Advertisement

Reforming Peking University: A Window into Deliberative Democracy?

  • Xu Jilin

Abstract

Village elections at the rural level are often cited as promising evidence of the continuing democratization of China. However, examples of grassroots democracy are often concentrated in rural China and few analogous examples in China’s major urban areas (where the average level of education, income, and political activism is much higher) exist. One form of grassroots democracy, deliberative democracy, is gaining currency in Europe and North America. Deliberative democracy proposes that major public policy decisions ought to be subject to spirited public discussion and debate, with the belief that dialogue and deliberation lead to optimal compromise and a more accurate consensus about the public interest. According to the theory of deliberative democracy, civic deliberation is the basis for the legitimacy of public policies and ultimately for politics more generally (Chen Jiagang 2004).

Keywords

Public Sphere Public Debate Public Reason Deliberative Democracy Reform Plan 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Works Cited

  1. Beida Reform Attracts Followers: Reaping and Nurturing.” 2003. 21st Century Economic Report, available at http://www.cc.org.cn/old/wencui/030721200/0307212002.htm, accessed on May 5, 2006.
  2. Chen Jiagang. 2004. Deliberative Democracy. Shanghai: Shanghai Sanlian Bookstore.Google Scholar
  3. “Excerpts from Faculty’s Comments on the Proposed Personnel Reform of Peking University.” 2003. Thinking and Writing, available at http://chinese-thought.unix-vip.cn4e.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=121, accessed on May 5, 2006.
  4. Giddens, Anthony. 2000. Beyond Left and Right: The Future of Radical Politics. Beijing: Social Sciences Literature Publishing.Google Scholar
  5. Gao Min. 2003. “Why We Care About Beida’s Education Reform.” Business Weekly, No. 14, July 16.Google Scholar
  6. Habermas, Jürgen. 1998. “Three Normative Models of Democracy.” In Ciaran Cronin and Pablo De Greiff eds. The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 239–52.Google Scholar
  7. He Huaihong. 2003. “Towards Public Reason.” The Economic Observer, available at http://www.cc.org.cn/old/wencui/030721200/0307212007, accessed on May 5, 2006.Google Scholar
  8. Li Meng. 2003. “How to Reform a University: Comments on the Logic of the Personnel Reform of Peking University.” Academics in China 5: 45–64.Google Scholar
  9. Li Qiang. 2003. “Interview with Li Qiang: We Must Make the First Step,” Thinking and Writing, available at http://chinese-thought.unix-vip.cn4e.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=140, accessed on May 5, 2006.Google Scholar
  10. Li Yintao. 2003. “Beida Reform: The Debate between Interests and Reason.” Xinmin Weekly, No. 29, at 29.Google Scholar
  11. Sun Liping. 2003. “On Beida Reform: Contrasting Views.” Thinking and Writing, available at http://chinese-thought.unix-vip.cn4e.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=210, accessed on May 5, 2006.Google Scholar
  12. Zhang Weiying. 2004. The Logic of the University. Beijing: Peking University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Ethan J. Leib and Baogang He 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xu Jilin

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations