<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content="text/html; charset=unicode" http-equiv=Content-Type> <META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19019"></HEAD> <BODY> <H1 class="cN-headingPage prepend-5 span-11 last">The party's the problem </H1> <DIV class="push-0 span-11 last"><!-- cT-storyDetails --> <DIV class="cT-storyDetails cfix"> <H5>Paul Monk </H5><CITE>April 26, 2011</CITE> <UL> <P class=comments><A href="http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/politics/the-partys-the-problem-20110425-1du2y.html#comments">Be the first to comment</A> </P></UL></DIV> <DIV id=googleAds class="ad adSpot-textBox"></DIV><BOD> <DIV class=articleBody><!-- cT-imageLandscape --> <DIV class=cT-imageLandscape><IMG alt="Illustration: John Spooner" src="ctsart_svOPED_APRIl26-420x0.jpg"> <P>Illustration: John Spooner </P></DIV> <P><STRONG>The idea that reform is a Western plot to weaken China is Communist Party spin.</STRONG></P> <P>PRIME Minister Julia Gillard's visit to China this week coincides with a nervous and reactionary campaign by the Chinese Communist Party to suppress any possibility of a "jasmine revolution" - given what has been sweeping the Arab world recently. Scores of leading intellectuals, human rights lawyers and activists, journalists and scholars have been arrested to silence and intimidate them. The case of the artist Ai Weiwei has made headlines, but many others have been swept up by the party's forbidding security organs.</P> <P>This suppression should concentrate our minds on how we think about the rising power of China. Human rights abuses are generally considered ugly, and a regime that treats its own citizens in this manner does not look like a trustworthy or pleasant neighbour; to say nothing of a prospectively benign regional superpower. The real lesson from the current repression in China, however, is not the strength or unpleasantness of the regime, but its insecurity. A regime that imprisons a man such as Liu Xiaobo and denounces the award of a Nobel peace prize to him as "an obscenity" is deeply insecure and politically immature.</P> <P>For three decades, the Communist Party has declared it wishes to move from the rule of an arbitrary dictator (Mao Zedong) to the "rule of law". But it violates its own laws with astonishing frequency. It still rules arbitrarily and its legal system is farcically subordinate to political dictation.</P> <P>The party insists it is building a "harmonious society", but it takes severe measures to suppress any voice that displeases it. Its propaganda organs accuse Western critics of wanting to contain and weaken China, using democracy as a "fig leaf". In reality, democracy has been called for by the most principled and independent Chinese intellectuals since before the Communist Party even existed.</P> <P>Understanding this is critical to our future dealings with China. Political reform has always been excruciatingly difficult in China, but calls for it are not a Western plot and they are not designed to weaken China. They are intended to strengthen it and provide for better, more resilient, more responsive governance. They are intended to make it possible for China to become a more fully accepted and welcome member of the international society of states. As Wang Jisi, dean of the school of international studies at Peking University, put it in a recent essay, <EM>China's Search for a Grand Strategy</EM>, China won't be able to exert positive influence globally unless it can enhance its reputation for "good governance and transparency".</P> <P>How can it do that? Wang is unequivocal: China's continued resurgence depends on "greater transparency and accountability, as well as on a firmer commitment to the rule of law, democracy and human rights, all values that are widely shared throughout the world today". Let's drum this into the heads of everyone who says we should not "lecture China" about democracy and human rights: the whole idea is being articulated best by eminent Chinese thinkers; it is vital to the flourishing of China, not part of any plot to weaken it; and it is a complex but indispensable element in China actually becoming influential and universally respected on the world stage.</P> <P>Wang's essay was about the need for China to devise a coherent grand strategy - something he argues it currently lacks. Just as he points out the need for China to undertake responsible political democratisation, he argues that it badly needs to reassure the world that its rapid military build-up won't lead it to bully its neighbours. Most of its neighbours are becoming apprehensive that it will.</P> <P>The irony of Chinese testiness is that the United States seeks not a weak China, but a co-operative and confident China - a partner in orchestrating and maintaining global security and coping with global challenges. This is lucidly set out by a very fine American China specialist and US State Department official, Thomas Christensen, in his recent essay <EM>The Advantages of an Assertive China</EM>.