On November 27, Mr. Yao Yang, Dean of National School of Development at Peking University, gave a speech titled, Modernization in China at Antai College of Economics & Management, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. He pointed out that none of these –the frameworks of transformation, of development or of China’s national rejuvenation- would allow us to gain a clear picture of what was happening in China, for they were mainly concentrated on the realm of economics. Rather, the scope of the framework of modernization was broad enough to cover all issues across the country, which made it a more appropriate framework.
Technical Progress, Industrial Organization, and Lifestyle
Before applying the framework of modernization to explaining what China has gone through, Yao Yang presented a brief overview of its content. Modernization, as he said, mainly consisted of three aspects: technical progress, industrial organization, and lifestyle, and they were closely connected. Since in the primitive society where our ancestors gathered fruits and hunted animals, we have developed farming skills, undergone the process of industrialization and now have arrived at the information age. In the past centuries, technology has been advancing at a remarkable speed, and it has brought about considerable changes in the organization of production. For instance, the unit in primitive society was usually a clan while that of modern society can be the factory or small and medium enterprises. With the increasingly specific division of labor, the organization of production is getting more and more complicated. Meanwhile, it places greater stress on cooperation than ever before. This sounds contradictory to some degree, but it is one of the contradictions of modern society. At the same time, the lifestyle is no longer what it used to be, which is clearly exemplified by the fact that people are flooding into cities but during the urbanization they keep distances from each other. And this phenomenon is termed as society of strangers in sociology.
Rationality, Personal Space and Civic Spirit
With modernization causing dramatic social changes, Yao Yang argued that we were in need of a new code of conduct, which he summed up as rationality, personal space and civic spirit. And these three requirements were not only for the government, but also for the people.
In traditional societies, especially the Chinese society which is built upon consanguinity and geographical relationships, people act out of emotions. If they can’t settle problems with emotions, they would turn to dictatorship for help. In the modern society, however, it is rationality and the rule of law that is needed. As mentioned earlier, social life and industrial organization are increasingly complicated, and the distance between people is getting larger. In the society of strangers, one can’t settle problems by fists but by must by rationality since violence can only work in the countryside. Moreover, the cost of time is pretty high in the modern society, and it goes up corresponding with increases in income. Thus rational people would not care about sunk costs, because otherwise what they get in return is far less valuable than the money and effort they have invested in.
Some people advocate building a new code of conduct upon morality, but Yang Yao retorted that morality was largely based on emotions, and consisted of conflicting dimensions. Supposed there is a man whose girlfriend and mother happen to fall into water, and the man does not know which one to save. This dilemma suggests that we both value love and filial piety, but the conflicts occur once they are placed together. To put it in other words, the code of conduct based on morality is problematic. And that is why we need the rule of law, which is a set of behavioral norms derived from rational calculations, and rules out the possibility of internal conflicts. It is true that the rule of law may be rigid, but it provides a code of conduct that is logically consistent.
Yao Yang pointed out that personal space was generated by two factors. One is that we all want to have some space to our own in the society of strangers and the other is that we need to continue to decompose and establish a wide variety of property rights as the world has become so complex. By property rights, Yao Yang did not limit it to the sphere of economics but rather extended it into that of sociology and politics. Personal space not only puts constraints on the government but the people as well. And smoking in public places and cutting lines can be seen as examples of ignoring others’ personal space.
Meanwhile, Yang Yao also recognized that the law could not guide every aspect of life, which was why we need civic spirit. It is true that civic spirit did exist in traditional society, but it was applied to family members, fellow villagers and a few other people. What modern society needs is a civic spirit built upon rationality, in which no one could benefit from disobeying the rules. In the late 1990s, there were fewer cars in Beijing, but traffic jams were more severe than now. It was because the drivers drove against the traffic and blocked the road. In contrast, the traffic order in Hangzhou is pretty good. It is because one can be fined more than one thousand RMB if caught breaking the rules. Thanks to such harsh punishment, people in Hangzhou all obey the traffic rules.
Applying the Framework of Modernization to Understanding China
Based on the above simple analysis, Yao Yang tried to apply the framework of modernization to understanding a range of issues in contemporary China.
The first case discussed was the Chinese model. The biggest advantage of China has been having an efficient and powerful government since ancient times, and China would not have created such a rapidly growing economy without it. Thus some people, at home and abroad, believe that an authoritarian regime and market economy is a perfect combination for China. Here rise some questions: Is China's current system the ultimate model and can it exist for long?
