China

[2952-0-0]

It's much more likely that a new generation of western-educated leaders will take over the Communist bureaucracy sometime in the next decade. Each time a new generation takes over the party, they always, must, absolutely have a guiding catch-phrase:

Mao Zedong's Thoughts (under Mao)
Deng Xiaoping's Theories (which first unleashed the economic boom)
Socialism with Chinese Characteristics (essentially lip service claiming that they still want socialism)
Three Represents (representing economic growth, cultural development, political stability)

And the current one is Building a Harmonious Society,indicating that they are aware of the inequalities and the need to smoothen them out. They've shown genuine desire by abolishing rural taxes, trying to force factories to pay wages on time, trying controlling pollution, etc (on the other hand corrupt local officials treat their areas like a fiefdom and ignore what the central leadership says).

Some time next decade, another generation (most of whom have been overseas and seen democracy) will take over, and by that time the GDP per head will have surpassed a threshold that makes democracy inevitable. Once that happens either a wave of populism sweeps in (similar to current leftists in Latin America) or we get something like India with a stable democracy but fractured in practice.

It's pretty much impossible that Hong Kong or Macau could ever become independent, since those two cities depend so much on the mainland's needs for services. Besides, once democracy arrives in Beijing it's sure that it will have come several years before that (right now they are free, but only partially democratic with appointed leaders, somewhat like British colonies). As for Taiwan, it's anyone's guess how or whether they rejoin (on the other hand it's less than impossible they will secede), given the unpredictable politics of the island. Tibet and Xinjiang might be granted autonomy, but I'm sure even a liberal leadership would suppress separatism.

As for the next few years, there might be a tiny bit more freedom as the government has realized that criticism is constructive. Don't forget that it was a dissident who uncovered some product safety scandals.

[2952-0-0]

What a lot of armchair experts here who are stuck in the Cold War.

First, no, China is not the Soviet Union. When one dominant ethnic group is 93% of the population (and much of the remaining 7% are mixed Han/minority who declare themselves as minority in order to qualify for affirmative action schemes), there will be no Yugoslav-style collapse.

Second, I can foresee a crisis which causes Tibet and Xinjiang to split up (but not Inner Mongolia, which is 80% Han), but they will quickly become totally dependent on their vast new neighbour. Tibetan schoolchildren and businessmen will still be required to learn Mandarin to succeed. Almost all the trade will be conducted with their new neighbour. Perhaps they will depend on it for military protection. By this point any sense of independence becomes blurred.

Third, I'm not aware of any country descending into civil war after its economy has grown above a certain point.

Fourth, any notion that Chinese culture is incompatible with democracy and liberalism is nonsense. Korea and Japan prove that Confucian values can coexist with liberalism (the former proves how one culture can form two totally opposite regimes). Taiwan *is* Chinese, and has been democratic for 20 years without much trouble. Hong Kong (under the flag of the PRC, no less) *is* Chinese and *does* have democratic and western values, and has been that way for decades without any trouble. No doubt the latter two will do much more to promote those values in the PRC than anything else will.

Fifth, if anything Korea and Japan are more xenophobic and nationalistic, since their small size enables a culture which is uniform across the entire country with little foreign influence.  Many provinces in China are more culturally diverse than those two liberal, democratic countries. So any cultural explanations for the dictatorship is nonsense.

Finally, it is possible for the Communist Party to relinquish power. Supposedly "free" China, a.k.a. the Republic of China in Taiwan, was ruled by an authoritarian dictatorship until the late 1980s when controls were gradually loosened. In 1990 students demonstrated in Taipei demanding democracy, which the government had no choice but to accept.

People need to accept that this isn't the 1980s and there is no evil empire to bluster about

[2952-0-0]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Like they happen in the past when dynasties lose their authority: perhaps a major social/economic downturn hits, which diminishes the authority of the Party. This coincides with a tide of liberalism, which in the two areas turns into a tide of virulent nationalism. The military is divided, and somehow a declaration of independence is made out. The military is unable or unwilling to stop them. But in any way, it will be fairly easy for the new, reduced China to "buy back" the two, just as Hong Kong and Taiwan are being "bought out".

It's also clever that the Tibet Autonomous Region only covers a part of the area considered Tibetan: most of western Sichuan and all of Qinghai are also considered Tibetan, which could run into issues in the future.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The ethnic identity is old enough to make a Yugoslav-style collapse a non-starter. State collapse, on the other hand, is not entirely impossible, but the barriers to launching a revolt are much higher now than they have ever been.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But what happens in areas with a culture that is highly influenced by China is applicable. Korea and Japan are arguably more isolationist and submissive of authority, yet they are liberal democracies (imperfect ones, but democracies nonetheless). Taiwan and Hong Kong share the same culture and language, and liberalism is prevalent in both of them (the former is an immature democracy, while the latter is a mature semi-democracy).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Currently the authority of the Party and the Party's dirty tricks are enough to suppress any calls for reform. But this cannot go on forever. When the KMT fled to Taiwan and declared martial law, it was a "temporary" measure until the Communist Party was defeated. The British didn't care about democracy in Hong Kong (perhaps why it was and still is the most free market place on earth), until the years after the Tiananmen Square protests when it became a priority. Anything can cause the Party's authority to be tarnished, and the public will be sure to take advantage of it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Japan is not entirely good examples of liberalism, and the culture is more submissive of authority. In China there is no pressure to "know your place", and the saying that "the nail that sticks out is beaten by the hammer" is unknown. There are no complex language rules about speaking to people of different status. In this sense China is much more liberal and fluid than a supposedly democratic country.