The Case for Robust Democracy in China

Not Weapon, but Enemy: What we are fighting is not this or that enemy who could be attacked or liquidated by atomic means, but the atomic situation as such. Since this enemy is the enemy of all people, those who, up to now, had considered each other to be enemies, have now to become allies against the common menace.–Peace actions from which we exclude those with whom we wish to live in peace amount to hypocrisy, self-righteousness and a waste of time.
from Theses for the Atomic Age by Günther Anders

I do not believe Xi Jinping and the Chinese people are evil, although I do see many mistakes they have made in their development as a modern nation (but we all make mistakes).

I believe Xi Jinping and the leadership of China, at least in the last few years, have acted more times than not to stabilize world order, prevent wars, increase commerce, invent new technologies and solve major civilizational problems.

I understand warfare, and I understand that some people in the USA and other countries may view the Chinese as being uniquely deceptive and antagonistic. In some ways this may have been a fair perspective on China in prior decades, but I do not think that this view accurately portrays the China I am seeing now. Nor does it portray the China that will need to exist if it is to survive for the next century. Nor does it portray the China that will need to exist to help other countries survive and thrive for the next few centuries.

I believe there is a strong case for an expanded, robust democratic China to emerge now, for the following reasons:

1) Healthy development for the Chinese population. The development of uniquely Chinese competitive democratic procedures, and the implementation and operation of these procedures, will be a major brain stimulus to individuals across the country. China needs more.
2) Increased resiliency in the event of a solar flare, earthquake, or other disaster event. Any national system that cannot survive without more extensive dialogue and debate is hampering its citizens in the event that a major leader (or multiple) is ever taken out by a major natural disaster event. The current Chinese system, dependent on a tightly controlled uni-party despite some voting processes, does not incentivize a healthy competitive dialogue that is critical to human development and longterm resilient government.
3) Limiting competitive democracy does not prevent bad actors or spies from entering the system. It actually prevents their detection, since a spy who enters higher up in the system will have the ability to prevent discussion or opposition to changes lower in the system with little pushback. Focusing on more open discussion of all issues (especially in a technology environment where it is a reality to fake a person entirely with plastic surgery and an LLM-generated script), is a longterm more reliable way to detect bad actors.
4) Economic stimulus in development and operation of democratic processes. From media to campaigning and to pride of birth and schooling origins for elevated leaders (both the winners and the losers), there are is a strong argument that expanded democracy will drive more economic growth and dynamism.
5) Storytelling and a great journey through a decade-long transition which will be a proving ground for the adaptability of the Chinese culture and Chinese people. A common story, more than simply genetics, is what binds nations. A uniquely Chinese story of peacefully increasing democratic development and human rights will be a story that will be passed down for generations, the momentum of which can reinforce itself if there is backsliding. This decade-long transition can also influence many other world leaders to deepen their own national stories, leading to increased resilience of all nations and increased human rights for people globally.
6) Improved information flow for leadership. Non-democratic processes do not eliminate or reduce politics. They push information into the shadows where it is even harder to detect and interpret. More open information flow is better for leaders in China, especially in an environment where LLM-tech makes bad and even entirely fake actors harder to detect.
7) Enables global alliance building. Many of the nations that China trades with already have democratic processes more robust than China’s. The ability for leaders of other nations to collaborate on major trade deals or longterm projects (including convincing internal populations to get on board) will be stronger. Alliances that are built only on monetary exchange are more fragile than alliances built on both mutual trust with semi-shared (or entirely shared) longterm goals and monetary exchange in combination.
8) Positions China as a pioneer for secure, open-source voting technologies to power efficient, fast, and secure elections. This could be an area of pride for China and for Asia more broadly. This could also help stabilize many nations around the world, if open-source voting technology is offered to countries in combination with trade deals. A competition between USA and China for two or three or even more open-source technology stacks for voting and open governance infrastructure would be of huge benefit to our world (and the many planets that will be stably populated through a peaceful, collaborative space colonization amongst all nations).
9) Quickly escalates China as leader of the global political dance Right now Trump (and some other world leaders) are using China as an excuse to become more authoritarian, which increases both short-term and long-term dangers for China (and other countries). Transitioning to a uniquely Chinese form of real, robust democratic practice will immediately change the conversation, disarm the ability for leaders from the USA and other countries to create false demonizing stories of an evil China, and will contain or collapse rising authoritarian tendencies in the USA and other countries (all of which are longterm threats to China). This is not about beating other countries at their own game, but rather creating a new more democratic shape of China that will be harder to pigeonhole, while also forcing other countries to play more honestly by their own rules (and in some cases exposing their hypocrisy, leading to the collapse of some regimes). Further, one of the greatest gifts that Xi Jinping can give the Chinese people and the world is to transition from his current open-ended lifetime leadership of China to the first of a decade-long, single-term formal presidency with a more expansive, uniquely Chinese democratic practice. In some ways, the persistence of Xi Jinping’s leadership, although it has enabled great accomplishments from the Chinese people, could quickly turn to a severe limiter of further great accomplishments from the many Chinese people who made breakthroughs during his leadership (scientists, scholars, athletes, engineers, entrepreneurs, business people, teachers, civic leaders, and many more). When the average soldier or worker sees Xi Jinping change (or accept) the removal of term limits, even if he is doing so to stabilize the nation on the short-term, they may wrongly interpret this single action as permission for a citizen to break boundaries of their own (both against other Chinese and against other foreign citizens). This seems oversimplified, but it is not. The trend of Xi Jinping’s rule is clearly in the direction of less formal governance. Even if Xi Jinping operated this way to resolve corruption and enable fast-scale economic and population growth up to present day, I do not think the current course can continue at the senior level or at the lower levels of Chinese society. My sense is that more of Chinese national culture will fracture (and soon) unless a large-scale initiative is launched, and that the more democratic form of governance has much better steady-state stability once the transformation is completed. I do not think that Xi Jinping wants to be a limiter of the Chinese people, and I do not think he makes the decisions he does only out of personal pride. The work to clean up corruption, combat illegal trafficking of all kinds, stabilize conflict with other nations, and continue open dialogue with Donald Trump despite unfairly aggressive provocations and inaccurate portrayals (for Donald Trump’s own political benefit) are all evidence of a long-term courageous view for stable governance. Others should also find ways to believe in and encourage the best version of Xi Jinping (it is a challenge for me to do sometimes!). He wields tremendous power and has an incredibly challenging job. Fortunately for him, he does not have the weight of carrying a centuries old royal family line, which is a far more stress-inducing, boundary-filled and paralyzing job.
10) We already have an Emperor in Japan from a longstanding dynasty, who has chosen a very carefully articulated, human-rights-respecting form of democratic governance while preserving the Emperor position. I know some will claim that this was forced on Japan, but I do not agree. The conclusion to the war is very mixed, and in some ways the war was always about preservation of the royal position and of Japanese governance (which has included democratic practice since the late 1800s). So in that sense, both Japan and USA won the war. China (and other nations) should take advantage of this extremely rare historical event and avoid creating any national political roles that are lifetime, less dynamic, and less predictable.