</P> <P>Last year, in a conversation with Hillary Clinton, which emerged from WikiLeaks, then prime minister Kevin Rudd described himself as ''a brutal realist on China''. With refreshing candour, Rudd described the Chinese leaders as ''sub-rational and deeply emotional'' about Taiwan. He told the US Secretary of State that our intelligence agencies were closely watching China's military expansion. The planned build-up of Australia's navy, he told Clinton, was ''a response to China's growing ability to project force''.</P> <P>Much was made of Rudd's candour and there was speculation that the disclosure might adversely affect our relations with China. But the context of his remark was crucial. He stated that, of course, our common goal must be to integrate China into the international community, ''while also preparing to deploy force if everything goes wrong''. That is to say, we should seek to ensure that China's rise will be peaceful, not assume or merely hope that it will be. As things stand, that will be a particularly challenging - but unavoidable - project for Australia, given our vast economic stake in China's resurgence.</P> <P>Here, then, is the watchword for our relationship with China in the years ahead: we want a secure and mature China, not a tetchy, insecure and bullying one. What would work for us - for the international system as a whole - would also, as it happens, serve China's interests best. It might not, however, suit the perceived interests of the Communist Party. There's the problem.</P> <P><STRONG>Dr Paul Monk is a former senior east Asia intelligence analyst, a founding director of Austhink Consulting and the author of <EM>Thunder from the Silent Zone: Rethinking China</EM>.</STRONG></P> <P>----------------</P> <H3>Comments</H3> <P class=cfix><SPAN><STRONG>25</STRONG> comments so far</SPAN></P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>China has so many problems it's not going to be able to much in the short or even long term. The fact that it is a Communist country doesn't help. Communism has been a total failure everywhere. All this China taking over the world stuff is complete garbage. They copy stuff, they don't innovate. If we all stopped buying their crap they'd be stuffed.</P><CITE><B>Dr Strangelove</B> | NY - April 26, 2011, 8:53AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>A thoughtful and insightful article.</P><CITE><B>SteveH.</B> - April 26, 2011, 8:58AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>I cant believe this rot is still out there.<BR>Dont think im some right or leftist nutter.<BR>I write this because I am an Australian has lived in China for many years.<BR>I often laugh at all the text book essay phd experts out there. They all talk about understanding China but in reality none really come close.<BR>Illusion One.<BR>China the land of oportunity. Most businesses think that going to China will be easy after they have read all the PHD material about doing business in China. However the reality of it all is that all have come back out of China. I thought that would teach western companies something but I was wrong. Chinese people dont want western people to become successful in China.<BR>I will say this, as most are terrified and scared of saying this publically. The Chinese Government will never give up control of there power. They hold power by force. The west act like the Chinese Communisty Party can change color. They act like China will reform after lots of international pressure. The reality is they will never do it. They are not going to give up there money and power. No no talks about how China prints as much money as it wants and goes abroad and exchanges it for gold and other country currency. When will the world talk about the reality on China. Why is no one talking about the massive polluting China is doing?Do you know about 90% of Chinese cities have no blue sky? That 100% of all there rivers are highly polluted? Climate change is caused by China. The Chinese people are have the same wants as Australian people - freedom and a clean environment. The Chinese Government will never give up dictatorship.</P><CITE><B>Sydney Man</B> | Sydney - April 26, 2011, 9:01AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>It all comes down to personal philosophy - is the good of the whole more important than the good of a few individuals? China has over a billion people. The Chinese government is doing an amazing job of increasing the wealth of China resulting in an improved standard of living for the people living there. Each province is being developed at different rates and the people in different regions have incomes and living conditions. This would be cause for huge internal conflict. The Chinese NEED to repress those who speak out otherwise the whole state could de-generate into Civil conflict greater than anything the world has ever seen. Democracy will come. Civil rights will come. "Intellectuals" in Australia should look with an open mind at this. The absolute worst thing that could happen in the world is a Chinese civil war. This will kill hundreds of millions of people and plunge a quarter of the world into extreme poverty. Those pushing for the fall of communist rule should be careful what they wish for.