A lot has already been written about the economic rise of China. Yet the political and strategic dynamics driving Chinese behavior are much more enigmatic for the West. This is why Western publications such as The Economist are fascinated by developments there. It is in this spirit of intellectual curiosity that the magazine decided to devote a weekly section to China. The fact that this is the first time since the launch of The Economist that the magazine decided to cover a country this way is very telling. The reason, as they put in rather alarmist term, is that “China is now an economic superpower and fast becoming a military force capable of unsettling America.”
Whether China's rise will end up unsettling America will ultimately depend on the domestic evolution of Chinese politics. There are primarily two ways of analyzing China. According to the first and more conventional school, Chinese economic development will eventually change the political system in a more democratic way. This is the basic premise of modernization. Modernization theory considers economic development as the precursor of democratization. According to this school, the basic requirements of democratization are factors such as the emergence of a prosperous middle class and political institutions that are mature enough to demand a peaceful transition from single-party rule to multi-party elections. In arguing so, modernization theory follows the trajectory of Western patterns, where mercantilism, capitalism, the Industrial Revolution, economic development and the emergence of a middle class were factors that came before democratization. In others words, there seems to be a clear correlation, bordering on causality, between development and democracy. As a result, as China turns into a consumerist developed economy, the transition from an authoritarian to a more democratic state seems inevitable according to modernization theorists. The emerging Chinese middle class will sooner or later push for political reforms that will democratize China.
In the other camp are the skeptics. They doubt the ability of modernization to explain Chinese dynamics on the grounds that what happened in 18th and 19th-century Western Europe will not repeat itself in China. The Chinese model is based not on private sector capitalism, as was the case in the West. Instead, what defines Chinese political economy is the rise of state capitalism where private property rights are not secured. The Chinese Communist Party also maintains a solid grip on the political system and controls the political, social and cultural realm in addition to the economic realm. Since China has an enormous population, the most important factor for the Communist Party is the ability of the capitalist system to absorb the millions of Chinese workers. Unemployment is therefore the nightmare that keeps Chinese officials awake at night. And the best way to keep the millions of Chinese employed is the growing Chinese economy. Otherwise, economic stagnation is likely to create social unrest and social unrest may eventually lead to a revolution against the political hegemony of the Chinese rulers.
Herein lies the Chinese paradox that contradicts with Western patterns of modernization theory. In the conventional case, economic development leads to democratization. In the Chinese case, economic development leads to political stability. In other words, China has created its own model that defies Western historic norms. In this Chinese model the key to the political hegemony and longevity of the Communist Party is economic performance. It is development, prosperity, the emergence of a middle class and a consumerist society that keeps the masses satisfied and willing to maintain the stability provide by the authoritarian political system. As long as people have jobs, they will put up with the political hegemony of the Chinese Communist Party.
We are therefore facing an interesting dilemma. Will economic development lead to democracy in China? Or will it maintain the current system? If we believe a Communist China will sooner or later clash with the United States, the answer to this question will also define the future of Chinese-American relations. But, as we will analyze next week, a Communist China need not clash with the United States. The status quo of peaceful coexistence may end up becoming the norm.
