Abstract

China's reform agenda is understood in the light of a thirty-year process. Interpretations of reforms differ according to the meaning of the word. Should Mao's heirs be seen as Leninist reformists, or as reformers in the historical Chinese sense, aiming at transformation in response to the West? The implications are contradictory. The reforms have been successful, yet their term has never been clearly defined. Reforms have been described alternatively as another phase in China's cyclical history, or as a transitional phase, or even as a change towards a hybrid regime with cultural Chinese features.
 China has had 'true reformers', aiming at fundamental change. Their legacy is still present and Chinese society is eager for economic and social debate. However, actual reform has reached a plateau. The Party's undiminished monopoly on political ideas, its legitimization through nationalist pride, its hold over the media and communications, as well as global vindication of its cautiousness, all hint of a neo-classical restoration era. However, a new wave of reforms may question again the nature of China's political system.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.