JavaScript disabled. Please enable JavaScript to use My News, My Clippings, My Comments and user settings.

New feature Personalise your news, save articles to read later and customise settings View Demo

Hi there! Beta version

If you have trouble accessing our login form below, you can go to our login page.

National Times

China's very own Mandela

David Kelly
October 12, 2010

Opinion

Video settings

Please Log in to update your video settings

Video will begin in 5 seconds.

Video settings

Please Log in to update your video settings

Mandela's private writings

Nelson Mandela's new book, 'Conversations with Myself', a compilation of his private writings, is set for worldwide release today.

The Nobel peace prize will make tyranny harder and the prospects of reform brighter.

The award of the Nobel peace prize to Liu Xiaobo is a salutary event. For a Chinese writer and public intellectual to be so singled out does his nation no dishonour, despite official statements to the contrary. It shows, rather, that China, a nation that once led the world in the enunciation of universal values, is capable of returning to its ancient role.

Liu's contribution to the social and political development of China will likely come to be seen as comparable to that of Nelson Mandela to Africa or Vaclav Havel to eastern Europe. But even if such an outcome is somehow staved off, Liu has made the work of the forces of tyranny much harder, and the prospects of the forces of political reform much brighter.

Liu is a former university lecturer in literature and philosophy, and an author who was jailed after the Tiananmen protests of 1989, despite his well-documented role in trying to persuade the students to drop their radical postures, and despite his role in averting a worse massacre from occurring.

Illustration: John Spooner

Illustration: John Spooner

Jailed again in the late 1990s, constantly under surveillance and long prevented from pursuing an academic career, Liu became a phenomenally productive columnist, able to publish in Hong Kong and in other overseas media. With his writings under strict ban in China, he is largely unknown to the general public, though capable of creating waves in cultural and intellectual circles.

Last year, he and a circle of associates produced Charter 08, modelled on Havel's Charter 77. The document challenged political authority, demanding that it live up to its own stated political reform objectives.

At the top of politics in China, there is evidence of division over reform. Premier Wen Jiabao, head of the government and a member of the standing committee of the politburo, has called for the realisation of universal values.

Despite the attempts of Wen and his supporters, others are portraying universal values as weapons being used by the West to contain and repress China's rightful rise in the world.

In his best-selling book China Stands Up, the writer Moluo, who once sided with ''liberal'' voices close to Liu Xiaobo, sets out to settle accounts with the ''May Fourth Movement'', a patriotic movement criticising the entire Chinese tradition that followed the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 (and, ironically, gave rise to the Communist movement in China).

Moluo claims that the May Fourth Movement, which now has a tradition of counter-tradition, embodied the denigration of Chinese culture that had been a mark of Western imperialism since the Opium Wars.

While not mentioned explicitly by Moluo, Liu's writings are solidly in the May Fourth lineage. From as early as his first book, 1988's Xuanze de pipan (Critique of Choice), Liu's ''Chineseness'' has always been open to nationalistic attack on grounds of supposed ''wholesale Westernisation''. On one occasion, interviewed by the Hong Kong journal Kaifang, he stated that political reform was possible in China only if one imagined it remaining under colonial reform for 300 years. ''I doubt 300 years would suffice,'' he added. Those who know Liu can easily imagine the ironic grin and chuckle with which he would have made this statement. Nationalist propaganda, unrelenting since the suppression of the Tiananmen protest movement, has created a generation in China that is utterly tone-deaf to irony and for whom Liu is quite literally a traitor (though they can't explain why he would have advertised this so publicly before returning to live in his motherland).

The text of Charter 08, the document that more than anything else sealed Liu's fate and led to his harsh 11-year sentence on Christmas Day last year, is explicit in its appeal to universal values: ''The Chinese people, who have endured human rights disasters and uncountable struggles across these same years, now include many who see clearly that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values of humankind and that democracy and constitutional government are the fundamental framework for protecting these values.''

Attacks on Liu will inevitably link his ''wholesale Westernisation'' with the universal values to which the Charter 08 document subscribes. His insistence that universal values really be universal - that the West itself be subject to its own culture of critical inquiry - will be swept aside.

But there is a fatal weakness in the critique of universal values in China today. Something has to be offered in their place, such as ''Chinese values''. So far, nothing but ''motherhood'' concepts such as ''harmonious society'' and ''peaceful rise'' have been put forward. Social order, based at its core on a pervasive police state, and unquestionable authority protecting the interests of an opaque power elite, are values that dare not state their real names. In any genuine debate, they must fall before the universal values of Charter 08. If there is anything of value in them - say traditional Confucian ideas of meritocracy - these will survive genuine debate and become special applications of universal values. Meritocracy that arbitrarily arrests and imprisons will be thrown in the trash-can of history.

Universal values are only universal in a Platonic sense. They continually find expression, as societies and their economic and political systems evolve and change. What is crucial is that a nation's leadership articulate rather than impose its values. The adaptation of universal values to a particular context can be achieved only by the society as a whole. It is this that makes them universal.

China has nothing to fear from genuinely universal values because they will at the end of the day be defined and enacted by Chinese people.

The regime quite literally jailed Liu ''because it could''. It will eventually release him for the same reason.

David Kelly is a professor of China studies at the China Research Centre, University of Technology, Sydney. This article was first published through the East Asia Forum.

 

30 comments

  • Watch for a chorus of "no comment" from our Aussie politicians. They won't want to upset our Chinese Masters.

