The Impact of Tiananmen

Abstract

This chapter concludes Part Three of the book. It analyzes the political arguments of the NA debates following the Tiananmen crisis of 1989. The next section first summarizes the political arguments of the three groups involved in the debates of 1988–9: NA supporters, elite democrats and democrats. It suggests that the debaters of all distinctions were not so concerned about whether democracy or a new form of authoritarianism should replace CCP rule, but whether the CCP should exercise greater use of the Chinese legal system to sustain its authority.

‘It’s peculiar,’ said a young lecturer in philosophy, discussing the means and ends of reform. ‘It’s like looking through a glass wall. We can see where we want to go, but know we can’t go straight there without triggering disaster. If we try to go straight to democracy and a market economy, there will be chaos, and from chaos will certainly grow authoritarianism — not the new kind, but the old, feudal authoritarianism. Feudal authoritarianism is what sprouted from the chaos of the Cultural Revolution, and it happened in countless large and small localities all across China. It is what grows naturally in China, and it will sprout again if chaos reigns again.’ (quoted in Link, 1992, p. 286)