The reserved, honorable leadership of the Japanese royal family is precisely what is needed as a distant enabler for all other countries. As an example, just recently Emperor Emeritus Akihito instructed the use of much smaller funeral rites, a humble and important act that no other royal leader in our current world would think to do. The combination of the ending of World War II, the constitution that emerged, and the ongoing survival of a thriving Japan led by a 1000+ year old royalty is a miraculous gift that all countries should not take lightly (especially when that royalty has used their carefully preserved power to focus on open, human-rights-respecting, democratic governance).

The strength needed to carry such a royal line is enormous, and the political process of building one is, and always will be, incredibly messy and violent. No one can catch up to the history that has been established by the Japanese royal family, and although some royal families in other countries still exist, no one should try to expand the sovereignty of any of these families given the opportunity that was opened after the war with the new constitution of Japan.

The existence of the Japanese royal family as a sovereignty story and reality enables the rest of us to focus on solving bigger problems and leading much richer lives of leisure (that the Japanese royalty will never be able to experience). The Japanese people also have limitations and duties that citizens in other countries will never have because of their long historical connection to and support of the royal family, and we should all be appreciative of that. I do not envy the Japanese royal family, and I will sit politely and listen on the rare occasions when they do speak. I encourage others to do the same.

I do not view this as a point only about the Emperor’s person (though the embodied sovereign person alone should draw our respect and attention), but as a recognition of a constantly observed, long-repeated civilizational ritual of governance that can serve as a kind of lowest-level sovereignty signal and foundation for other nation states and royal families to build upon (of which the Emperor’s person, reflection-ability, and repeat action is the most important part). Although other nations could try to create more robust and carefully executed governance rituals, they do not need to simply because Japan exists. By protecting Japan, we are protecting all other nation’s abilities to operate with much lighter-weight governance structures.

Related to this, I am losing confidence in many of my fellow Americans.

There is a surprising path for China to become more American than America (or they may argue, more Chinese than China or America) – meaning a non-royalty-constrained nation whose leadership and citizens serve as models for world governance by championing human rights and fair trade and open debate, by operating lightweight government efficiently while rooting out corruption, by focusing on large-scale problem solving while minimizing inter-nation and inter-personal warfare, and by driving cultural traditions that enable more frontier exploration and rapid technological breakthroughs, even into outer space.

For that to happen, Xi Jinping and other leaders must band together to make a significant and courageous evaluation of what a robust Chinese democratic state can be. Then take swift action.

Show, strike, shatter the hammer to forge the China that survives centuries.