Chapter 15 3. Institutional Transcendence: The Relationship of Three Forces

In March 2012, Mr. Fukuyama published an article in the "Financial Times" entitled "China has not solved the problem of the 'bad emperor'". He still insisted that in June 2011 he debated the Chinese model with me at the "Wenhui Lecture Hall" in Shanghai. At that time, he expressed the view that in Chinese history, when a "good emperor" was encountered, the dynasty prospered, and when it encountered a "bad emperor", it fell into a slump. He believed that the biggest problem in China today is that it has not yet established a "formal system and true rule of law".Different from the last time, this time he used the Bo Xilai incident as an example to support his point of view, thinking that China still has not solved the "bad emperor" problem.In April of the same year, at the "China Wave" forum held by the Shanghai Century Publishing Group at the London Book Fair, a senior commentator from the Financial Times also raised the same question to me, and thought that the Chinese model seemed unreliable.

I answered this reviewer's question candidly.I said that today the Western media do not deny that the candidate for China's next supreme leader has been decided, which is the first major event; the candidate for the next prime minister has also been determined, which is the second major event.In my opinion, this in itself shows that China's high-level succession system is functioning smoothly.As for the Bo Xilai incident, it will not affect the overall situation of the succession of China's top leaders. It is far-fetched to insist on the "good emperor" and "bad emperor".

As for Mr. Fukuyama's emphasis on "formal institutions and the real rule of law", there is some truth to this, because some successes of Western countries are indeed related to this factor.One of the main characteristics of China's institutional innovation over the past 30 years is also the emphasis on institutional arrangements, the spirit of the rule of law and procedural justice. However, I also think that the success of a country does not depend mainly on whether there is a "formal system and the real rule of law", but rather It depends on whether these "formal systems and the real rule of law" conform to the real conditions of a country and whether they can keep pace with the times.Take India, which we are familiar with, as an example. It seems that it has long had a "formal system and the real rule of law", but India lags behind China in almost every aspect, and most of its social indicators are not even up to the level of China's Tibet region.Japan also seems to have had a "formal system and the real rule of law" long ago. However, Japan has changed its government like a revolving door, with nine ministers in ten years, weak governance, and an economic recession that has lasted for more than 20 years.The United States has long had a "formal system and the real rule of law," but all this seems to have gradually evolved into a "system rigidity and legalism." Naturally, this is the part of the American system that most needs reform.

Under this rigid system, the Republican and Democratic parties in the United States are sharply opposed, making various institutional reforms in the United States difficult.Under this legalism model, the cost of social governance in the United States is extremely high. In Mr. Fukuyama's words, "veto politics" prevails, making it impossible to implement necessary reform measures.The "formal system and real rule of law" in the West really needs to be reformed.Zakaria, a well-known American media person, also lamented not long ago: "In a rapidly developing world, other countries act quickly and farsightedly, while our (U.S.) government is paralyzed. Keep saying that we have the history of the world." The greatest system is all very well, but to say so while it's disabled is a lot like cheerleaders with no brains."

I have outlined the predicament of the American middle class and the "American Dream" above, and it is necessary to further explore the reasons behind this predicament.I personally think that there is something wrong with the political model of the United States.Instead of taking the trouble to sell its own political model to the world every day, the United States should reflect on the problems of its own political system.Anyone who has a little understanding of the American political system knows that the American democratic system has basically been kidnapped by various well-organized and mobilized interest groups. The "separation of powers" that Americans were once proud of has almost become a reality today. It has become synonymous with the government's "powerlessness" or even "political paralysis".

The biggest dilemma of the "separation of powers" system in the United States is that the "separation of powers" is essentially an institutional arrangement confined to the political field, but outside the political field, powerful capital forces seem to be able to influence many American systems arrange.A good modern political system should be able to ensure a balance among political power, social power, and capital power on a larger scale.The imbalance between these three forces and the dominance of capital should be the main reason why the "American Dream" was "sold out".It is in this sense that the vision of the Chinese people has gone beyond the American model, and the political exploration that the Chinese are conducting today is of great significance.

The "democratic" system in many Western countries has gradually evolved into a "money-lord" system, especially the democracy in the United States.As mentioned earlier, the "separation of powers" system advertised by the United States is limited to the political field, and these powers are still controlled by capital forces in essence.Modern society needs a rough balance and benign interaction between political forces, social forces, and capital forces beyond the political field. Otherwise, "money owners" will control "democracy", and the 99% and 1% behind "Occupy Wall Street" Conflicts may also become protracted as a result, eventually leading to a bigger crisis.

