Hope of Russia: The Middle Class’ awakening awareness of their rights.
By He Qinglian on June 14, 2012.
There
is a feature in China’s foreign policy in recent years: whenever
Western countries—the United States in particular—made any “unfriendly”
actions, the Chinese government would definitely lodge a strong protest;
yet however “unfriendly” Russia may be to China—whether it is the China
threat theory that repeatedly emerges in Russia, or the unfair and
inhumane treatments that Chinese traders and nationals in Russia have
often been subjected to, the Chinese government would basically respond in a
low key approach. Chinese media, too, turn a blind
eye to them. Their attitude toward Vladimir Putin has been
completely different from their attitude to heads of Western countries.
They would spare no ink when they write about scandals that are
connected to Western heads of state or government; yet when they write about Vladimir
Putin, their reports comprise nothing but praise, and they generally
do not criticize him.
Why
does Putin get this preferential treatment? The reason is simple: the
Chinese government sees Putin and Russia as its ally in opposing
democracy. Looking around in this world, Beijing feels it difficult to find
another of its kind that resembles it this much, and concluded that
Russia would embark on the pro-Western road of democracy if Vladimir
Putin is gone, which would make Beijing feel it has lost
its key ally.
As
two of a kind, [the authorities in] Beijing and Vladimir Putin
resembles each other the most in the fact that they both reject modern democratic
system, and believe firmly that economic development is what construe
the basis of political legitimacy. In his election campaign speech in
January this year, Vladimir Putin still insisted that political “leap and
revolution” would be harmful, and that gradual development would be
necessary; he still stressed that “being strong is the fundamental
guarantee for national security of Russia”; he emphasized that in terms
of the percentage of electric appliances ownership, Russia has already
been on par with the level of developed nations, the actual income of
four-fifths of the population exceeded the peak years of development of
the Soviet Union; the consumption level of 80% of Russian households
surpassed that of the USSR period.
Without
doubt, Putin would not forget to arouse in the
people the sense of gratitude by mentioning the tremendous hardship Russia had faced in the
early stage of democratization.
Similar expressions could often be found in speeches made by Jiang
Zemin and Zhu Rongji of the third generation of the CPC leadership and
Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao of the fourth generation.
The
resonance between the Beijing authorities and Putin is also manifested
in their special interest in controlling culture and thoughts. The only
thing that set them apart is that in Russia, where some room for
creative freedom already exist, Putin would have to say as a courtesy
that no one shall infringe creative freedom. Yet, what Putin truly
emphasized was that the country has the obligation and right to use
resources to address social and public issues, and to shape a worldview
that would strengthen the country. Correspondingly, the country would
request that such social awareness tools as television programs, movies,
the Internet, and popular culture act as role models and set in place
the norms. In this respect, the Beijing authorities have already been
ahead of Putin and want to bring it further, so that they could keep
all the above-mentioned watertight.
As
for economic policy, Putin stressed the controlling function of big
state-owned enterprises. The rich therefore feel insecure and they flock
to emigrate. There were even reports that the prices of luxury houses
in New York climbed as a result of purchases made by the rich from China
and Russia. Those
who are familiar with Chinese political propaganda and state conditions
would likely feel a sense of deja vu when reading these.
Nonetheless,
the Chinese government should not feel pleased so soon. After the first
round of initial democratization, the seeds of democratic thoughts have already
been sowed. Russia will gain from those after some hard work.
The
difference between Russia and China is that, after the collapse of the
Soviet Union, comprehensive privatization and economic liberalization
had been implemented. The national control of the economy is not as
comprehensive and strict as the Chinese government does; the democratic
reform that once had taken place gave rise to today’s multiparty
politics in Russia. The ruling party may be powerful, but unlike the
situation in China, it cannot dictate the government, turning it
completely into a political tool for the party. It is because of this
room for political activities that Putin can only practice enlightened
despotism, however much he wants to turn the clock back. Despite severe
interference from Putin and his political forces, freedom of
association, freedom of demonstration, and freedom of the press still manage
to provide the opposition with some room for activities. All these
still do not exist in today’s China. Finally there is Weibo, which
allows for some room to breathe, and the Chinese government is going all
out to monitor it, control it and police it.
Also
among the people who dislike Putin’s power are economic elites, who
opted to vote with their feet. They emigrate, bringing with them the wealth
they have gathered through the years.
There
are two types of people who support Putin.
The first type constitute
Russian angry youth, such as members of the pro-Putin Youth Democratic
Anti-Fascist Movement "NASHI" and “Putin Youth Brigade”. The reason they
support Putin is that, Putin aroused in them the dream of a mighty
country. They chanted “Westerners stop making indiscreet remarks about Russian politics”, having neither any understanding of the history of the former Soviet Union nor
ideas about the Red terror Josef Stalin had once made the
people of the USSR live in, and were enthralled by Putin’s lectures. Besides, Putin’s “Youth of Russia” federal target program provide these youngster
with the opportunities to enter the regime at all levels, they
therefore became staunch supporters of Putin.
The
second type of Putin’s supporters—of the same social class as Mubarak’s
supporters—is from his ticket bunkers scattering across villages and
backward regions where the flow of information is controlled. People of these
regions still prefer “the traditional Russian order”, namely power
politics.
According
to an opinion poll in early 2011, almost 70% of the Russian people
chose “stability”, even if it “may be at the expense of the principles
of democracy and personal freedom”. Only about 20% of the people picked
“democracy with complete freedom”. These people, predominantly members
of the middle class dwelling in big or medium cities such as Moscow,
became increasingly aware of their rights and are no longer satisfied
with mere stability. They demand various political rights, especially
the right to participate in government affairs and actively oppose the
power politics of Putin. Growing increasingly wealthy, the middle class
are key planners and participants of protests.
By
contrast, the middle class of China may not be happy about government
corruption, heavy tax burden and the lack of freedom; but once they
perceive the prospect of China descending into anarchy and mob politics
after the power politics of the government is gone, these people would
become committed supporters of the regime.
The
difference between the attitude of the middle class of China and Russia
have toward power could be attributed to the features of both
economies, the respective ways through which the middle class of the two
countries were formed, and whether or not the bottom of society stand
to benefit from the national economy.
A
resource-based economy, Russia got freed from the economic difficulties
not because Putin had discovered the way to revitalize the economy with
science and technology, but rather he capitalized on the dramatic
change in the pattern of supply and demand of the world's resources that
happened in the mid-1990s. He also made good use of the country’s
advantage in resources to improved income distribution and social welfare with the drastically
increased national revenue, the whole society benefited.
And
unlike China, Russia’s middle class does not consists a main body of
civil servants; rather, it covers all types of knowledge group.
China’s
economy, on the other hand, is a dependent economy. In addition to its
manufacture, which relies heavily on foreign raw materials, energy, and
core technologies, its [goods] are highly dependent on foreign markets.
A
situation like this determines that China could only rely on overdraft
of laborers’ life and welfare, on top of the overdraft of the national
ecological environment.
In
most areas except the several showcase cities that open to the outside
world, China’s middle class, accounted for less than 20% of the
country’s population, consists predominantly of civil servants and
employees of government public institutions. The lives and progress of
these people per se are highly dependent on the regime.
