The idea of a ‘Chinese model’: A critical discussion

Abstract

This discussion offers a critical analysis of the idea of a ‘Chinese model’. The idea originated in the successful economic development of the People's Republic of China beginning in the 1990s, and has attracted even more attention since China's apparent success in coping with the global economic recession since 2008. The discussion examines: (a) Chinese attitudes toward the idea of an ‘exportable’ model, (b) the historical context of revolution for China's development that is often ignored in discussions of the ‘Chinese model’, (c) whether or not it is possible to speak of a ‘model’, since China's development is very much a work in progress, and (d) what may be the appeals and the shortcomings of the path of development China is pursuing. I suggest that a ‘paradigm’ for inspiration may be a better way to understand what Chinese development represents than a ‘model’ for emulation.

Keywords:

• China model
• paradigm
• authoritarianism
• socialism
• Chinese revolution

Notes

¹ Karon (2011) for a discussion by the conservative scholar, Francis Fukuyama. See, also, Huang (2011), discussing the annual Yellow Paper released by CASS.

² For an extensive discussion, see Dirlik (2005).

³ The terms are in a basic sense interchangeable. For example, see Yu et al. (2005).

⁴ See Huntington (1968). For a sampling of discussions in China in the late 1980s, see Rosen and Zou (1990–91).

⁵ See Berger and Huntington (2002). We might remember that Berger's was a major voice authorizing the Confucian revival beginning in the late 1970s, and Huntington played a leading intellectual role over four decades as an advocate of authoritarian development as well as of cultural (civilizational) ‘uniqueness’ and homogeneity in shaping developmental trajectories. A prominent Chinese scholar who advocates similar ideas is He Chuanqi. See China Development Gateway (2009).

⁶ For a critical discussion see Dirlik (2011).

⁷ The historical circumstances of the last three decades of development include, according to a recent piece, the leadership of Deng Xiaoping, the role of Chinese overseas, and China's location in Eastern Asia, a region of immense economic vitality for the last half century. See Etienne (2011). While the discussion is brief, the stress on concrete structural circumstances is fundamental to discussions that rely on generalities about culture and innovation. On the other hand, the author is also oblivious to historical context, possibly out of an expressed hostility to the revolutionary past.

⁸ For ‘national humiliation’, see Callahan (2010). For world's fairs, see, for an example of Fairs histories published in connection with the Shanghai Expo, Yu (2009). For a more critical perspective on the Fairs, see Rydell (1984).

⁹ For an interesting discussion of the new automobile culture, see Waldmeir et al. (2011). For the crisis brewing in real estate development (or, better, maldevelopment), see the recent report by the Daily Mail Reporter (2011).

¹⁰ See, for example, Bell (2008). For a recent discussion of the Confucius institutes, see Louie (2011).

¹¹ For a recent analysis that suggests that authoritarianism may be a source of appeal of the ‘Chinese model’, especially in developing societies, see Palmer (2010).