One of the constants of Western foreign policy is the attempt to export democracy. I find this pursuit to be somewhat of a folly because it is built on the faulty premise that democracy is absolutely the ideal form of government. I have nothing against democracy and I rather prefer it myself – but for many cultures, nations and situations, it is unsuitable. An insistence on democracy can lead to sham governments like Iraq, embarrassing results like Hamas in Palestine or dangerous trends like the rise of far right parties in central and eastern Europe.
There seems to be an assumption that only democracy can guarantee those cherished Western liberal rights: life, freedom and property. I think we can all agree that many forms of government can provide life and property so perhaps freedom, or liberty, or whatever you want to call it is the core issue. Does freedom mean that citizens must have the ability to choose their own rulers? I don’t think so. Liberty is stuff like free speech and free religion and all those First Amendment type concerns. Not only can many types of government can guarantee such rights, democracy, in many cases, does not or cannot provide them.
I wonder if the policy of exporting democracy is a just another breed of colonialism. It’s much more palatable than the old practice of enslaving indigenous peoples, of course, but nevertheless entails forcing foreign ideals upon a culture. A bit patronizing, don’t you think? It’s an active extension of the idea that Western liberalism is superior to any other cultural philosophy or way of life. In many cases, this is the plain and bald truth but in some the situation can be more complex.
One of the most interesting examples of the democratic conundrum is Hong Kong. I recently listened to a couple of podcast documentaries (from the excellent BBC World Service Documentary Series) about Hong Kong, focusing on how the territory has changed ten years after the handover. The second part concentrated solely on the place of democracy in Hong Kong. The correspondent – obviously biased toward the British view of government – badgered several people in different strata of society about their thoughts on the distinctly undemocratic nature of Hong Kong. While the responses of the masses were mostly ambivalent, the responses of the ruling class was very interesting.
But, first, a bit of history: Hong Kong has no tradition of democracy. The British ruled it as a colony and, according to the podcast, often colluded with the Chinese mainland to suppress any thoughts of democracy. It seems that in the last few years the British began to introduce democracy but it was too little too late and frowned upon by Beijing. In a related development, many economists, including Milton Friedman (I suppose that name lends some credence to the opinion), predicted that Hong Kong’s economy would collapse or at least decline dramatically once under China. But that’s not what happened. Hong Kong continued to prosper and perhaps that is why democracy won’t be arriving in Hong Kong any time soon. When the citizens are prosperous, who cares about the people at the top?
The ruling class interviewees in the podcast had a fascinating riposte to charges that they are hindering democracy. Only ten percent or so of the population – that would be the richest ten percent – pays taxes. So, the rest of Hong Kong pays no taxes, receives services like health care for free, and enjoys the fruits of a liberal and strong economy. So the rich are reticent to allow those who don’t pay taxes the right to vote (in parallel, government cronies insist on a slow and gradual movement towards democracy, a view that appeases the central Chinese government). The argument is that extending the democracy throughout the population would lead to a welfare state, which may or may not be a good thing depending on your point of view. Would then citizens be willing to pay taxes for the right to vote? Would businessmen and businesswomen continue to invest in Hong Kong if they were required to sustain a population whose votes had tremendous collective power?
Insisting on democracy in Hong Kong seems like a yet another extension of the China-bashing that has been a recent fad in the Western media. China may deserve much of the criticism but the pressure to implement true democracy – whether in China as a whole or just in Hong Kong – is being applied with little thought. Hong Kong proves that some places may flourish in the absence of democracy.
0 Responses to “Exporting Democracy and Hong Kong”