Fang Lizhi, "Democracy, Reform, and Modernization," 1986
In China following the death of Mao Zedong in 1976, Deng Xiaopeng launched a series of economic reforms that began to generate tremendous growth and an increased standard of living for millions of Chinese. Though political reforms were not forthcoming, the seeds of democratic change were beginning to sprout in the 1980s and would culminate in a massive student protest at Tiananmen Square, Beijing in June 1989--would was fiercely suppressed by the PRC.
A few years earlier, astrophysicist Fang Lizhi, who had become connected with the international academic community through his scholarship, gave a series of speeches to students in 1986. This one was delivered at Shanghai University.
Questions to consider:
1. On what basis does Fang rest his support for democracy? How does he define the concept?
2. Though he seeks domestic reform, what might the international implications of his message have been in terms of the balance between Communist and democratic governments?
Much of what is wrong with socialism comes from subscribing to obsolete ideas, ideas without basis in either theory or fact. Yet we never change, because we've lived with these notions so long that we are no longer aware of them. I am like this myself. I used to think that many of our problems were just a consequence of the way things are, part of the natural order. But going abroad has changed my perspective drastically. Socialism has failed in China. Certainly there are many reasons for this failure, but beyond the shadow of a doubt, much of what we have done here is neither progressive nor socialist. On the contrary, it has been extremely backward and feudalistic.
. . .Our understanding of the concept of democracy is so inadequate that we can barely even discuss it. With our thinking so hobbled by old dogmas, no wonder we don't achieve democracy in practice.
Not long ago it was constantly being said that calling for democracy was equivalent to requesting that things be "loosened up." . . .
I think that the key to understanding democracy lies first of all in recognizing the right of each individual. Democracy is built from the bottom up. EverymruViauil1 possesses certain rights, or to use what is a very sensitive expression indeed in China, everyone has "human rights” . . .
But perhaps we are starting to view the spiritual aspects of civilization a little differently. We are beginning to see “liberty, equality, and fraternity" as a positive spiritual heritage. Over the last thirty years it seemed that every one of these good words-liberty, equality, fraternity, democracy, human rights-was labeled bourgeois by our propaganda. What on earth did that leave for us? Did we really oppose all of these things? If anything we should outdo bourgeois society and surpass its performance in human rights, nor try to deny that human rights exist.
Democracy is based on recognizing the rights of every single individual. Naturally, not everyone wants the same thing, and therefore the desires of different individuals have to be mediated through a democratic process, to form a society, a nation, a collectivity. But it is only on the foundation of recognizing the humanity and the rights of each person that we can build democracy. However, when we talk about "expanding democracy" here; it refers to your superiors "extending democracy" for you. This is a mistaken concept. This is not democracy. . .
In democratic countries, democracy begins with the individual. I am the master, and the government is responsible to me. Citizens of democracies believe that the people maintain the government, paying taxes in return for services-running schools and hospitals, administering the city, providing for the public welfare. . . A government depends on the taxpayers for support and therefore has to be responsible to its citizens. This is what people think in a democratic society. But here in China, we think the opposite way. If the government does something commendable, people say, "Oh, isn't the government great for providing us with public transportation." But this is really something it ought to be doing in exchange for our tax money. . . You have to be clear about who is supporting whom economically, because setting this straight leads to the kind of thinking that democracy requires. Yet China is so feudalistic that we always expect superiors to give orders and inferiors to follow them. What our "spiritual civilization'' lacks above all other things is the spirit of democracy. If you want reform-and there are more reforms needed in our political institutions than I have time to talk about-the most crucial thing of all is to have a democratic mentality and a democratic spirit.
Excerpted in Excerpted and introduced in Padraig Kenney, 1989: Democratic Revolutions at Cold War's End. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2010. 159-163.
A few years earlier, astrophysicist Fang Lizhi, who had become connected with the international academic community through his scholarship, gave a series of speeches to students in 1986. This one was delivered at Shanghai University.
Questions to consider:
1. On what basis does Fang rest his support for democracy? How does he define the concept?
2. Though he seeks domestic reform, what might the international implications of his message have been in terms of the balance between Communist and democratic governments?
Much of what is wrong with socialism comes from subscribing to obsolete ideas, ideas without basis in either theory or fact. Yet we never change, because we've lived with these notions so long that we are no longer aware of them. I am like this myself. I used to think that many of our problems were just a consequence of the way things are, part of the natural order. But going abroad has changed my perspective drastically. Socialism has failed in China. Certainly there are many reasons for this failure, but beyond the shadow of a doubt, much of what we have done here is neither progressive nor socialist. On the contrary, it has been extremely backward and feudalistic.
. . .Our understanding of the concept of democracy is so inadequate that we can barely even discuss it. With our thinking so hobbled by old dogmas, no wonder we don't achieve democracy in practice.
Not long ago it was constantly being said that calling for democracy was equivalent to requesting that things be "loosened up." . . .
I think that the key to understanding democracy lies first of all in recognizing the right of each individual. Democracy is built from the bottom up. EverymruViauil1 possesses certain rights, or to use what is a very sensitive expression indeed in China, everyone has "human rights” . . .
But perhaps we are starting to view the spiritual aspects of civilization a little differently. We are beginning to see “liberty, equality, and fraternity" as a positive spiritual heritage. Over the last thirty years it seemed that every one of these good words-liberty, equality, fraternity, democracy, human rights-was labeled bourgeois by our propaganda. What on earth did that leave for us? Did we really oppose all of these things? If anything we should outdo bourgeois society and surpass its performance in human rights, nor try to deny that human rights exist.
Democracy is based on recognizing the rights of every single individual. Naturally, not everyone wants the same thing, and therefore the desires of different individuals have to be mediated through a democratic process, to form a society, a nation, a collectivity. But it is only on the foundation of recognizing the humanity and the rights of each person that we can build democracy. However, when we talk about "expanding democracy" here; it refers to your superiors "extending democracy" for you. This is a mistaken concept. This is not democracy. . .
In democratic countries, democracy begins with the individual. I am the master, and the government is responsible to me. Citizens of democracies believe that the people maintain the government, paying taxes in return for services-running schools and hospitals, administering the city, providing for the public welfare. . . A government depends on the taxpayers for support and therefore has to be responsible to its citizens. This is what people think in a democratic society. But here in China, we think the opposite way. If the government does something commendable, people say, "Oh, isn't the government great for providing us with public transportation." But this is really something it ought to be doing in exchange for our tax money. . . You have to be clear about who is supporting whom economically, because setting this straight leads to the kind of thinking that democracy requires. Yet China is so feudalistic that we always expect superiors to give orders and inferiors to follow them. What our "spiritual civilization'' lacks above all other things is the spirit of democracy. If you want reform-and there are more reforms needed in our political institutions than I have time to talk about-the most crucial thing of all is to have a democratic mentality and a democratic spirit.
Excerpted in Excerpted and introduced in Padraig Kenney, 1989: Democratic Revolutions at Cold War's End. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2010. 159-163.