Maurizio – Omnologos

Where no subject is left unturned

Is China’s Authoritarian Capitalism Better Than Liberal Democracy?

with 4 comments

(No it isn’t: just like trying to earn a living by gambling is not better than having a salary, even if potential returns are much higher)

Is China’s authoritarian capitalism better than liberal democracy (as “the condition and motor of economic development“)? That’s more or less what Slavoj Žižek, co-Director of the International Centre for Humanities at Birkbeck College, asks in the Letters section of the London Review of Books (Vol. 30 No. 8 · Cover date: 24 April 2008), at the end of a singularly even-handed description of the Tibet-China relationship (that by the way only victims of their respective propaganda machines will believe to be a story of good guys vs. bad guys).

Fareed Zakaria has pointed out that democracy can only ‘catch on’ in economically developed countries: if developing countries are ‘prematurely democratised’, the result is a populism that ends in economic catastrophe and political despotism. No wonder that today’s economically most successful Third World countries (Taiwan, South Korea, Chile) embraced full democracy only after a period of authoritarian rule.

Following this path, the Chinese used unencumbered authoritarian state power to control the social costs of the transition to capitalism. The weird combination of capitalism and Communist rule proved not to be a ridiculous paradox, but a blessing. China has developed so fast not in spite of authoritarian Communist rule, but because of it.

There are a few i’s to dot, and t’s to cross in Mr Žižek’s discourse. First of all, Taiwan, South Korea and Chile became “today’s economically most successful Third World countriesafter getting rid of “authoritarian rule“. So from those examples it appears that dictatorship may gestate a successful economy, but more often than not “Authoritarian Rule” transforms itself into a suffocating mother, if not an evil stepmother.

More importantly, China itself is in a sense only the last manifestation of a truism: an (economically) enlightened dictatorship can be much more efficient than the collection of dirty tricks known as democracy. Voltaire likely believed in that, just as Plato and countless others, and even if it does sound like an elitist concept, it is obvious nevertheless. An intelligent, caring, politically and economically wise Prince can decide for the best of everybody in minutes, rather than wasting months trying to convince, negotiate, win over people, perhaps in interminable parliamentary committees.

Such a Prince can also guarantee decades of good governance, truly a blessing for his (or her) people.

There is a small matter though. Say, your Prince is Octavianus Augustus and peace and prosperity is for everybody. Then comes Tiberius, and things start out ok: only, to worsen with his increasing paranoia.

Then you’re stuck with Caligula. And Nero is not too far away either.

Things haven’t changed much in the intevening 2,000 years. The trouble with authoritarian rule, hence with authoritarian capitalism, is not its ability to generate prosperity: rather, its perfectly equivalent capacity to degenerate, quickly because almost without control, thereby hampering the growth of that prosperity if not killing it off entirely.

Speaking the language of the financial world: just like a new CEO can resurrect or destroy a Company, so a despotic Prince (or committee of Princes, aka the “Communist Party of China Central Committee“) is a recipe for increased earning opportunities and, for the very same reasons, for an increase in risk.

And that’s something that should definitely be factored in in any judgement about what to choose as “the condition and motor of economic development“. After all, who wants to continuously gamble all of one’s wealth?

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Wait a sec: one thing is liberalism (both on the political and economic side) and another entirely different beast is democracy, meaning “majority rule”. In Rome, the support by the plebs was precisely what brought down the Republican liberties: after the failed attempts by the Gracchi brothers, Catilina and Caesar, finally they succeeded with Octavianus and the following emperors. Which is why the American Founding Fathers, more inclined to emulate Cato than Caesar, always spoke of creating a Republic, not a Democracy: in the Federalist paper #10 Madison argues at length about the difference, and Ben Franklin reportedly said that “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch, Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.”.


    2008/Apr/30 at 07:05:02

  2. Can’t quite agree on this one.

    To view China as a *enlightened dictatorship* is quite typically a western point of the view. Most Chinese, on the other hand, view China in a transition period from the authoritarian rule into democracy.

    You mentioned Taiwan and Korea, but your statement is quite to the opposite. Both regions didn’t enjoy the fastest economic development *after* they abandoned authoritarians. Instead, both abandoned authoritarian rules *after* their economic success. This is most certainly true for Taiwan.

    So the majority Chinese tend to believe that China can duplicate the same process. Although, given the size of China and the complexities, this process would be much more pains-taking and slow.


    2008/May/01 at 07:39:40

  3. chirlanomaly: ultimately, Žižek’s point was about the present Chinese situation being the endpoint for liberal democracy. I see you do not agree about that either.


    2008/May/01 at 23:15:02

  4. Yes, it is, because democracy is obviously retarded and socialistic. Try learning some economics instead of beating off to leftist propaganda.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: