Opinion Paper
Chew-as, Jorja P.
China as the New Idol for Emerging Economies
Introduction
TED Talk featured economist Dambisa Mayo on her stand on how a country can achieve
fast-paced economic growth. Her talk entitled “Is China the new idol for emerging economies?”
presents her key points that China is the new idol for emerging economies because it has been
able to show that fast-paced economic growth is possible.
Mayo talked of six points in the video. First, many westerners believe that freedom in
economics and politics is the best thing in the world, and the number one thing to strive for.
Second is the presumption that private capitalism, liberal democracy and prioritized political
rights are the cornerstone of any successful society. Third, the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights was unanimously adopted and came into place in 1948 however, in many cases, these
aren’t being met. Fourth, there is a growing gap in ideological beliefs between developed and
developing countries between political and economic rights. 90% of the world that lives in
emerging markets believe that the most important things are food, shelter, healthcare and
education. There is a difference between what people believe in the west and what people believe
in from the rest of the world. Fifth, China has gone the opposite way and prioritized state
capitalism, de-emphasized democracy and prioritized economic rights. Sixth, most people
believe that democracy is no longer a prerequisite for economic growth such as Chili, Singapore,
and Taiwan but these countries have done it in reverse.
Human Rights
Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of
residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status. We are all
equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated,
interdependent and indivisible (United Nations High Commission on Human Rights).
All human rights are indivisible whether they are civil and political rights, economic,
social and cultural rights, or collective rights. The improvement of one right facilitates
advancement of the others. Likewise, the deprivation of one right adversely affects the others.
Human rights is a recognized right even before the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. It should be noted that several individuals had human rights theories and their theories
gave human rights to be what we know it today. Significant events such as World Wars have also
paved the way to what human rights are now.
Mayo’s point that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights since 1948 in many cases
is not met is correct. However, each State in the world has their own definition of human rights
with respect to their culture, beliefs, and religion. Human rights are not only a legal concept, but
also require political, cultural, and societal negotiation both in national and international realms
(Freeman, 2017).
Yin (2007) compared news reports on the Chinese human rights situation in the United
States and China. Yin presented discursive representations in the two newspapers that reflect the
struggle over articulation of human rights. The New York Times attempts to project the notion of
natural rights as universal truth, whereas People's Daily defines human rights as a process of
development to counter Western condemnation as well as to justify rights abuses in China. Seu
(2010) explored the reception of human rights appeals in audiences targeted by media campaigns
and found a trend of media distrust that also affected audience reception of human rights
campaigns. Achugar (2007) conducted a diachronic analysis of the human rights discourses in
texts produced by the military in Uruguay, finding that national narratives of events from a
period of dictatorship were subsequently transformed to justify committed atrocities. Achugar’s
research highlights the role that texts play in maintaining institutional identities and the
importance of intertextuality in analyzing discursive practices.
Human rights have been covered in previous discourse analytical studies in a variety of
contexts. Studies from recent decades can be roughly divided into three categories: those
focusing on the representation of human rights in the media ( Le, 2002; Seu, 2010; Yin, 2007);
those focusing on human rights discourse in the aftermath of war or national atrocities, such as
Achugar (2007) in the case of Uruguay, Anthonissen and Blommaert (2007) on South Africa,
and Wodak (2007) on the legacy of war crimes in Austria and Germany; and human rights in
institutional and legal contexts, such as the study by Cortese (2003) on treaty ratification for the
rights of children and Pinto (2011) on the rights of disabled people in Portugal.
A somewhat similar approach has been previously adopted by Cortese (2003) in studying
the treaty ratification process of the UN’s Convention on the Rights of the Child. Cortese traced
the diplomatic negotiation of human rights discourses from multiple culturally different
viewpoints in ‘a process of dialectical adjustment of systems of belief’ (Cortese, 2003: 365)
meant to result in common, binding discursive practices in human rights law between nations.
These studies prove that although human rights are not met in most cases, it can be seen
that human rights are carried out from the best of the capabilities of the states, it is carried out for
every human being in the world despite reservations of each state.
China and Human Rights
The government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), guided by a totalitarian
ideology under the absolute rule of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), deprives citizens of
their rights on a sweeping scale and systematically curtails freedoms as a way to retain power.
People in China cannot practice the religion or belief of their choice. They cannot express their
opinions openly or form or join groups of their choosing without fear of harassment, arrest, or
retribution. Members of minority groups are subject to mass arbitrary detention, Orwellian-style
surveillance, political indoctrination, torture, forced abortions and sterilization, and
state-sponsored forced labor.
The human rights situation across China continued to deteriorate. Human rights lawyers
and activists reported harassment and intimidation; unfair trials; arbitrary, incommunicado and
lengthy detention; and torture and other ill-treatment for simply exercising their right to freedom
of expression and other human rights. The government continued a campaign of political
indoctrination, arbitrary mass detention, torture and forced cultural assimilation against Muslims
living in Xinjiang (China, 2021). Thousands of Uyghur children were separated from their
parents (Asat, 2021; Yakub, 2021). There are several more cases of human rights violation in
China that the world does not know.
Looking deeper into the actions of China to achieve such economic growth and be
recognized as an emerging market to be idolized, a simple person can say that such economic
growth is not acceptable. Throughout the years, China controlled its citizens in order to achieve
economic growth. It deprived the people of their basic rights enshrined in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. China’s way of political stabilization is dictatorship. Mayo did not
mention this in her talk but the way China achieved its economic growth was because there are
no political rights in China in the first place.
Economics and Politics
From an economic point of view, Mayo’s talk of prioritizing economic growth over
political power is a plausible solution to attain economic growth but taking into account all
perspectives, it is not the best solution there is to attain economic growth.
Economics is a social science with stakes in many other fields, including political
science, geography, mathematics, sociology, psychology, engineering, law, medicine and
business. The central quest of economics is to determine the most logical and effective use of
resources to meet private and social goals. Production and employment, investment and savings,
health, money and the banking system, government policies on taxation and spending,
international trade, industrial organization and regulation, urbanization, environmental issues and
legal matters are just a sampling of the concerns at the heart of the science of economics.
Political rights refer to an individual's ability to participate in the civil and political life of
the society and state without fear of discrimination or repression, and is tied closely to
citizenship status.
An understanding of economic, social and cultural rights also demands recourse to the
right to development. In order to reveal the reach of the right to development, it is important to
highlight, as Celso Lafer (1999) does, that in the field of values, the consequence for human
rights of an international system of defined polarities – East/West, North/South – has been an
ideological battle between civil and political rights (the liberal heritage sponsored by the USA)
and economic, social and cultural rights (the social heritage sponsored by the former Soviet
Union) (Piovesan, 2004). It was in this context that “an effort by the Third World to elaborate its
own cultural identity, proposing collective rights of cultural identity, such as the right to
development”, emerged.
Since the 2000s, China has engaged in a strategy to leverage not only its economic
influence but also its political influence in countries where it invests and develops trade relations.
One of the components of this has consisted of challenging the principles of democracy and
universal human rights, which Beijing claims are Western-centric and tools to constrain China’s
development, and instead promoting its own paradigm of democracy and human rights under
which each state is entitled to revise and frame these concepts using its own historical, cultural,
and local political considerations, in the name of non-interference and peaceful coexistence.1
This approach has been clearly demonstrated in Central Asia. Beijing has sought
convergences with Central Asian states’ approaches to governance and foreign relations in order
to minimize uncertainty and to maximize its leverage over governments with similar political
systems. China wants to prevent any possibility for political destabilization that it fears the West
could initiate in the region through promotion of democracy and human rights and that could
impact its interests, in particular its development program in Xinjiang. China also wants to
secure its trade and investments in the region, which have grown significantly since the 2000s
and are likely to increase further through China’s Silk Road Economic Belt initiative, launched
in 2013.
To this end, Beijing has endorsed the political authoritarianism of Central Asian regimes,
which it views as a bulwark of stability, and has striven to counter efforts to promote
democratization and universal human rights in the region which it views as attempts to
westernize it. This policy has materialized in Chinese rhetoric endorsing Central Asian policies
restricting political rights and restraining opposition activism, including anti-Chinese activism, as
well as in the export of technology that enables governments to monitor the population.
Historically there has been a notion that the whole world should adopt private capitalism
and liberal democracy. In other words, countries should prioritize political rights over economic
rights. Moyo disagrees with this theory and deems it an illusion. She believes the western
obsession with political rights is flawed. She raises the question: if a poor person had to choose
between a roof over their head or a right to vote, which would they choose? This point is mind
catching to every person who heard and watched the video. From a third person's view, a poor
person would care more about their basic necessities to survive, such as food and shelter, rather
than their political rights as seen and observed from the poor.
The suppression of China of political rights of its citizens was not included in the
calculations and projections made by Mayo in her case. She solely focused on economics rather
than focusing on the bigger picture. She emphasized that a state should adapt China’s way of
gaining economic growth that benefits the people.
In economics, the economy of a country has its stages. The economic growth includes the
following five stages: Traditional Society; Preconditions for Take-Off; Take-Off; Drive to
Maturity; and Age of High Mass Consumption. Rostow's model is one of the most significant
historical models of economic growth (Rostow’s Economic Growth Stages). The Traditional
Society stage is characterized by a subsistent, agricultural-based economy with intensive labor
and low levels of trading, and a population that does not have a scientific perspective on the
world and technology. Preconditions to Take-off is a society begins to develop manufacturing
and a more national/international—as opposed to regional—outlook. Take-off stage is a short
period of intensive growth, in which industrialization begins to occur, and workers and
institutions become concentrated around a new industry. The Drive to Maturity stage takes place
over a long period of time, as standards of living rise, the use of technology increases, and the
national economy grows and diversifies. The Age of High Mass Consumption stage is when a
country's economy flourishes in a capitalist system, characterized by mass production and
consumerism.
Prior to Rostow, approaches to development had been based on the assumption that
"modernization" was characterized by the Western world, which was able to advance from the
initial stages of underdevelopment. Accordingly, other countries should model themselves after
the West, aspiring to a "modern" state of capitalism and liberal democracy.
The United States has had no economic growth since centuries ago, it was an emerging
market with high economic growth. The United States, Japan, Great Britain, and Singapore is
now in its final stage of economic growth as compared to China, Philippines, India, and
Thailand. China is still in its Take-off stage where China is in its period of growth. I am not to
criticize the way Mayo has made her calculations, research, and economic prediction for it is her
expertise as an economist. However, to idolize China for its fast economic growth is not an ideal
way to achieve such economic growth.
The economy of the United States, Japan, Korea and Great Britain is presently stable and
these countries have different political ideologies. They achieved economic growth not
prioritizing economic rights but rather these states equally let individuals have political and
economic rights. China on the other hand, after how many years that only during the 2000’s did
it achieve economic growth. The data presented by Mayo are accurate but if you compare the
data of China from a century ago to that of economically developed countries then there is a
difference.
History focused on the western being obsessed with political rights as the priority over
economic rights but in actuality it was so to have economic rights have equal footing with
political rights. Political and economic rights go hand in hand. With political rights comes
economic rights that Japan, Singapore, and South Korea were able to achieve economic stability
because of political and economic rights that come as one. As stated by Marx, civil and political
rights are useless unless social and economic rights are provided (Bouandel, 1997: 17).
Poor People versus Democracy
Moyo uses China as an example of an economically successful country that can be a role
model for emerging countries. China proves that democracy is not a prerequisite for economic
growth and development. Instead she argues that economic growth is a prerequisite for
democracy. Moyo believes countries need to establish and grow the middle class first in order to
hold the government accountable for its actions. Moyo disagrees with the western’s methods for
development. She suggests the world should be more open-minded and look at alternative
options of how to transform the world in order to make it a better place. However, Mayo did not
delve with Asian first world countries achieving economic growth but focused on the western
side.
