By Xie Yuan — Speaking to a packed house at Hong Kong University on Monday, veteran journalist Yang Jisheng said China’s leadership would have to make a clean reckoning of the 1989 crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators and pursue “democratic politics” before China could enter the “post-Deng Xiaoping era.”
But Yang stressed democratic change in China would be a gradual process.
“We have seen so many casualties from radical revolutions in our history, and we need to look for moderate, not radical political improvements,” said Yang.

Yang Jisheng’s talk, “China’s Reform: Reflections and Looking Forward”, was hosted by the China Media Project of the Journalism & Media Studies Centre, where Yang is currently a visiting fellow.
A retired senior reporter for China’s official Xinhua News Agency, Yang was one of just a few journalists to interview Zhao Ziyang while the ousted reformist premier was under house arrest.
Yang Jisheng is also the deputy editor of Chronicles of History (炎黄春秋), a journal that drew attention earlier this year for an essay by Marxist theorist Xie Tao calling for deeper political reforms.
The post-Deng era, said Yang, has been marked since the mid-1990s by a combination of authoritarian politics (权威政治) and market economics. As economic growth has surged and political reforms lagged, a number of problems have worsened. These include abuse of official power for business ends, a growing gap between rich and poor, and a host of other social problems such as the lack of affordable housing, education and medical care.
To solve these and other problems, future reforms in China would have to focus on separating power from the market economy, a task only democratic politics could achieve, said Yang.
“Democratic politics is the only way to have strict checks and balances on power,” he said.
Yang said democratic politics were also necessitated by changes in the nature of power in China. Leadership of charismatic men of the past, or qiangren zhengzhi (强人政治), has given way to leadership by ordinary persons, or changren zhengzhi (常人政治), he said.
Political leftists in China have advocated a return to Stalinist policies to resolve growing social problems, and Yang said he expected leftists to propose a slowdown of economic reforms at the upcoming 17th National Congress. But Yang said such a turn back was unlikely to garner support.
Yang is author of three books, including The Deng Xiaoping Era, Analysis of Chinese Social Strata and the recent Political Struggles in China’s Reform Era.
[Posted by Xie Yuan, October 9, 2007, 1:30pm]

Top party leaders will of course be at the top of your interview wish list this month. But no one, least of all officials in the upper echelons, will agree to an interview ahead of this key political session. It’s possible Hu Jintao will choose to visit with some particular foreign news icon, as Deng Xiaoping did with Oriana Fallaci and Jiang Zemin with Mike Wallace.
But most foreign journalists will have to settle for Chinese academics, political experts and historians. Here are a few at the top of our list:
Wang Guixiu (王贵秀) – A professor at the Central Party School, Wang is the most important scholar of political reform in China. Wang has criticized China’s lagging political reform efforts. [Wang on separation of party and government].
[CLICK HERE FOR PHOTO]
Xie Tao (谢韜) – Xie is former vice-president of Renmin University of China and a leading Marxist theorist. At the beginning of this year, an important journal, Chronicles of History (炎黄春秋), published Xie’s essay, “Only Democratic Socialism Can Save China” (只有民主社会主义可以救中国). The essay sparked debate in China’s intellectual circles over political reform.
[CLICK HERE FOR PHOTO]
Gao Fang (高放) – A professor at Renmin University of China, Gao is China’s leading historian of the Communist movement. He was a major proponent of inner-party democracy (党内民主) during the political reform movement of the 1980s.
[CLICK HERE FOR PHOTO]
Dong Degang (董德刚) – Dong is vice-director of the philosophy research division (哲学教研部) of China’s Central Party School. Earlier Dong Degang (董德刚) – Dong is vice-director of the philosophy research division (哲学教研部) of China’s Central Party School. An article by scholar Dong Degang (董德刚) in the March issue of the official magazine Scientific Socialism (科学社会主义) suggested a number of cadres, “including high-level officials and old comrades”, were wary of attempts to modify the party’s constitution at each CCP plenary session, and urged a cautious approach to adding President Hu’s theory of “scientific development” (科学发展观) to the Party Constitution. [More coverage from CMP].
[CLICK HERE FOR PHOTO]
Wang Changjiang (王长江) – Director of the Party Building Division (党建部) of the Central Party School, Wang wrote an essay in May this year called, “Answering a Few Misgivings About Issues Concerning Democracy” (辨析关于民主问题的几个疑虑). The article, published in Beijing Daily, argued that democratization could happen even under a one-party system.
[CLICK HERE FOR PHOTO]
Zhou Tianyong (周天勇) – Vice-Director of the Research Office of the Central Party School, Zhou is also one of several authors of the Party School’s “Political Reform Research Report” (政治体制改革研究报告), which has been published in book form as Political Reform in China.
[CLICK HERE FOR PHOTO]
Yu Keping (俞可平) – A political scientist who currently serves as deputy director of China’s Central Compilation and Translation Bureau, Yu drew attention this year with an essay called, “Democracy is a Good Thing.” Many regard Yu Keping as a key thinker in the Hu-Wen administration.
[CLICK HERE FOR PHOTO]
Wu Jiaxiang (吴稼祥) – Now a freelance writer, Wu worked in the General Office of the CPC Central Committee in the 1980s and was regarded a key thinker behind then-Premier Zhao Ziyang. Wu was jailed following the crackdown on democracy demonstrators in June 1989. He later spent time as a fellow at Harvard University. Wu’s books include Wrestling for Power: The 16th CPC Congress (角力十六大) and Diary from Zhongnanhai: The Fall of Two Generational Heirs (中南海日记：中共两代王储的陨落).
[CLICK HERE FOR PHOTO]
Wu Guoguang (吴国光) – Now a member of the history faculty at Canada’s University of Victoria, Wu was closely involved in policy-making on political reform under Zhao Ziyang in the 1980s. He is the author of Zhao Ziyang and Political Reform (赵紫阳与政治改革).
[CLICK HERE FOR PHOTO]
Luo Shugang (雒树刚) – Formerly deputy director of China’s Central Propaganda Department and head of the official Xinhua News Agency, Luo is a key researcher in the area of political reform. In the 1980s he published two books on political reform: Political Reform Made Simple (政治体制改革通俗讲话) and Monitoring Within the Party (党内监督).
[CLICK HERE FOR PHOTO]
(Qian Gang, October 9, 2007)
[Translated by David Bandurski]
Previous 17th Congress article: “To what extent will delegates to the party congress have a say in party affairs?”