    Commenter
    Banana Republic
    Date and time
    October 12, 2010, 9:12AM
  • Liu's unrelenting pursuit of political reforms in China must be commended but comparing him to Nelson Mandela is stretching it a bit. For one thing, he doesn't enjoy universal support in his own country. In any case, the best way to achieve political reforms in China is not to fight the present system head-on; it must be done from within the system itself. There are many reformers within the party, including the premier, who are working towards the same goals but using a much more gradual, subtle approach. Many party members recognise the fact that the party cannot survive indefinitely without eventually introducing democratic reforms. The party must and will introduce these reforms in due course - any attempt by outsiders to force its hands will always fail and, more importantly, will be counter productive.

    Commenter
    Michael
    Location
    Melbourne
    Date and time
    October 12, 2010, 9:33AM
  • Thanks you for an enlightening article. While yes, the international world should increase pressure on human rights in China, rather than seeing the financial gains, history shows us that true change must come from within - when imposed by outsiders, it cannot be lasting or genuine. Hopefully word of this award will spread in China itself.

    Commenter
    Meg
    Location
    Sydney
    Date and time
    October 12, 2010, 9:40AM
  • Interesting article and well reasoned but I tend to share the reservations, especially about the Mandela link-up, expressed above.

    I also wonder whether, or not, it is actually necessary to reach some level of economic development before 'universal values' become genuinely meaningful.

    Did modern industrial societies promote and try to enshrine 'universal values' when they had pre-industrial or developing economies?

    Is it possible to give real meaning to democracy or freedom of expression before the vast majority of the population can afford to eat, heat or house themselves adequately?

    It seems, sometimes, that the western insistence on immediate democracy and 'freedom' does more harm than good in certain circumstances.

    Do democracy and freedom have any meaning when only a miniscule percentage of a given population can take advantage of them?

    I don't know but I do wonder.

    Commenter
    p mahone
    Location
    sydney
    Date and time
    October 12, 2010, 10:30AM
  • Liu's win is an insult to the German people. It's telling them the Liu's canvassing for democracy and multi-party elections make for more peace than the re-unification of what was once a divided nation; the tearing down of the Berlin wall and the subsequent collapse of the Soviet Bloc defused a potential nuclear war and set the clock back further away from midnight still count for less peace than a democray. It makes a mockery of the thousands of tanks and billions of dollars of weaponry arrayed against each other that could make democracy meaningless.

    Commenter
    Thomas
    Date and time
    October 12, 2010, 10:51AM
  • Only God can help the blinkered asses who persist in their belief that they have the hallowed right to pontificate about human rights, but not be criticized. Who is Liu, who is Kelly, who are these people anyway, and to compare Liu, a philosopher, with Nelson Mandela, a true fighter for freedom in a sick white dominated society is utterly ridiculous.

    David Kelly, why don't you get real job and do some good for those whom you claim need to be freed. Try going through customs and immigration at any Australian, American or European airport; then try the same thing in China.

    Professor of China Studies, what an insult to those who know China.

    Commenter
    Geoffrey W
    Location
    Beijing
    Date and time
    October 12, 2010, 11:00AM
  • Totally agree with Michael, the democracy reform has to come from within not forced upon.
    Being a Chinese original, I have not heard of Mr Liu until now. I don't believe he is known to ordinary Chinese either. Even the democratic pursuits overseas are not too supportive of him. Virtually it can only be viewed as a challenge from West which is not necessary.

    Commenter
    Dave
    Location
    Melbourne
    Date and time
    October 12, 2010, 11:14AM
  • No matter how unpalatable Chinese Law and penalties might seem to others, Liu Xiaobo has been convicted under the existing Laws and Regulations of the PR of China and not arbitrarily arrested and imprisoned as Professor Kelly implies.
    If there is any irony at all, it is that it was a democratic and constitutional government that gave Mandela 27 years in the slammer for a similar Charter.

    Commenter
    Jacko
    Location
    China
    Date and time
    October 12, 2010, 11:36AM
  • Imagine the true potential of China when it adopts 'universal values' ...... AWESOME!

    Commenter
    matt b
    Location
    sydney
    Date and time
    October 12, 2010, 11:40AM
  • Oh please. Another part of Western conspiracy/fear toward China? And compare him to Nelson Mandelson? That's an insult to the South Africans.

    I don't believe his views are generally appreciated or desired by people in China. It seems that it's only people in the West that are "pushing" democracy onto China; and when an odd person from within China does the same, s/he immediately becomes a poster boy/girl in the West, while largely spat on by ordinary people within China. Look at all the Tiananmen Square "leaders" who fled to the USA and other countries. In recent interviews (e.g. with Cai Ling, she nows lives in USA), none of them champion for democracy in China anymore. If the people INSIDE China want it, then they will get it. At the moment, the people of China are not interested in changing the status quo because they are genuiuely happy with the current system, which is perhaps proving to be superior than the Western system in generating prosperity.

    See various polls done comparing "happiness", "satisfaction" and "optimism" in a list of countries; China routinely comes out on/near top - people can't see how democracy can contribute to that, if not negatively affect what the people have. Even the USA is gradually moving toward the Chinese model (which Fox News recently called "State Capitalism").

    Commenter
    David
    Location
    Melbourne
    Date and time
    October 12, 2010, 12:36PM

More comments

Comments are now closed