Over the past 30 years of reform and opening up, with China's rapid rise, economic and social forces have made great progress, and a balance of political, social and capital forces has been formed.We might as well compare the huge differences between these three power structures in China and the United States. In the United States, compared with political power and social power, capital power has formed a clear advantage.The power of capital has been fully organized and influences political power. In other words, under the power of capital, the political power of the United States lacks the necessary independence and neutrality, and can only follow the requirements of capital power.Similarly, the capital power of the United States has also completed the penetration of social power to a large extent, especially the control of mainstream media and the setting of social issues.

For a long time, the political tradition in the United States has been that American capital and social forces have certain restrictions on the political power of the United States. American law even stipulates that in order to prevent the rich from manipulating elections, the upper limit of personal donations to presidential candidates is 2,500 US dollars.But in the past 30 years, especially since the Reagan era, the power of American capital has jumped, and its energy has clearly overwhelmed political and social forces. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that there is no cap on donations from companies and groups in support of campaigns. In 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that there is no cap on individual campaign donations.So far, American democracy has truly become a "money master".

Looking at China again, in history, China’s political power has always been in a relatively strong position and a relatively neutral position. This tradition continues to this day. Although the influence of China’s social power and capital power is rapidly expanding, China’s Political forces largely maintained their independence and neutrality.The strength of capital power is that it is good at creating wealth and demonstrating efficiency.The history of the past 60 years shows that in the first 30 years, China suppressed too much capital power, resulting in a serious lack of economic vitality and slow progress in improving people's livelihood. However, with the reform and opening up, capital power exploded, and the Chinese created a wealth growth Wonder of the world.But the power of capital also brings its own side effects. If there are no other restrictive forces, the profit-seeking nature of capital will lead to a high degree of social polarization and financial and economic crises.

In China, the power of capital is generally limited by political and social forces.It is impossible for the 100 richest people in China to influence the decision-making of the Politburo of the CPC Central Committee, but the 50 richest people in the United States should be enough to influence the decision-making of the White House.Capital has no motherland, and a new phenomenon has emerged in recent years: Today, the desire of capital forces to improve their own political system and social structure has been significantly reduced, because through globalization and networking, the source of their greatest profits may no longer be their own country. A new institutional dilemma facing the West.In contrast, although China’s gap between rich and poor has widened, China’s political power has generally ensured that the living standards of disadvantaged groups have been greatly improved. Chinese social power has continued the tradition of Chinese populism, and the mainstream of society has almost always been inclined to restraint capital.This balanced pattern of the three forces should be the main reason why China was able to avoid the American-style financial crisis and debt crisis. This may also be the main reason why the prospect of the "Chinese Dream" of ordinary people may be more exciting than the prospect of the "American Dream". Along with economic development, China's social forces have also developed rapidly, which has changed the way Chinese people live and participate in politics.In the first 30 years, China's social power was too weak, which led to many problems, including lack of vitality in social life, serious failure of information feedback, etc. When problems arise, social forces cannot provide timely and effective feedback and countermeasures. Over the years, China's economy and the Internet have risen rapidly, the middle class has continued to expand, and Chinese social forces have begun to influence all aspects of China's political life. Discussions on many public policy issues and political issues have never been as open and in-depth as they are today. It has become an important part of Chinese social life, and Chinese people's freedom of speech has never been as extensive as it is today.But social forces also have a blind side, especially the trends of welfare maximization and populism are also developing.Fortunately, China's political forces have noticed this situation and began to guide and even correct social forces more. The recent emphasis on establishing a "more fair and sustainable social security system" and the governance of online rumors are good examples. It shows that China's political forces are clear-headed. This kind of correction represents the long-term and overall interests of the country and the people, and is worthy of recognition. In short, the predicament of the "American Dream" and many problems in the United States today are mainly due to the excessive power of capital, which restricts the political power of the United States and also influences the power of American society to a large extent. interests to the detriment of the interests of the majority of the American people.If the United States fails to adjust the relationship between these three forces in a timely manner, the predicament of the "American Dream" is expected to continue.In contrast, the dynamic balance of political power, social power, and capital power under the Chinese model, especially the relative strength and neutrality of Chinese political power, roughly maintains its own norms and leadership while being restricted by social power and capital power. The ability of capital power and social power should be the key reason why China has risen relatively smoothly in the past 30 years, and it is also the main reason why the dreams of most Chinese people have come true.We can deduce from this: If the political system arrangements of China and the United States continue to develop according to the current logic, the prospect of realizing the "Chinese Dream" should be more exciting than the prospect of the "American Dream". Notes: