Civil Society: A Help or Hindrance?

China began its process toward rapid growth and expansion under Deng Xiopang, who believed the road to advancement was through slow, deliberate reforms of the economic system rather than through pronounced revolutionary change. In Robyn Meredith’s work, The Elephant and the Dragon, we are given a thorough account of the Communist Party of China’s micromanagement of economic growth, from the formation of special economic zones to huge infrastructure development projects. Several questions are especially salient with respect to the relationship between economic reform and political reform, the space for civil associations and institutions in society, and ultimately China’s ability to maintain its superpower status and its economic growth. Meredith paints an image of the Chinese countryside being lifted out of poverty, and to be sure, Chinese citizens are better off because of the Communist Party’s invitation of foreign investment and implementation of economic projects. Yet as Mary Gallagher’s article points out, much of China’s economic growth stems from Foreign Direct Investment. It seems that a strong indigenous Chinese role in the country’s economic development does not exist. Is this the reason why China persists in its authoritarian system, why citizens have been reticent to demand real political and social reform from their leadership? Buruma’s article speculates that because Chinese civil society is so weak, and because opposition is rigorously suppressed, this idea of a new, modern China could fail, stemming from the fact that citizens have no outlets for protest. China is always being brought up as an example of rapid economic growth and success, but are the achievements of countries like India in some ways more enduring, because the leaders have been held accountable for their actions? India’s growth rate is nearing China’s, but what is interesting is that India has had a long history of opposition movements and freedom of expression. Or is the lack of civil society in inconsequential, as Marc Morjé Howard brought up in his article. Would a more vibrant civil society in China merely “rock the boat,” creating disruptions domestically and economically? Is it possible to sustain this impressive rate of economic growth and societal advancement while at the same time introducing more democratic processes?