MCLC: reading Havel in Beijing (1)

[Denton, Kirk]

MCLC LIST
From: joe alvaro <jjalvaro at student.cityu.edu.hk>
Subject: reading Havel in Beijing (1)
***********************************************************

China does not appear to have a mechanism which gives voices to its
citizens who do not share (or are critical of) CCP ideology. The CCP's
concept of a 'harmonious society', by logical extension, implies that
there is an unharmonious sub-set. We all know the stories of
'disharmonious' voices that have been effectively liquidated (harmonized).
But since when is being Chinese the same thing as showing allegiance to
the CCP? I daresay these are not synonymous. I hate to generalize but it
seems that many are willing to accept CCP autocracy rather than be seen to
lose face or say China is undemocratic and the CCP is little short of an
autocratic kleptocracy. Such a concession would not bring shame ­ China
would gain the respect of the world. The very thing for which it craves,
i.e. world approbation, would be abundantly lavished and 'Brand China'
would have achieve its goal: respect.

The officially-constructed world of a 'harmonious society', and
'scientific development' while 'holding high the great banner of socialism
with Chinese characteristics' and 'building a moderately prosperous
society in an all-round way', etc., etc., are a framework within which the
CCP may continue to legitimize its hold on power. But when these slogans
are juxtaposed with freedom of expression on one hand, and the dark
reality of CCP brutality on the other, the rhetoric pales indeed. My
question is this: Can the modernization of China not be achieved while
showing justice?  
   Nowadays, there is no such thing as what Zizek called 'automatic
legitimacy', particularly for governments. We have entered a phase where
ordinary people are questioning master narratives and hand-me-down
ideologies more than ever, forcing hierarchies to come up with ever
greater justifications to legitimize their policies, if not their very
existence.

History tells us that no society has ever been truly 'harmonious'. In
every case, government oppression has achieved one thing only: a temporary
silencing of that which was deemed incongruous ­ eventually, the growing
tide of suppressed voices, as dissonant as they might be, conquered the
artificiality of government constructed 'harmony'.

Joe Alvaro