Home » Contemporary China


by | 23 October 2013 | 4 Comments | Last modified: 23 Oct 5:11 am

Has Xí Jìnpíng been attacking the xiànzhèngpài?

Joseph Fewsmith gave a talk in Vienna a couple of days ago. Here’s one of his recent articles:
Joseph Fewsmith: Debating Constitutional Government (China Leadership Monitor)

Rather than pull public opinion together, Xi Jinping’s 习近平 call for realizing the “China Dream” seems to have revealed the depth of cleavage among China’s intellectuals. The newspaper Southern Weekend set off a drama when it responded by writing a New Year’s editorial calling the China Dream the dream of constitutional government, only to have provincial propaganda authorities rewrite it beyond recognition before publication. Subsequently, Xi Jinping authorized a sharp attack on “Western values,” including constitutionalism. This internal talk, written into the now infamous “Document No. 9,” prompted several publications to run articles against constitutionalism, provoking liberal intellectuals to defend the idea. This deep divide suggests there is increasingly little middle ground left among China’s intellectuals, while the backing of different views by different officials reflects a politicization of seemingly intellectual debates. These debates are ultimately about the legitimacy of the government and thus reflect fragility in the political system.

Wikipedia about “Document No. 9” that Western media refer to:
关于当前意识形态领域情况的通报 (Wikipedia)

关于当前意识形态领域情况的通报,簡稱9號文件,是2013年5月由中共中央办公厅 印发的一份旨在通报意识形态领域情况的文件。


今年春天以來,國內和海外即盛傳中共高層下發文件, 要求“七不講”,一些網絡 活躍人士並披露了“七不講”的具體內容,但是一直沒有得到官方權威證實。是真是 假?衆說紛紜。於2013年8月上旬最新出版的 《明鏡月刊》43期,獨家全文刊發了中 共中央9號文件,人們才得知“七不講”的源頭——雖然措辭和文意在坊間流傳過程 中,已經與原來的論述有了出入。

They often also mention the speech Xí Jìnpíng gave on August 19th:

Is this a blow to the xiànzhèngpài 宪政派?
See also: parasinologie.blogsport.eu

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

4 comments on ““Zhongnanhaiology”

  1. J Lowrie on said:

    This debate is a red herring, an ideological expression of the contradictions among the bourgeoisie , as they manoeuvre to advance their own material interests. Cai Xia’s claim that ”the progress of mankind’s political civilisation is towards democratic politics” is either breathtakingly naive or downright cynical! Where, pray, is such progress taking place? What the last three decades have demonstrated is the increasing progress of the world’s bourgeoisies towards oligarchic politics, the exact opposite of Cai’s assertion.

  2. J Lowrie on said:

    As a professor debating democracy one would expect Cai to have some acquaintance with Aristotle’s ”Politics”, which is the fundamental text on the nature of democracy, wherein Aristotle explains that democracy is the rule of the many i.e.the poor or unpropertied,while oligarchy is the rule of the few i.e.the rich. It is demonstrably clear that the rich over the last three or so decades have been entrenching their rule and using their power to enrich themselves to an obscene degree. What we see in China is a struggle between different sections of the oligarchy, and this is expressed in ideological posturings by those who feel their material interests would be best served by an extreme oligarchy(e.g. more money for internal oppression) and those who feel bourgeois society is best protected by a more moderate oligarchy(e.g. more money spent on buying judges,politicians or votes). None of this has anything to do with democracy!
    This can be readily comprehended by the liberal or moderate oligarchy’s call for an independent judiciary.Independent of what? Independent of bribes? And where in the world does this exist? A judiciary is the very antithesis of a democracy.
    The mark of a democracy is a trial by jury chosen by lot from among the citizens, with the utter absence of professional judges. Such juries should be as large as possible to prevent bribery or intimidation. Any citizen should be free to bring a lawsuit, and all legal officers should be elected for a year and obliged to render account of their actions at the end of their period of office.
    Such trials by jury are the very cornerstone of a democratic constitution, and what the left have to be advocating, in China and elsewhere. They will soon see that the “liberals ” are not so keen on democracy after all!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


HTML tags are not allowed.

icon_wink.gif icon_neutral.gif icon_mad.gif icon_twisted.gif icon_smile.gif icon_eek.gif icon_sad.gif icon_rolleyes.gif icon_razz.gif icon_redface.gif icon_surprised.gif icon_mrgreen.gif icon_lol.gif icon_idea.gif icon_biggrin.gif icon_evil.gif icon_cry.gif icon_cool.gif icon_arrow.gif icon_confused.gif icon_question.gif icon_exclaim.gif