Question: A revolution does not have to be violent. The Velvet Revolution is the perfect model.
Answer: I do not believe that a Velvet Revolution can take place in China. Never mind the international situation. Never mind the fact that the entire population of Czechoslovakia is only one half the size of the population of the city of Beijing. To believe in the Velvet Revolution requires that you believe in the character of the people, the tolerance of the authorities and the leadership of the intellectuals. The Velvet Revolution took place as the result of these three groups coming together. I do not believe that these groups exist in China. You cannot cite this perfect revolution to rebut the possibly imperfect reforms.
I understand that many intellectuals and scholars in China are enamored of the Velvet Revolution. They are even secretly moved by the idea that they may play the role of Havel. But whether there is a violent revolution or a non-violent one, the role of the intellectuals will be far less than they imagine, never mind a leadership role. The poorer the quality of the citizens, the lesser the importance of the intellectuals. You cannot avoid facing the realities of China by using mere words to describe the perfect democracy, the perfect freedom and the perfect human rights. Reform and democracy are negotiation processes. You cannot expect the rulers to read some books and become suddenly moved to hand everything over to you. You cannot wish for the Velvet Revolution every day so that you can play the role of Havel. You cannot expect that every Chinese citizen will receive a voting ballot and that their votes cannot be bought. Even today, there is no universal suffrage in the Czech Republic.
Therefore my viewpoints are very simple. We don't want to see a violent revolution. A Velvet Revolution will not take place in China. Perfect democracy will not appear in China. We can only go after one small thing at a time. There is no point in frustrating oneself by dreaming about democracy and freedom in our study rooms. Reform is the best answer.
Question: You conclude that the quality of the Chinese people is too poor so that they are not fit for democracy. Did the government pay you a stability-maintenance fee to say that?
Answer: I don't know how you come to this conclusion, because I thought that I made it very plain to see. It is not a question whether democracy is suitable or not, because it will arrive sooner or later. The quality of the citizens will not prevent democracy from arriving, but it can determine its quality. Nobody wants a Rwanda-style democracy, but that is not a genuine democracy. Sometimes it arrives slowly, sometimes it arrives abruptly. Sometimes it arrives neither thoroughly nor completely. Sometimes it is neither American nor European in form. But it will arrive at some point in your lifetime. When you look back, you may find it to be somewhat dull and unexciting.
Question: You are saying that everything depends on the favors of the rulers and not on the efforts of the people themselves?
Answer: Of course, it is important to pressure the rulers. But regrettably, the cooperation of the rulers is even more important. This requires luck and character. At this time, the various social classes are divided and alienated from each other. For example, no matter how much a deal you make out of the high-speed train collision, the rulers are complacent. They feel that this is a civil affair which time will take care of itself. The families of the ruling class may be completely indifferent to this matter. They care only about who rises or falls, their relative ages, the arrangements for certain positions, etc. Regardless of public opinion pressure, the matter will still fade away.
Of course, they may be unconcerned about public opinion pressure. For example, if you have a billion yuan in your account, you won't be too bothered to lose 1,000 yuan. The intellectuals may regard something as very important, but they are magnifying the supposed anxieties of the rulers who may not have considered that issue at all. Many intellectuals that all problems arise from the system, such that everything will be solved if the system is changed. They may be well-intentioned and righteous. But they are assuming that the peasants and the workers share the same knowledge as they do, and that everybody needs to think the same way. But the reality is more disheartening.
The struggles take place in remote places. Over the years, I have visited more than one hundred county cities of all types. They are not especially isolated and/or impoverished. I have spoken to people from all walks of life in those places. Their quest for democracy and freedom is not as urgent as intellectuals imagine. They hate the powers-that-be and corruption mostly because they wish that they (or their own relatives) have been the beneficiaries instead; they don't care about restricting or supervising the authorities; they pick up the vocabulary about democracy and freedom only when ill luck befell them and they need to petition their causes. If the government pays them enough, they will be satisfied.
Any social conflict that can be solved by money is not a social conflict. Intellectuals typically think that these emergency invocation of the words (e.g. democracy, freedom) means that there is a universal demand, thus constituting a consensus. I do not believe that there can be a perfect revolution in a largely divided country. You may feel that I have been the tamed by the rulers and therefore you want to change the rulers. But this is how it has been so far for the last generation or two. Fortunately, when I speak to their children, I find that the Internet and various media have more or less opened their eyes. Therefore I am not pessimistic.
Today, the Chinese Communist Party has 80 million members. 300 million persons live in families which have members with party membership. The Party is no longer just a political party or a class. Therefore, many of the flaws of the Communist Party are also the flaws of the people. I believe that a very strong one-party-system is the same as a no-party system. When the party organization reaches a certain size, it becomes the people itself. So the issue is not to deal with the Communist Party this way or that. The Communist Party is just a name. The system is just a name. If you change the people, everything changes. Therefore, it is more important to seek improvement. Rule of law, education, culture ... there are the basics.
Question: If the revolution comes, what role should influential intellectuals play?
Answer: The intellectuals should be like a blade of grass sitting on top of a wall. But this has to be a blade of grass that bends in the opposite direction of the wind. Intellectuals need their own sense of justice, but they cannot have a position. The more influential intellectuals must not have fixed positions. Whenever they see one side getting too powerful, they must stand with the other side. They must never trust any propositions. They must never follow any ideology. They must treat all revolutionaries as swindlers. They must never believe in any promises. They must do their best to ensure that no side gets annihilated so that the other sides become absolutely powerful. If there is a revolution in China in the future, I will stand with the side which is weak and vulnerable. If this side should grow strong, I will stand with its opponents. I am willing to sacrifice my personal views to ensure the co-existence of different groups. This is everything that you should be seeking for.
From EastSouthWestNorth: http://zonaeuropa.com/201112a.brief.htm#011