Formerly a top reporter for China’s official Xinhua News Agency and deputy editor of the influential journal Chronicles of History (Yanhuang Chunqiu), Yang Jisheng is one of China’s most experienced journalists. In his 2004 book, “Political Struggle in Reform China”, Yang released his personal reporting notes spanning more than a decade, including the content of three discussions he had with Zhao Ziyang while the ousted premier was under house arrest.
SPEAKER: Yang Jisheng (杨继绳 )
Lecture will be in Mandarin
DATE: Monday, Oct 8, 2007
TIME: 19:00-21:00
VENUE: T4, Meng Wah Complex, The University of Hong Kong (NOTE: This is a change from the previous venue: Foundation Chamber, Eliot Hall, The University of Hong Kong
For enquiries call: (852) 2219-4014

I would expect the reader’s response to the above headline to be something like: “Voting? In China? What is there to talk about?” Point taken. But even if we’re not seeing popular democratic elections, it’s worth noting that Chinese media have been talking about “election” (选举), or xuanju, in the selection of delegates to the 17th National Congress. And this topic is critical as we tackle the issue of political reform in China. So what are we looking for exactly?
The measure Chinese media are talking about is the ratio (the “differential rate” (差额) or cha’e) between delegates nominated by party standing committees at various levels to the total number of National Congress seats available. The term used in Chinese is “differential voting” (差额选举), or cha’e xuanju.

[The Beijing Times reports in November 2006 on the increase in the differential rate for the 17th National Congress.]

For appointment of delegates to the upcoming 17th National Congress, there was reportedly a five percentage point rise in the differential rate, 15 percent as opposed to 10 percent, from the 16th National Congress back in 2002. That means, basically, that for every 100 seats available for this year’s congress, an additional 15 nominees were chosen (by party committees at various levels) and eventually pared down by party members (any who chose to vote) at those levels.
On August 2 this year, a list of all 2,217 delegates to the 17th National Congress was made public through newspapers across the country [See image below], a historic first for China. Given what we know, the People’s Daily list represents the results after 15 percent of nominees were removed in the differential rate process (被”差”掉). They were pared down, in other words, from an initial pool of around 2,550 nominees.

[The list of delegates to the 17th National Congress is made public in the official People’s Daily on August 2, 2007.]

