks, anyway, Frank. But I think I’ll throw in with the ‘89 protesters than buddy up with that totalitarian regime.
But have fun rationalizing totalitarian rule, Frank. Looks like it suits you.
I don’t know if I’ll ever read anything you read ever again after what you just wrote today.
Comment by Ben Sutherland – May 23, 2008 @ 5:55 pm
Francis Fukuyama wrote:
>…American liberty is the product of >decentralized government balanced by a >strong central state, one that is capable, >when necessary, of sending the National >Guard to Little Rock to protect the right >of black children to attend school….
With due respect to Mr. Fukuyama I’m of the feeling that American liberty’s been slipping because of a growing imbalance between “the strong central state”, which has arrogated to itself the right to wage undeclared wars, and “the decentralized state” whose role is more or less limited to distributing to those with connections the contents of the pork barrel. As a result “guided democracy” a la mode chinoise, or russe, is gaining currency and popularity globally.Its solidity is undewritten by the Chinese version of the Nationa Guard, which displayed the central government’s resolve to remain the ultima ratio in Korea against us and on Tianmen against our system.
Comment by denis fodor – June 10, 2008 @ 11:14 am
Hi.
I’m livin in IRAN and actually i just want you to know that i like your sentences and i follow your points. but….
There is one way for Iranian salvation and its America’s help.
I say this because i live here and you live in US. I even don’t dare to write my opinion here.
you know the differents.
Regards.
Comment by Mohammad Tajbakhsh – June 15, 2008 @ 1:44 am
Hello;
I read your article on Afghanistan the other day, and was struck that you seem to be distancing yourself for your part in the incredible damage the Bush Admin. has created in out world. In-League with, in my opinion, American Traitors such as Norquist and Podhoretz, you should not be allowed to vanish into the academic background for your crimes against our country.
I was advised of the fierce patriotism engendered in Americans of Japanese descent by the ghastly imprisonment program in WW2. It may seem to the otherwise-advised mind that you have attempted, in your abbettance to WAR-Crimes by the U.S. Government, that you have “counted-coup” for that outrage. But vengeance is the Lord’s, not yours or mine. I know of Daniel Inouye, and I know of Wesley Narita, for my hometown here.
They are different than you, sir. The are Americans I can understand and respect.
The bastards that have subverted MY government under cover the Cheney/Bish Admin. are indeed the enemy within, and you carry that title forever for me, unless they start a new tribunal, similar to the justice meted-out at Nuremburg, so long ago.
Hub Galliker, having honorably-served.
Comment by Hub Galliker – August 17, 2008 @ 4:41 pm
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Leave a comment
