Explaining China to Americans

This morning the editors of the Wall Street Journal came very close to explicating a good theory of China for an American audience:

China’s laws forbids storing explosive chemicals within one kilometer of residences. Regulations on how dangerous chemicals should be stored were also violated. Chinese state media reported that the owners of the warehouse, now under arrest, admitted using ties to government officials to skirt the law. Such corruption is a major contributing factor to China’s poor safety record.

The Tianjin disaster also exposes a major fault line in Chinese society. A growing middle class largely signed on to the Communist Party’s post-1989 social contract: You don’t question our power, and we will make you prosperous and secure.

For more than two decades the Party has largely kept its side of the bargain. But an economic slowdown and the costs of official corruption could shake its legitimacy. As people become more prosperous, they value more highly the benefits that come from an accountable political system.

By contrast, China’s state capitalist system can’t root out corruption and other abuses of official power, no matter how hard President Xi Jinping tries. That’s because the central tenet that can’t be questioned is that the Communist Party is above the law.

but, sadly, they fell short of the mark. China does not have a robust system of civil law. In the final analysis it doesn’t matter what the laws say—those are just for the rubes. Corruption is not an aberration of the system; it is the system. What the heck good is party power if you can’t throw money the way of your friends and family?

Another thing they missed which you can hardly avoid realizing. You only need to listen to the survivors of the explosions: nothing happens that the authorities didn’t intend. I don’t believe that’s the case but it’s obvious that the Chinese people believe it. It was an obvious takeaway from the market crashes they’ve sustained. There was interview after interview with poor sods who’d lost their life savings who said “Why did the government do this to me?”

0 comments… add one

Leave a Comment