The issue of “differential election” is still a very sensitive one in China. When Guangdong’s Southern Weekend ran an article on August 9 detailing the process of delegate “election” for the upcoming party congress, Central Propaganda Department Vice-director Li Dongsheng (李东生) was reportedly furious. The paper was formally criticized, and Li said: “Is this really something you think you can look into?!”
How significant is the recent increase in the differential rate? At this point, it is more symbolic than anything else. Consider that with 30 provinces and autonomous regions in China, there are just over 300 differential candidates, or an average of around 11 per province. That means that in the vast majority of voting districts (county or city, etc.) there are no additional candidates. While party members are theoretically tasked with “electing” their delegates, there are in most cases no real decisions to be made.
But that doesn’t mean the differential rate is worthless as a measure of political change in China. It should be noted that the differential rate for the 13th National Congress, during which Zhao Ziyang gave his political report, was 20 percent.
As the 17th Congress opens, the following questions are worth asking:

*Is a primary election held for members of the Central Party Committee and the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection?
*If there is a primary election, will the number of candidates exceed the number of posts (是否实行差额预选)? What is the differential rate? Is the list of candidates made public?
*In the formal selection process will differential elections be held? What is the differential rate? Is the list of candidates made public? Will media have access to the names of those candidates not chosen for posts?
*How will the election results be publicized? With a list of names and votes cast? Or simply names?
*How will members of the Political Bureau and the Central Secretariat be selected? Will there be a primary election? If so, will it be open?
*Will differential elections be held for members of the Political Bureau and the Central Secretariat?
*Will any language about differential election appear in Hu Jintao’s political report, or in amendments to the party constitution?

(Qian Gang, October 3, 2007)
[Translated by David Bandurski]
Previous 17th Congress article: “How will Hu Jintao promote “inner-party democracy” at the 17th National Congress?”

Pundits generally agree that this month’s 17th National Congress is unlikely to bring major change on the political reform front. But many also predict there will be small steps forward, and that these are likely to come in the area of “inner-party democracy” (党内民主). I agree with this assessment, and I think we should pay close attention to how Hu Jintao deals with inner-party democracy.
We’ve already seen a sharp rise in use of the term “inner-party democracy” in official party media, most notably People’s Daily, since the 16th congress:

[GRAPH: Number of articles in China’s official People’s Daily using the term “inner-party democracy” from 1949-2006.]

“Inner-party democracy” appeared in 103 People’s Daily articles in 2006. While that might not seem like a lot, it marks a new historical high point for the term and shows it is getting greater priority.
So what is inner-party democracy?
As the term itself makes clear, this is not about “popular democracy” (人民民主). The idea, rather, is greater “democracy” – or more shared decision-making – among party members (who account for just 5 percent of China’s whole population). That’s not so appetizing, perhaps, for democracy proponents outside China. But some believe this is a new party approach to political reform, and that inner-party democracy can be used to pull along more broad-based political reforms.

[An October 2004 article in Economic Daily by current Politburo Standing Committee member Wu Guanzheng (吴官正) argues for the development of inner-party democracy.]

Some scholars argue that political reform in China should take its cues from the so-called “East Asian Model” – that is, more centralized, single-party control with an agenda focusing on economic growth. Yu Keping (俞可平), an influential party theorist close to Hu Jintao, has been clear on this point:

One-party leadership is the basic character of China’s political system. One-party leadership means the Communist Party of China is the only political party in China, sharing political power with no other party or political entity.

And yet, even in the context of one-party rule, there is room for progress toward more “democratic” decision-making.
At this point, it’s hard to see how firm Hu Jintao’s commitment is to inner-party democracy. In his June 25 speech he had the following to say: “We must continue — actively, safely, soundly and effectively – to promote the building of inner-party democracy” (要继续积极稳妥、扎实有效地推进党内民主建设) … “to perfect the system of inner-party democracy, [and] to raise consciousness about inner-party democracy”( 完善党内民主制度，使党内民主意识普遍增强).
This could be read as Hu Jintao’s endorsement of inner-party democracy. But it shows at the same time a great deal of wariness. The words “actively, safely, soundly and effectively” tug back on the reins and ensure reforms don’t pick up too much speed.
Hu Jintao talks in the same passage about “upholding democratic centralism” (坚持民主集中制). This makes his bottom line clear – there will be no change to the longstanding status quo of one-party rule.
If Hu Jintao hedges with these words in his political report to the 17th congress this will signal that while inner-party democracy will be a priority over the next five years we cannot expect any major steps.
As we assess Hu Jintao’s progress on inner-party democracy, we should look especially at the following questions:

*How will party elections be handled for the 17th National Congress?
*Will delegates to the congress play a role in shaping the party agenda?
*Will there be discussion about creating a permanent decision-making body for the 17th congress (常任制) so that delegates can participate in affairs beyond the meeting this month?

I’ll be turning to all three of these issue later this week.
(Qian Gang, October 1, 2007)
[Translated by David Bandurski]
Previous 17th Congress article: “Will there be echoes in Hu Jintao’s report of the 8th or 13th congresses?”