</P><CITE><B>jon</B> | melbourne - April 26, 2011, 9:13AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>All very good , but greed is rampant why should the millions of party members yield power and the perks that go with it they have no issue with shooting a few protesters / dissidents to keep the status quo . China is a far more material ( Capitalist ) society than our own.</P> <P>There is also the possibility of instead of Democracy feudalism will take hold - China had a republic for a while but it didn't last and the country fell apart due to the interest of local strong men ( who quickly raised their own armies) . </P> <P>The problem is not so simple..</P><CITE><B>ben</B> | Shanghai - April 26, 2011, 9:32AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>Nei hou</P> <P>I think the golden rule here is that:</P> <P># CHINA SUCCEEDS DESPITE COMMUNISM, NOT BECAUSE OF COMMUNISM. <BR>Every time we buy a Chinese made product we further erode true communism in China. The old party party is more a collective of dictators (with varying degrees of honesty) trying to manage the enormous growth that trade brings nowadays.</P> <P>## I have no problem with selling them ore and them selling us back manufactured goods. </P> <P>I have no problem with selling them uranium for energy so long as we set up an agency to monitor what China does with that uranium.</P> <P>I have no problem with selling them fish, rabbits, wild pigs, beef wood chips, tin, zinc, copper, gas and rare earths for if we don't sell it to them they'll simply waltz into (with Chinese owned corporations) mineral/commodity rich nations that are untapped (like PNG) and develop their own mines and plants etc.<BR>------------------</P> <P>The real question is why does Gillard not offer training to the unemployed to fill the skills shortages in mining towns in Aus? I mean, surely they can't stuff up skills training like Garret's insulation debacle... can they?</P><CITE><B>Alex</B> | Finley NSW - April 26, 2011, 9:33AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>@ Sydney Man<BR>I here the same thing from Chinese Nationals and Immigrants. The Chinese People are not China, China is the communist party.</P> <P>World leaders are Naively assuming China will change because it is the logical outcome of progress. We are forgetting one important factor. Greed.</P> <P>Does anybody really think that the Communist party is going to let go of their control over China and just step aside because it will be good for the People? If they can't have China then no one can. Logic will not factor into their decision.</P> <P>Why is China stepping up its Military production? The Chess pieces are moving into place and the game is only half way through finishing.</P><CITE><B>Nicolas</B> - April 26, 2011, 9:51AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>Sydney man, many of us are aware of these things about China. The columns that are being nice to China are probably trying to give the regime face saving ways to change.</P> <P>Whether this has even a remote chance of success I guess we'll see. Most of the writings come out of that special world of diplomats and foreign affairs - a very strange place.</P><CITE><B>Evan Hadkins</B> | Sydney - April 26, 2011, 9:52AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>It is bit rich of our Prime Minster to lecture others on human rights. The Prime Minister needs to look to her own appalling treatment of Aboriginal people, gay and lesbian people, and older Australians.</P><CITE><B>Really?</B> | Melbourne - April 26, 2011, 9:58AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>I totally agree views that China copied everything. It never innovated. But part of me always hinted that was not true. Never say never? hmmm.</P><CITE><B>jphu</B> | sydney - April 26, 2011, 10:00AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>After being painfully colonized and exploited by the west for more than 100 years, the Chinese simply don't believe the hypocrisy of the west under the name of 'democracy'. The Chinese, I am afraid, will keep doing their own way and ignoring the 'heartfelt suggestions' from the west.</P><CITE><B>Cathy</B> | Mosman - April 26, 2011, 10:14AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>Let the Chinese decide the way forward themselves.</P> <P>They may come up with an even better solution that democracy, who knows?</P><CITE><B>Rastus</B> | Brisbane - April 26, 2011, 10:15AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>In my experiences in China, I've seen behaviours of "officials" at the lower end as well as putting up with the full blown rhetoric from upon high. From a western perspective it isn't very pretty. </P> <P>Nationalism is quietly overtaking socialism as the preferred state ideology, concomitant with that is a re-emergence of xenophobia. One party rule is half the equation propping up this rotten system with a joke of a legal system completing it.</P> <P>I could go on and on recounting my experiences in dealing with Chinese businessmen both here (hiding behind contracts written for the Chinese legal system) and in China but it wouldn't make good copy - besides Sydney Man has already applied the broad brush on this topic and is essentially correct. (And indeed, anyone who has travelled to China for reasons beyond being a tourist would largely concur that different rules apply.)</P> <P>China will change one day but it is problematic to predict the outcome. However its history tells us that change will be violent and bloody - dynasties do not hand back the keys - reluctantly or otherwise.</P><CITE><B>Melbourne Man</B> | Once upon a time in China.... - April 26, 2011, 10:18AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>Every political system has its own flaws. The majority of Australian citizens have no clue about economics, how many of us truely understand the economic definition of "super profit tax"? Yet we vote and elect leaders who lied their way into prime ministers, who makes short term decisions solely for the purpose of gaining more votes, the general population is easily manipulated by skilled politicians with lies, deceptions and ... backstabbing. And we are calling this a better political system?</P><CITE><B>Rico</B> | Sydney - April 26, 2011, 10:33AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>@ Really</P> <P>Yeah, but this is what Australians excel at- Australians love to tell the rest of the world how to live and what to do while ignoring the obvious at home. </P> <P>I reckon that since Aboriginals were classified as human beings back in 1968, the best government policies for their good have been under: <BR># Howard with the intervention <BR># Rudd with the % of $ going back to aboriginal artists when their art is resold. </P> <P>The concept of Norforce with its ranks of aboriginal Australians was great and nowadays we have that rich mining magnate who sets out to employ aboriginals on his mines, which is really positive, for it is their land- we just seized it after all. </P> <P>But by and large, this is a nation that is easily sucked in by political boycotts of Israel and ALP politicians lecturing to the rest of the world about disarmament. </P> <P>## I truly believe that the ABC has been an enabler for years when it comes to deflecting attention away from issues at home- and no, I'm not talking about Dateline and Foreign Correspondent. <BR>And the worst thing is that the media's supposed thinkers/intelligentsia have always been too politically biased to recognize it.</P> <P>In reality, does any party truly have a vision for aboriginal Australia? I still reckon that offering tree planting jobs to aboriginals on desolate 3rd World settlements in the outback is the best way to tackle climate change for after all, tree planting is accepted as reducing C02 in Euro ETS schemes. </P> <P>((Sorry for not discussing China in this post ed but where else can these issues be raised?))</P><CITE><B>Alex</B> | Finley NSW - April 26, 2011, 10:39AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>Oh come on, are you really that vain? The Chinese have been exploited by the West for 200 years, you really think we're/they're going to buy your/our bullsh*t? It started with the Opium Wars, and quite frankly not many people take kindly to 200 years of exploitation from the West. It's only started to relax with the CCP's aggressive reforms that have obviously been less than humane in many cases, but don't ever start thinking they'd turn on each other merely because the West wants to 'save them from oppression'. Don't get me wrong, its human rights abuses have been terrible, but as a user said before, China won't be taking Western hypocrisy anytime soon. Go get rid of Guantanamo Bay before you try lecturing China on human rights.</P><CITE><B>Typical Bullshit</B> | Sydney - April 26, 2011, 10:45AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>Oh come on, are you really that vain? The Chinese have been exploited by the West for 200 years, you really think we're/they're going to buy your/our bullsh*t? It started with the Opium Wars, and quite frankly not many people take kindly to 200 years of exploitation from the West. It's only started to relax with the CCP's aggressive reforms that have obviously been less than humane in many cases, but don't ever start thinking they'd turn on each other merely because the West wants to 'save them from oppression'. Don't get me wrong, its human rights abuses have been terrible, but as a user said before, China won't be taking Western hypocrisy anytime soon. Go get rid of Guantanamo Bay before you try lecturing China on human rights.