According to Yang Yao, Singapore may have made the most of an authoritarian regime, but in the long run it won’t work for China. In such a complex society, it is almost impossible for a few people to grasp all of the relevant information, not to mention managing the country without it. As Hayek clearly pointed out in The Road to Serfdom, the socialist planners can’t solve problems concerning information. In order to obtain enough information to realize the socialist program, the country will eventually become a police state, and embark on the road of enslavement. Thus, if we want to represent the interests of all and treat them equally, the only method is majority rule, which we may call democratic principles.
As for the statement that Chinese civilization has something to do with authoritarianism, Yang Yao replied that civilization is not fixed. Western countries that apply democratic principles also experienced the Dark Ages, and there is nothing different between Chinese and Western civilizations except that China is now 300 years behind. Besides, the idea of moderation proposed by Confucianism shares something in common with the core of democracy- compromise. Thus it can be said that the idea of moderation is part of democracy, and that it needs promotion.
The second case is the relationship between government and society. Nowadays the city management is one of our daily topics and the latest one which has been in heated discussion is the case of Xia Junfeng. Xia Junfeng killed two city management officials, but it remained a question whether the death penalty should be imposed. This question deals with the relationship between government and society, and that of government and economy as well. And Yao Yang believed that with the perspective of the conflicts between modernization and traditional society, one might have a better insight of these relationships. From his point of view, the Chinese Communist Party is more than a revolutionary party, and it is a party in aggressive pursuit of modernization. During the modernization, however, China is still a traditional society intertwined with modern elements. In light of this, we may understand the deal about city management. City management did not come into being until the late 1990s, and it was established to adapt to the fast-pace of China’s modernization. Still half of the population lived in rural areas, and migrant workers living in the city would make their living by setting up a stall along the street, then the intervention of city management officials and conflicts between them were inevitable. Emotionally speaking, we are irritated by the violent behavior of city law enforcement officers. On the other hand, the migrant workers must have set up their stalls right in the middle of the streets without them, which is obviously unacceptable today. In addition to the conflicts between city law enforcement officers and peddlers, the contradictions generated by modernization also consist in the urban development. It is aimed for an ultramodern majesty, but it retains the ritual of ancient society. And this is very much typified by Terminal 3 of the Beijing Capital Airport: it is beautifully designed but there is a huge waste of interior space.
The third example is the moral outlook. Many people stated that Chinese are undergoing the process of demoralization and should re-read classics. In the prose named Chinese Dogs and Chinese People, Fu Sinian wrote the following: Why do Chinese dogs bear so many resemblances to Chinese people? They are not stupid, but just lack the sense of responsibility – They are very much alike. Fu believed that it took centuries to form moral or cultural traditions intrinsic to China. Not only did he depict Chinese as not focused and irresponsible, but also completely denied their moral character. Other people, such as the cultural conservatives, hold the opinion that the fate of China is determined by its culture. Mr. Fang Heqing, for instance, argued that dictatorship was the only political system China could adapt because of its culture.
In regard to this issue, Yao Yang did not think that we were that corrupt. More importantly, what was critical was that we have not learned the standards of morality in the society of strangers. In the past century and more, China has missed public enlightenment in the process of modernization. Latecomer countries like Japan and South Korea have gone through it, such as the national education during Meiji Restoration and the New Community Movement carried out by Park Chung-hee. The latter one emerged to build infrastructure in rural areas in the first space, then to enhance the moral quality, and was even spread to the city. Besides enlightenment, establishing the morality standard of modern society requires the authority to help people develop good habits. “It is actually easier to establish the code of conduct for the society of strangers in the market economy.” Yao Yang said, “And this also explains why though people in Shanghai, which is the most commercialized, are not as friendly as Beijing residents, they are more rational.”
Future of China: Democracy and the Authority of Law
As for the future of China, Yao Yang expressed that adapting a democratic system and establishing the authority of law were the only two possible solutions. For one thing, democracy helps people learn how to tolerate and compromise. Only with compromise can people realize that others need personal space as well as to pay respect to it. In this way, public spirit and civism can be fostered. The biggest advantage of democracy is that it imposes a severe constraint on the government. And the supervision of government can’t be achieved without the participation of people. For another, what creating the rule of law needs are as followed: the government respecting the law, law makers representing it and people observing it.
Modernization not only requires the government to make changes but also we the people. If we still apply the code of conduct based on relations that only works in the society of acquaintances, we won’t be able to restrain the government or achieve real democracy and the rule of law.
Note: Original document was written in Chinese, summarized and translated into English. Contact: Daniel Singer, Editor. (dnsinger@gmail.com)