The case of Mongolia on poverty and democracy is instructive (Tuya, 2013). The country
started transitioning to democracy over twenty years ago and, for almost as long, the rate of
poverty has stood at 30 percent and above. The gap between poor and rich has continued to
grow, and infrastructure has languished in a chronically decrepit state. The implications for
democracy were grave: most reforms stalled, vote buying became a serious concern, and public
trust in the institutions of democracy was shaken. The lesson to be drawn from this experience is
that, early on in the transition process, new democracies should put economic liberty and
transparency on a par with other democratic values such as regular elections, rule of law, human
rights, freedom of association and freedom of speech (Tuya, 2013). A callous and corrupt
government, sometimes voted in through dubiously “free and fair” elections, can use the
trappings and rhetoric of democracy as a façade while behind the scenes they engage in
rent-seeking practices that can lead to a systemic entrenchment of corruption. In such a system
political power is used for economic gain and economic gain is used for buying political
influence. Few or no dividends go to the general populace. This results in persistent poverty
among a large percentage of the population coupled with poor social services. Public enthusiasm
or support for democracy wanes, democracy is eroded, therefore human rights are violated, and
eventually democracy breaks down. Such scenarios are an early and real threat to democracy
because the impoverished populace does not have the necessary tools―such as education or
access to information―to fight back and, in most cases, is simply unfamiliar with the concept of
demanding government accountability and responsiveness.
Early on, the Community of Democracies emphasized this problem by stating in Warsaw
that eradication of poverty is an “essential contributing factor to the promotion and preservation
of democratic development”(2000). Recommitment to the concept of interdependence between
democracy and poverty found in the Santiago Commitment (2005) is essential. The Commitment
stressed that democracy cannot be sustained without persistent efforts to eliminate extreme
poverty and, vice versa, that the strengthening of democratic governance was “an essential
component” of the efforts to alleviate poverty. Rooting out corruption that “corrodes
democracy,” as stated in Warsaw, is a central element of these efforts, and this stance was
reaffirmed in the Krakow Plan for Democracy (2010). Poverty is as much a threat to a
democracy as poor institutions in that it deprives people of their political voice, preventing them
from holding their governments accountable and responsive, and eroding public trust in the
emerging institutions of democracy. The Community of Democracies Bamako Consensus (2007)
addressed the issue of public trust: “persistent inequality and poverty can lead to low public trust
in political institutions and vulnerability to undemocratic practices, both of which are threats to
democracy.” Poverty is also an assault on human dignity which is why the Bamako Consensus
also emphasized that democracy, development and human rights were mutually reinforcing.
This body of reasoning serves as a good foundation for the Community of Democracy to
contribute to the ongoing global debate on the post-2015 development agenda. This debate
presents the Community of Democracy with an opportunity to pursue its position that eradication
of poverty and the consolidation of democracy are interdependent. The thematic session on
Millennium Development Goals that is planned for the Community of Democracy’s meetings in
Ulaanbaatar could therefore be seized as an occasion to launch substantive discussions on
collaboration, in the coming years, with international organizations and civil society on ways to
incorporate democratic governance in the post-2015 development agenda, or mainstream
anti-corruption efforts into it, and ensure that this agenda adopts a human rights-based approach,
addresses inequality and promotes social inclusion. Discussions could revolve around the issues
raised in papers and notes by United Nation bodies and agencies and other actors, especially civil
society, that call for encompassing human rights, democracy and good governance in an
inclusive development agenda focused on poverty eradication. The ideas expressed at the global
consultation on governance and the post-2015 framework could also be taken up.
While poverty is experienced by individuals, it is created by systems that fail to protect
their rights to a decent standard of living. Supporting individuals and families is certainly
necessary. But alone, it will not eliminate poverty.
To make real progress towards eliminating poverty, we need systems that support people
in realizing their economic and social rights. We create our systems and we have the power to
change them. We need to press our governments to do so.