</P><CITE><B>Typical Bullshit</B> | Sydney - April 26, 2011, 10:46AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>As professional politicians, both Julia Gillard and Hu Jintao understand that all politics is local. The capricious use of Chinese laws for political purposes is more a sign of grim politicking within the many layers of PRC government and administration than any coherent posture towards the international community. We can expect to see more of it in the process of passing leadership to Xi Jinping. For China's entire history, command and control from the centre has been tenuous. It has always been enforced erratically, and stability has always been to product of that temporary constraint which comes from fear of retribution. It is easy to say that "the Party is the problem", but if you look at the behaviour of the Kuomintang which preceded the Communist Party little has really changed. Ditto if you go back through China's dynastic governments (and we are not talking here about the tinsel glories of television historical reconstructions). Real change to the political culture of China or any country cannot arise without changes in child raising and general community values. That does happen. A few short generations ago, children were beaten in Australia and Britain as a matter of "character building", while adults were flogged mercilessly for minor infractions. Chinese common culture and child raising has strong strands of coercion which are not going to disappear instantly. The idea that 'might is right' is widely accepted, though increasingly contested when, for example, the rich abuse the poor. However, the most intractable divide between so-called Western values and those of East Asia including China is the matter of 'face" (mianzi in Chinese). The giving and losing of 'face' in East Asian cultures is seen as a moral question, and will continue to generate outcomes that we might see as illogical.</P><CITE><B>Thor May</B> | Brisbane, Australia - April 26, 2011, 10:56AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>Monk: "Here, then, is the watchword for our relationship with China in the years ahead: we want a secure and mature China, not a tetchy, insecure and bullying one."</P> <P>Substitute "US" for "China" and it's even more appropriate. Since 1949, Uncle Sam has been arming &amp; protecting China's last hold-out province - for most of that time, a repressive Right-wing dictatorship. The United States HAS been trying to weaken China, as can be seen by its military encirclement and US sponsorship of the Dalai Lama for decades (If I had more than 300 words I could go further on this). Failure to understand the pressures imposed by the US makes understanding Chinese Government actions impossible. While they are reprehensible, they are eminently logical.</P> <P>The second thing to recognise is that there are no communists in the Chinese "Communist" Party. Instead of "Workers of the World, Unite!", its motto is "To Get Rich is Glorious". This has produced massive corruption, which goes all the way to the top. Since everybody in politics &amp; business is corrupt, decisions to prosecute anyone for corruption always have an ulterior motive - they are the losers in internal power struggles.</P> <P>What will bring change in China is not liberalisation from above (the bureaucracy saw what happened to Gorbachev in the USSR and is united in opposing that), but a revolt by its own workers. The industrialisation of China has created by far the largest working class on Earth and it will grow larger in coming years. When the countryside is emptied of under-employed peasants, labour shortages will give the workers the upper hand and they'll blow the "Communist" Party and its dictatorship sky high.</P><CITE><B>Greg Platt</B> | Brunswick - April 26, 2011, 11:20AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>@ Sydney Man | Sydney - April 26, 2011, 9:01AM</P> <P>Well said.</P> <P>China is becoming an economic powerhouse. It's middle class is growing. Compared to the West's opposing fortunes, we need a person with a Phd to spread propaganda to tell us that China is doing things "incorrectly".</P> <P>Why is it that I am beginning to respect less the opinions of supposed "experts"? Maybe it's because they don't register on the commonsense radar.</P><CITE><B>we_are_gullible</B> - April 26, 2011, 11:25AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>As professional politicians, both Julia Gillard and Hu Jintao understand that all politics is local. The capricious use of Chinese laws for political purposes is more a sign of grim politicking within the many layers of PRC government and administration than any coherent posture towards the international community. We can expect to see more of it in the process of passing leadership to Xi Jinping. For China's entire history, command and control from the centre has been tenuous. It has always been enforced erratically, and stability has always been to product of that temporary constraint which comes from fear of retribution. It is easy to say that "the Party is the problem", but if you look at the behaviour of the Kuomintang which preceded the Communist Party little has really changed. Ditto if you go back through China's dynastic governments (and we are not talking here about the tinsel