Following the opening up of the reforms, western civil society theory has become increasingly influential within the domestic theoretical community, and some scholars have strongly advocated western civil society theory, as well as the concepts, discourses and perspectives of western civil society theory to study the problems facing our socialist democratic political development and the direction of future development. In the new era of chinese identity socialism, we are better able to uphold and develop chinese identity socialism, and we need to shed more light on the substance of western civil society theory and prevent it from misleading our country's practice of reform and openness。
Western bourgeois reformist ideology
The theory of western civil society formed in the 17th to 18th centuries and was based on bourgeoisism and liberalism, the product of the then emerging bourgeois demands for economic freedom and political rights. During this period, western civil society theory focused on opposing government violations of individual freedoms and rights, excessive interference in the free market and society, the establishment of the “minimist” “limited government” and the guarantee of a range of democratic political rights such as economic freedom, private property rights and the so-called “social autonomy” of individuals, particularly of the bourgeois class。
After the 1970s, in response to the “difficulties” of welfare and taxation in western countries and the resulting “trust deficit” in government, together with the fear that the so-called “government failures” and the “market failures” had caused social disorder and failure, western civil society theory advocated a redefinition of government functions, a shift in the role of government to the “manager” of the public service, becoming a “civil society” protector, monitor and regulator; and an active involvement of society in the production and delivery of public services and a shift in the role of society to the “roller” of public services. Through this kind of government-social interaction, western civil society theory seeks to co-operate in the management of public affairs, with the aim of easing class conflicts, preserving the social order of “sacrosanct private property” and achieving what western countries call “effective governance”。
While western civil society theory deliberately emphasizes the distinction or so-called appropriate separation between western societies and governments, and sometimes even the so-called “confrontational” relations between societies and governments, such a “diverse” or “confrontational” is not a principled confrontation about whether capitalist systems of private property rights, capitalist economic freedom, and bourgeois democratic political rights are to be upheld, but rather a tactical disagreement about how to play the role of society and government. The fact that many of the social organizations that are the central vehicles of western “civil society” are not political opponents of western governments, but rather are receiving funding from governments and businesses is borne out by the fact that the social movements that are indispensable elements of western “civil society” are never mandated to overthrow the free market economy system in western countries。
This essentially non-confrontational relationship between society and government in western countries determines that western civil society theory is nothing more than an ideology of western bourgeois reformism, and that the preservation of human dignity, fundamental human rights and interests in western countries by ordinary citizens must not go beyond the borders that guarantee bourgeois economic freedom, private property rights and democratic political rights, and must not impede the dominance of capital, especially western monopolies, over the state and society. As lenin once pointed out, “as long as there is a rule of capital, and despite some improvements, workers employ slaves”。
Theory tool for western democracy, human rights exports
While the formation and development of western civil society theories are not of no benefit to the defence and promotion of the rights and interests of ordinary western citizens, these inherently insignificant “benefits” of western civil society theories are immediately lost when we turn our eyes from western countries to other countries and regions. The history of western civil society, which maintains that the conditions of “modern democracy” and the guarantee of civil rights have permeated and permeated developing countries and former socialist countries such as the soviet union, eastern europe, shows that it is simply a theoretical tool for democratic and human rights exports in the western era since the 1970s under the banner of “promoting democracy” and “resolving conflicts” and “building a balance between government, society and business”。
The western countries inculcate in the world the theory of civil society and the export of “democratic” “human rights”, which is not intended to preserve the social stability of the nations of the world, to build a “democratic” world and to improve human rights in the world, but rather to hide it with such seemingly beautiful and poignant theories. They are trying to suppress anti-western regimes, foster pro-western regimes, destabilize socialist regimes and preserve western monopoly capital over world domination. It is precisely because the vast majority of developing countries and some former socialist countries did not have a deep insight into the agenda behind western civil society theory that the “democratic” “human rights” export process in western countries has been moving well since the 1970s, creating a wave of so-called “democratization” that the west is proud to be sweeping the globe, a wave that has not completely retreated even today in the twenty-first century。
It turns out that some of the countries with high hopes for western civil society theory and active application of western civil society theory, which has opened up their doors to western “democratic” “human rights” exports, have not yet embraced a better “civil society” of rapid economic development, long-term political stability, and continuous improvement in people’s lives, but rather a combination of civil society whose economic development has been severely undermined, political instability has continued, and human life has deteriorated. In the 1970s and 1980s, many latin american countries implemented western “democratization” as a result of the stagnation of their economies throughout the 1980s, known as the “lost decade”. Many african countries are almost simultaneously implementing western “democratization”, with no better results than latin american countries. Despite their wealth of resources, these african countries have not been able to escape poverty, “from increasing difficulty to collapse of their economies, africa has fallen into the abyss of greater misery”. The economic development of the former socialist countries, such as eastern europe of the soviet union, had been severely damaged by a run-off along the western “democratization” path。
Numerous facts have also shown that many countries that are active in western civil society theory have not only failed to put an end to strife and social stability through the so-called “balancing” of the state, the government, and the market, but have instead led to a “colour revolution” of “street politics” as a result of social organizations in western countries. Among the social organizations of western countries that “refuel” in developing countries, the national democratic foundation of the united states, which was established in the early 1980s, is well known for its subversive activities or its promotion of “colour revolutions” in latin america, the cis, western asia, south-east asia, etc., and even for its frequent financing of anti-china forces。
Preventing western civil society theories from misleading our reform and open practice
The fundamental avoidance of western civil society theories that mislead and jeopardize our country's reform and open practice, and the effective defence against domestic and foreign anti-socialist forces from using them as a means of achieving “westization” of china's strategic designs, require, in addition to revealing in depth the substance of its theory and condensing its myth, in particular, an article on the economic and social basis on which it depends。
The consolidation and development of the public-owned economy must be carried out without wavering, with a view to accelerating the optimization, structural adjustment and strategic restructuring of the state-owned economy, promoting the value-added of state-owned assets, promoting state-owned capital to do better and effectively preventing the loss of state-owned assets。
It is necessary to improve the system of people's ownership and develop socialist democracy. It is important to maintain party leadership, people's ownership and the organic unity of the state under the rule of law. It is necessary to improve the way the party leads and is in power, to expand the orderly political participation of the people, to safeguard the unity, dignity and authority of the rule of law in the country, to use the institutional system to reflect the will of the people, to safeguard their rights and interests, to stimulate their creativity and to guarantee their ownership。
The interests of the people must always be paramount, and the results of reform development should be more and more equitably distributed to all. It is important to continue to promote social equity and equity in development by making further progress in child-rearing, education, income-generating work, health care, old age, housing and support. The fight against poverty must be pursued in depth to ensure that all people have a greater sense of common and shared development and that they continue to contribute to the comprehensive development of the human person and the common prosperity of all。
It is necessary to strengthen and innovate social governance by improving the system of social governance under the leadership of the party council, the responsibility of the government, social cohesion, public participation and the guarantee of the rule of law, and by improving the socialization, rule of law, intellectualization and specialization of social governance. The relationship between “laying” and “managing” needs to be addressed with a view to promoting the healthy and orderly development of social organizations. We would also like to draw attention to the good practices of some countries in preventing the destabilization of societies by civil society organizations. For example, while the russian federation has tightened legislation on the registration of civil society groups and the receipt of foreign donations, it has made great efforts to support and fund national civil society organizations whose aim is patriotism. Those experiences deserve our attention and lessons learned。
(author: liu chi minh, researcher at the research centre for the chinese specialist socialist theory system of the chinese academy of social sciences)