One way that we can start enacting this change is to take a human rights approach to
public policy. This means aiming for a society where people experience their rights in their daily
lives. It means putting as many resources as we can towards this goal. It means setting clear
targets and monitoring our progress. It means that when we fall short, people have a way that
they can seek remedy and move our governments to do better.
This is not the way we are used to thinking about rights and democracy. We tend to focus
on the kinds of issues that relate more directly to civil and political rights – fair elections, and
transparent decision-making, for example. Unquestionably, these are vital components of
democracy, and we should be concerned when these are threatened. But democracy is about
more than casting a vote on election day. And civil and political rights cannot be separated from
economic and social rights. They are parts of a whole. Only when each person can access the full
suite of their human rights can we claim to have a true democracy.
Conclusion
Emerging economy of China feeds on mainstream tolerance for nepotism, mass scrutiny
and many systematic human rights violations, camouflaged in the thickets of non-expansiveness
and national honor.
China as the new idol for emerging markets is not sustainable. Idolizing China is akin to
promoting dictatorship, only respecting the rule of brute over the rule of humane law, the fascist
state that China has become, or failing to understand the potential for that good old fashioned
value of fairness in the Western world versus the racist, controlling Chinese state. If China is
then the new idol for emerging countries, then what would that make Russia and North Korea?
References
Achugar, M. (2007). Between remembering and forgetting: Uruguayan military discourse about
human
rights
(1976-2004).
Discourse
&
Society,
18(5),
521–547.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/42889148
Asongu, Simplice; Odhiambo, Nicholas M. (2018) : Drivers of growth in fast emerging
economies: A dynamic instrumental quantile approach to real output and its rates of growth in
BRICS and MINT countries, 2001-2011, AGDI Working Paper, No. WP/18/013, African
Governance and Development Institute (AGDI), Yaoundé
China 2021. Everything you need to know about human rights in China - Amnesty International
Amnesty International
Community of Democracies (2000)
Community of Democracies Bamako Consensus (2007)
E. Gözler Çamur, (2017). Civil and Political Rights vs. Social and Economic Rights: A Brief
Overview. Bitlis Eren Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / Journal of Bitlis Eren
University Institute of Social Sciences Cilt/Volume:6 Sayı/Number:1 Haziran/June 2017 ss.
205-214
Flavia Piovesan, "Social, Economic and Cultural Rights and Civil and Political Rights", SUR 1
(2004),
accessed
September
1,
2022,
https://sur.conectas.org/en/social-economic-cultural-rights-civil-political-rights/
Kuosmanen, S. (2021). Human rights and ideology in foreign policy discourse: A case study of
U.S. State Department Human Rights Country Reports 2000–2019. Discourse & Society, 32(4),
426–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926521992146
Jacobs, J. (2022). "Rostow's Stages of Growth Development Model." ThoughtCo, Jun. 2, 2022,
thoughtco.com/rostows-stages-of-growth-development-model-1434564.
Peyrouse, S. (2022). China’s Impact on Democracy and Human Rights in Central Asia, Security
and
Human
Rights
(published
online
ahead
of
print
2022).
doi:
https://doi.org/10.1163/18750230-bja10012
Seu, I. B. (2010). “Doing denial”: audience reaction to human rights appeals. Discourse &
Society, 21(4), 438–457. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42889682
Rostow's Stages of Growth Development Model
StudyCorgi. (2022, March 20). China as the New Idol for Emerging Economies. Retrieved from
https://studycorgi.com/china-as-the-new-idol-for-emerging-economies/
Ted Talk: Is China the new idol for emerging economies?
Tuya,
N.
(2013)
Democracy
and
Poverty:
A
Lesson
from Mongolia.
https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/democracy-and-poverty-a-lesson-from-mongolia/
Yin, Jing (2007). The clash of rights: A critical analysis of news discourse on human rights in the
United States and China. Critical Discourse Studies 4 (1):75-94.