glories of television historical reconstructions). Real change to the political culture of China or any country cannot arise without changes in child raising and general community values. That does happen. A few short generations ago, children were beaten in Australia and Britain as a matter of "character building", while adults were flogged mercilessly for minor infractions. Chinese common culture and child raising has strong strands of coercion which are not going to disappear instantly. The idea that 'might is right' is widely accepted, though increasingly contested when, for example, the rich abuse the poor. However, the most intractable divide between so-called Western values and those of East Asia including China is the matter of 'face" (mianzi in Chinese). The giving and losing of 'face' in East Asian cultures is seen as a moral question, and will continue to generate outcomes that we might see as illogical.</P><CITE><B>Thor May</B> | Brisbane, Australia - April 26, 2011, 11:26AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>@Dr Strangelove | NY - April 26, 2011, 8:53AM</P> <P>You mean, like Microsoft copying stuff and hiding it under their own code? Who would have thought that Bill Gates would achieve fame from plagerising existing applications?</P> <P>Now, back to the topic of China and communism...</P><CITE><B>we_are_gullible</B> - April 26, 2011, 11:29AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>@ jphu | sydney - April 26, 2011, 10:00AM. You are wrong to say China copied everything.</P> <P>If you are interested in what China had discovered for the World please read the books of J Needham of Cambridge University. China invented the compass, paper and printing, gunpowder etc.</P> <P>Please remember China opened up again only recently in the past 30 years. Its R &amp; D and research output is growing at the greatest rate among major nations like its economy.</P><CITE><B>Dr B S Goh</B> | Australian in Asia - April 26, 2011, 11:31AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>Sydney Man is right.<BR>@Rico: Sure, Western politics and is not that great, but I think it is better than in China. The people who said that the Party had completely different ideas to the people are absolutely correct. The only thing is, the people do not really know it, as they have been fed propaganda and lies for so many years, that that is all they know. It is like the Chinese people are in a well, that they can get out of; they just do not know it.</P> <P>I think when the people awaken from their slumber, and shake off the lies of decades, change will come. I am not sure how or when that will arrive, but hopefully it will one day; and the sooner the better.</P> <P>I would like to think that I know a bit more about this than a reasonable amount of other people, as I have lived in China for three months.</P><CITE><B>David</B> | Melbourne - April 26, 2011, 11:35AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P></P> <P>China is so different from the tottering dictatorships in the Middle East and North Africa, they shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath. While political persecution of a few troublesome folk in China is to be abhorred, China is doing much more than the Islamic powers to educate its people, raise their living standards and modernise their culture and economy. Confucian tradition precludes any mass uprisings or even widespread internal perceptions of oppression, and better economic and social opportunities reduce the need for them. </P> <P>All one has to do is look at India, another massively over-populated emerging nation but a democratic one, to see that democracy is not always the best framework to advance such a large nation. India is growing economically mostly because of its population alone, while China is growing even faster and more effectively because it is more orderly and better regulated. </P> <P>Sometimes large populations breed uncontrollable and unproductive chaos, and we cannot know what shape a democratic China might take. It doesn't bear thinking about a free but ungovernable China full of starving, unemployed peasants, a massive and powerful Army, and resentment between metro and rural populations. As China gets its institutions and politics under better control, it can afford to relax its political control without engendering social and economic chaos.</P><CITE><B>M T Pockets</B> | Mackay - April 26, 2011, 11:36AM </CITE></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; TEXT-ALIGN: left; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); OVERFLOW: hidden; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; TEXT-DECORATION: none"><BR>Read more: <A style="COLOR: rgb(0,51,153)" href="http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/politics/the-partys-the-problem-20110425-1du2y.html?comments=25#comments#ixzz1Kaihz5zP">http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/politics/the-partys-the-problem-20110425-1du2y.html?comments=25#comments#ixzz1Kaihz5zP</A><BR></DIV></DIV></BOD></DIV></BODY></HTML>